Justin Case wrote:
[...]

Most debunkers will deny any claims of molten steel at the WTC, but there
is an abundance
of video evidence and eye witness accounts that say otherwise.

I'd like to see the video evidence for molten steel; not merely
stuff glowing at temperatures ordinary room fires can reach.

    http://www.doctorfire.com/flametmp.html

There are the expected conflicting witness accounts. How anyone
identified what he saw as molten steel hasn't been explained.
The actual steel was often mangled, but had not been melted,
when engineers investigated the collapse.

There is a
compelling amount of
evidence that proves that 'thermite' charges were used.

Lets see a peer reviewed paper that analyzed this evidence.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

That's not the normal usage of "peer reviewed". The normal usage
implies that the peers accepted the work, unlike the case here,
and that the author and his peers are expert in the field, unlike
here.