I wanna know if "Loose Change" is for real. i want reputable sources for either side of the argument

Question

the documentary loose change made too much sense on too many levels to just let slide. Yet i cant help wonder if some of the things they said were made up. they seemed like they were hunting for a conspiracy before they found one. which is an easy way to get bad info. so what im looking for is a list of true or false answers not tainted with politics.
1. what is the structurally unstable point of steel due to heat?
2. what is the maximum heat attainable by jet fuel under perfect conditions?
3. How many planes have ever vaporized on impact leave next to no wreckage?
4. How many sky scrapers framed with steel have collapsed due to fire?
5. Could cell phones work on planes on 9/11? were they technoligically capable of doing so?
6. when buildings collapse do they fall straight down on thier own (similair to a planned demolision), is that impossible?
- for your answers do not use anything from 9/11 as an example. I want evidence from other places. I dont care which side it supports

Answer 1

This has been gone over so many times already.

1. Depends on load, the steel loses strength as it heats, there's no point at which it suddenly becomes weak. That's how blacksmiths can bend horseshoes that aren't even red hot.
2. 960C(1796F). Way more than necessary. Steel starts oxidizing rapidly above 800C.
3. The building burned for a long time, there's plenty of time for anything recognizeable to burn to nothing. Do you think space aliens stole the bodies too? All that was found of them was bone fragments. Planes are mostly plastic and aluminium alloy. I've burned alloy cans in a wood burning stove, they leave nothing but white ash.
4. Not many have burned, not many were constructed that way.
5. They can, the question has been asked and answered here, GSM will work with a component of velocity in the direction of the cell tower up to 200mph. It's a doppler and frame timing issue.
6. The WTC was an unusual construction, the vertical strength was in outside walls, so the building fell down inside its walls which were then unsupported and followed.

Do your own research you lazy bastard! None of this is even vaguely unlikely, if you had the engineering background to understand the answers you wouldn't be asking.

Answer 2

check out popular mechanics they did the science to disprove a lot of what loose changed stated.