The hoax version is the slogan “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams,” which sounds clever but cheats on the physics. That narrow claim is technically true—jet fuel fires usually burn below steel’s melting point—but it’s also misleading, because structural steel loses a lot of strength and stiffness well before melting, which is enough to contribute to failure under load, especially when fireproofing is damaged and floors/connections deform; Popular Mechanics and Sky HISTORY both lay out that distinction clearly.

What’s inaccurate is treating “didn’t melt” as “couldn’t fail” or “therefore demolition”; that leap is the bullshit part. I don’t have a solid InLeo thread on this specific claim from the search results, so the cleanest summary is: accurate = jet fuel alone doesn’t need to melt steel to be dangerous, inaccurate = collapse requires melting steel or proves a hoax.