Creative Speculation

The purpose is spelled out pretty clearly right in the introduction: to make you believe that the WTC 7 collapse was not caused by fire, and to tell you that you're a gullible fool if you believe the "official story."

As for "what bullshit," I gave an example in post #2, which is where I stopped watching because it is such a ridiculous lie. I debunked that one myself many years ago by figuring out what time the video had actually been shot, many hours before WTC 7 collapsed. I stopped watching at that point because that was a clue that I could predict what other "truth movement" lies to expect. I do believe I've heard them all, and they just keep getting recycled no matter how many times they are debunked. But by that point, I had already waded through the bullshit about WTC 7 being reported as collapsed before it had; about Silverman calling his insurance company on the afternoon of 9/11 to "ask about a controlled demolition"; and the claim that the NIST report has "now been proved to be riddled with lies and fraud." That first claim is true, but it's used to make a bullshit implication whereas the explanation is known: Fire department officials had been predicting all afternoon that 7 would fall because they could see a bulge on one side and the building was creaking and groaning. At some point, like the "Whisper Down the Lane" game, that got misunderstood as 7 had already collapsed, and once one news agency (BBC), in their rush to report any news, reported that without verifying it (which they admitted), a then few others repeated it because the BBC was reporting it. The second claim is also true, but it's bullshit because the reason Silverman called the insurance company was because he thought he would need to bring 7 down with a controlled demolition after that fire and he wanted to know if they would cover it. Why would he do that if all the work had already been done and it had been rigged to look like fire caused it? The video just throws that in hoping you will think it sounds suspicious, but in fact it does the exact opposite if you bother to THINK about it. The third claim is just bullshit: no such "proof" exists exists except in the delusional minds of "truthers" who apparently don't understand what the word means. There are actual experts who question some details of the NIST report, as might be expected, but the "lies and fraud" claim is just abject slander to poison the well, to tell you not to believe the NIST conclusions, and specifically to make you think there must be a reason behind all that fraud.

You could investigate all these claims yourself if you had a mind to, but that's about all the time I feel like spending on this bullshit video and someone who wants to play dumb.