1 As Prof. Jones likes to say, explosives were needed to “eliminate” or remove the mass to account for free fall/ almost free fall, every x floors.
Collapse speed was neither freefall nor "almost" free fall.
2 -The twin towers fell into their own footprints (approximately, at least). And the related claim it took the path of “most resistance.” (comment: what would the path of most resistance actually be?)
The towers did not fall into their own footprint, nor even remotely close to their own footprint. They did not topple over, however, as this would require enormous lateral force that cannot be explained.
3 - burning steel pieces (weighing thousands of pounds) of the towers were hurled outward for hundreds of feet at speeds of about one hundred feet per second. . . . .
Objects falling due to gravity attain a speed of 100feet per second in the space of three seconds.
The observation of material landing hundreds of feet from the towers directly refutes the previous claim. Material landed so far away because the exterior column network peeled away from the towers in enormous multi-floor sections. This sections pivoted around the bottom point (as one would expect) resulting in significant lateral forces being applied to the stop sections, throwing them outwards as the column structure broke up (think of it like swinging your arm forwards holding a ball while outstretched, and imagine then letting go of the ball, will it fall straight down, or outwards?).
Calculations which took into account the energy consumption required to pulverize the buildings as observed show that the collapses took place at a rate over three times that which was possible by gravity alone.
The towers did not collapse in 3 seconds, so this is total garbage. The buildings were also not pulverized.
In reality, steel bends, and over 200 supporting columns, along with their cross-bracing would need to get out of the way at once to allow the upper section to fall.
The exterior columns peeled outwards ahead of the collapse wave, and the upper section twisted out of alignment with the core columns - the major collapse force was applied to the floor trusses which were never intended to hold any significant loading.
I have access to several videos of the tower collapses, and they all show a characteristically high volumes of smoke being expelled from the buildings just prior to their vertical movement. The smoke is consistent with the color of aluminum oxide generated from thermite reactions
The high volumes of smoke were on account of the buildings being on fire. The smoke was black, as expected from the burning of carbon-rich fuel. Thermite reactions produce white smoke.
The fires were not hot enough to weaken the steel to the point of failure, although efforts have been made to alter data and reality in order to meet that criteria
The fires in the WTC reached temperatures of 1000 degrees centigrade. At this temperature steel loses 90% of its load bearing capacity.
Even the NIST investigators had to distort the data to create their model where collapse inititiation would occur. Their own lab tests failed to duplicate the condition where the steel would sag to the degree to which they claim took place
It is standard scientific practise to "tweak" models so that they accurately reflect the reality of what happened. You do not tweak reality to more accurately reflect the model.
The lab tests on floor truss sagging were not designed to imitate conditions in the WTC, but to establish fire performance benchmarks for the assembly in question.
-Gumboot
