Oh holy crap. The many errors are so easy to spot!
The most important being: they completely ignore the constant acceleration of gravity. Since the collapses were all slower than free-fall (i.e.: acceleration < g), that means there was a resisting force that decelrated the collapse. Indeed, the momentum lost du to inelastic collisions of falling upper block with resting lower block is the main reason for this upward force and HAS been properly taken into account by everybody who ever modelled the collapse.
The experiments conducted are cute and good enough to convince me that upward and downward crushing occur simultaneously. I am not at all convinced that this refutes Bazant, and it has nothing to do with speed of collapse.
The videos of failed demolitions are quite irrelevant as we are shown reinforced concrete structures that ar much much smaller and of entirely different designs and design loads that the WTC skyscrapers.
It is very telling that they reference the finding of eutectic iron and iron-rich microspheres to FEMA and the USGS, but fail to identify Jones, Harriet ed.al. as "finders" of "high explosive active nano thermite".
At 9:06: "Perhaps there are experiments that support the official hypothesis ... but
I cannot think of one" -> HAHAHA yeah, that's the problem with twoofers: There is so much that they are simply unable to think.
