What is admirable is that ae911truth printed the responses that Mr. Mohr received: Answers from NIST.
I haven't listened to the debate, yet. I'll be interested in seeing if there is a written response to NIST's answers.
9/11 Truthers aren't always upfront about weaknesses in their case. Examples that come to mind would be their calling David Chandler a physics professor, when he's only a high school physics teacher, or their not admitting that there might be a problem with the online journal that supposedly peer-reviewed some of their papers. So I'm not claiming they're perfect. But there seems to be some sincere effort to find the truth, regardless of where it leads.