Verify Technical Claims?

Nice try to boost numbers...but since it has s#!t in the actual title I'm not biting

Not trying to boost numbers. The video makes several technical claims that can only be verified/debunked by someone with a lot more education than I have had. I do not know who made the video, however, I find the content to be frightening in its claims against the US Government. You may have to be a bit more open minded and less suspicious of my intentions. And if someone wants their numbers "boosted" I would think the video speaks for itself.

I find the content to be frightening in its claims against the US Government

Remain calm, that doesn't make it true.

Why don't you try some impartial research yourself - and remember, just because it's in a video doesn't make it true.

The BS conspiracy theories surrounding 911 are almost as numerous as free energy, perpetual motion, and faked moon landings - all of which can be debunked by simply and impartially using your own common sense.

That's an awfully big ask....

Oh yes...open minded...wanna buy a conspiracy? I've heard so many conspiracy theories against the U.S. Government that I just have to shake my head. We really aren't that smart in the government. On one hand most of America thinks we're all a bunch of bumbling idiots, and the rest of our time is spent in giant sweeping conspiracies that only Internet PhD's can figure out and then put together a slide show about it.

This infuriates me!

How any intelligent person could believe that this was a staged event is beyond comprehension.

Did "they" plant explosives in the Pentagon, too?

What about Flt 93? It was headed for the White House.

To suggest that this was choreographed, that planes were hi-jacked, and buildings were rigged with explosives prior to the event, so the building would come down, is personally insulting/offensive/repulsive!

This abortion is the illegitimate child of radical conservatives and the fornication started in Utah, and spilled over into the wackos in Arizona and elsewhere.

Rant over.

I said, "radical conservatives" and I am aware of quite a number of Utah and Arizona politicians and "scholars" who make these ridiculous claims. You might be able to guess that many of them are members of the same cult.

The term "thermitic material" was invented by a Utah "scholar" and his group of insane idiots and published as truth that this newly invented material was "proof" that explosives were used.

I'm sure there were many lefties in the mix, as well, but it is an insult to the poor souls who died that day, and since.

A staged plan this big and extravagant going off with out a hitch, to even accomplish a part of its goals. B.S. These people had a goal in mind, just to pull it off was a major feat, more less try calling it a conspiracy on top of it.

This is total bull crap! Why would you believe any of these fabrications.

What makes anybody think that this video has even the slightest credibility?

I don't!

Thank you, I am assuming some of you saw the video. I am not trying to start a flame war nor insult anyone. I value the opinions of members of this forum. My question concerns the part of the video that claims #1; the jet fuel burned up on impact, #2 the third building that was not hit by aircraft but came down anyway, #3 the reason for the large explosion on the CBS News video several floors down from the aircraft impact, #4 the claim that a concrete and steel building could not burn to the ground because jet fuel does not burn hot enough. These are technical claims made in the video. I am not the one who made the video, I am just trying to understand how they expect these claims to be believed if they are not technically possible. Please, I did not mean to accuse anyone in the US Government or anyone else, thats why I did not say anything in the original post because I dont know the facts. I apologize for upsetting any one, I can see that the video has caused some bad feelings, I can only say I was trying to get some professional opinions from persons who can set aside personal feeling for a moment and look at the technical side, and at least point me in the right direction that I might find out for myself. Thank you all.

As to one issue (#4): Steel begins to weaken at 650°F or so (depending on alloy). Thus, jet fuel definitely burns hot enough to soften the steel.

Take a look at this. Many people think Popular Mechanics did a surprisingly good job of debunking the 9/11 myths. (Sorry I can't do hyperlinks on this site with my phone.) http://www.popularmechanics.com/_mobile/technology/military/news/1227842

Just about every resource for accurate information on the events of 9/11 is listed at http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=93

I checked the website suggested by pantaz, I can see now I am in way over my head. But Im sure that was the reason the video was created, to turn peoples heads. I havent watched TV or movies in 18 years, so finding these types of things on the internet are hard for me to understand. I want to thank you all for your replies. I want to say also I am glad I live alone out in the desert. The world is a vampire.

...sent to drain secret destroyers, hold you up to the flames...

After much thought and some research I could say a few things from an observers viewpoint, however, this seems a very volatile subject and it would appear that several of the forum members are employed by or affiliated with the US government. Should I therefore "back off" for my own safety and to keep peace among the forum members? Or should I make some comments to stimulate thought and intelligent discussion while throwing caution to the wind? To be faced with such a dilemma in a forum of very intelligent people is a shame. Emotions run very deep for some people, so in order to keep from offending any of the members Im going to let it lie for now.

"...it would appear that several of the forum members are employed by or affiliated with the US government."

Oh, wow, I haven't seen the "government shill" accusation used in quite some time! Hilarious!