It's an irrelevant video due to the fact that they are using an f-4 instead of a boeing 767...you know what the difference is? about 150,000 pounds, that's the difference.
And this is not even the biggest difference here.
1 - An 767 airliner hitting WTC at ~550mph caused an almost "road-runner" effect, destroying the plane as it smashed through the whole building (external columns, concrete floors, internal columns, etc) , but obviously also damaging the building itself. It went though almost half of the 208 ft of the building, and the ignited fuel went through the rest, destroying part of the structure.
2 - In the same day, an 757 airliner hits Pentagon at ~530mph, with the wings causing much less damage to the facade and the main body opening a 75 ft hole to it, destroying the plane as it smashed through 3 rings of the building and also damaging the building itself. It went through 3 rings of the building, and a 12 ft hole was seen on the other side.
3 - In the video a F4 hits a concrete blocks at 500mph, disintegrating the plane and causing the concrete block to move some feet.
-> The speeds are equivalent in all 3 cases.
-> The planes sizes and weights are equivalent between 1 and 2 and completely different from 3.
-> The structure they hit are completely different in all 3 cases. A steel column "mesh" in case 1, reinforced concrete walls in case 2 and a 12ft reinforced concrete block in case 3.
In case 1, the planes penetrates the farthest. In case 2, the planes penetrates the building a fair amount. In case 3, it looks like it doesn't penetrates the block at all (we don't have the aftermath pictures to see the full extension of the damage).
Lordy, I didn't say they were equivalent. The velocity is roughly same. And this is what happens to an aluminum aircraft when it undergoes elastic to near-elastic impact with relatively immovable to near-immovable concrete barrier or barriers at 500 mph. It shreds. It's a stunning effect. Irrelevant? I'd say they're not equivalent, sure. But, irrelevant? Hardly.
It's a great video, but it's irrelevant to any 9/11 analysis/comparison. It's too different from what happened that day, other than it being a plane that hit something at 500mph. A comparison like that will not confirm the conspiracy and it will not debunk any claim.