I'm not a structural engineer but IMHO the collapse of WTC7 as portrayed in the video cannot be explained by the failure of one column.

I'm not a structural engineer either but I can guess why intuition built from the breakage of objects on a scale of several feet, as we more typically encounter, cannot apply to the demolition of a skyscraper.

• First, the entire column of the skyscraper should have a lot of inertia -- why would it tip horizontally in one direction or another without a significant continued force to do so?

• You're probably underestimating the cohesion of the floors, one to another. Maybe they're not like layers of cake balanced on toothpicks. Just a few internal structures connecting the floors (like concrete staircases?) make a vertical crumbling fall seem much more reasonable.

• An impact that is strong enough to break a hole in an exterior wall doesn't just affect that wall, presumably the whole building would be agitated, shaking and wobbling at various sonic and supersonic frequencies. (Thunder during a storm is enough to cause my house to resonate and rattle the mirrors on my wall.)

I'm not saying that I would have predicted that the building would fall vertically rather than tip over. I'm just saying that I would expect that the fall of an enormous building with lots of external and internal structure to be more complex than my intuition could accommodate.

If I was worried about there being a conspiracy, and it was because the fall of this building was nagging at me, what I would do -- because I know from experience this is what I do when I worry -- is I would go to youtube and google "building collapse" and see if buildings typically fall in ways that I expect, and if there's a lot of variation, etc. I would see if after watching a few buildings collapse at that scale, if my brain could extract enough information to really feel comfortable one way or another about the likelihood of identifying a 'false' collapse..

(Seeing what structural engineers have to say about it is not the first thing I would do, because I expect demolition models are like climate models -- you have enough free parameters and undetermined assumptions to get out anything.)