Comments by "Mark H" (@markh1011) on "Depressed Ginger" channel.

The towers didn't fall from the bottom.
3
"There are three buildings in the history of buildings to collapse because of fire" sigh.... no. 1. Buildings have collapsed due to fire before. 2. The towers didn't collapse due to just fire.
2
"Dude these clowns could not fly a paper plane." The worst pilot of the group had a commercial pilots license, many hours in the air and trained for the mission for months. Instructors who flew with him thought he did it. "this was mosad and controlled demo.." No evidence for either claim.. ".it was cgi and we ate it all." Oh god....🤦‍♂
2
".that goat farmers in a cave half way around the world" Mohammad Atta and other members of the group had tertiary educations and were recruited in Hamburg. Stop believing everything you read on the internet.
2
" jet fuel does not burn at a high enough temperature to melt the steel girders for one thing" The buildings collapsed when the steel weakened, not melting, weakened. Also, the highest temps came from the contents of the buildings not the jet fuel.
2
"Plus they found microscopic spheres of nano thermite in the debris of the towers." No that never happened. "That with the freefall speed of collapse" No that didn't happen. " owner buying insurance for terrorism months before 9-11" That was not uncommon. The towers were the target of an attack a few years earlier and were insured against it then. It would only make sense to do the same. "Yeah i’ll believe science" Do you really have any idea about science?
1
Well let everyone know when you find some evidence to support that...
1
"Am I the only one who thinks that Flight 93 was meant to fly into WTC 7 ? " That would be absurd. How would that make sense? 4 landmarks are selected - the towers, the pentagon and a building next to the towers. It was almost certainly headed for the capitol building.
1
@cagerat It doesn't though. It would be extremely weird if that was the 4th target. It would make people wonder why.
1
@cagerat Even if they were all there, all files are backed up and sent offsite as part of a disaster recovery plan. Blowing up buildings doesn't make information disappear. All of those organisations had other offices as well. These weren't any special central type office. So what would be gained from attacking them? No people were in there by that point. Flight 93 was most likely going to the Capitol Building. "So yeah, a very attractive target, very plausible - not weird at all." You're not seeing the problem. Even if all of those organisations were there (they weren't) making that a target would be weird and lead to questions why. Attacking someone who supposedly had those files would only make the conspiracy more obvious. It doesn't make sense.
1
".they say the jet fuel melted and weakened the beams " No they don't say that. That is not the official story. "then it wouldn't have fell perfectly in its own footprint" The towers didn't fall into their footprint. "it would have buckled and toppled over and alot of the two toweres would have still been standing" Gravity pulls down. "the owner of the building was getting sued by many employees for asbestos exposure." That's total fiction. There was supposedly still some asbestos to be removed in a few floors of one tower. "but instead he got a sht load of insurance money" He spent a small fortune fighting for that money, he had to pay the lease for the empty site and still got less than the rebuild cost.
1
"..just so happened that there were no jets to be scrambled and intercept because conveniently they were all sent far away for training drilss hmm" Planes were put in the air. No drills had any impact on the response of the air force. You get so much wrong.
1
@cbn7239 "So buildings just collapse into their own footprint?" Buildings have collapsed due to fire before. "Why use a demo crew then?" To make sure you can control when and how the building falls. WTC7 also destroyed the building next to it when it fell. " Building 7 was not hit by a plane" It was hit by part of a skyscraper which is what started the fire. "Wake up." Reading from the same script flat earthers use....
1
You can't debate me so you start a thread complaining about me. I love that you think I'm a special agent working for the government. 🤣
1
"Sidenote, nothing registered on the Richter scale so nothing hit the ground. " The collapse of the towers measured 2.1 and 2.3 on seismographs. Have you considered doing research before commenting?
1
@lyriktehuti " is a 2.1/2.3 comparable to 200+ stories of concrete" Yes. Prove me wrong. "Also, how did all of that material become a 3-4 story pile?" It was probably more than that, but there are 2 important points. 1. Buildings are mostly air. Skyscrapers are just frameworks. 2. These buildings pulverised themselves from the top down.
1
@lyriktehuti "And no, no research." Well that's how it looks.
1
A report was released on that over 15 years ago.....
1
@arkoudakafe "was it hit by anything? " Yes. Part of a skyscraper hit it. That's what caused the fire. "Did it suffer structural failure?" After about 7 hours of burning with no firefighting efforts - yes.
1
@arkoudakafe ", there were no visible signs of a major fire, no smoke." There are videos showing several floors with serious fires. There are definitely photos and video showing plenty of smoke. "Was it the only building that was hit by debree?" Several were. "just another coincidence I guess" It's not a coincidence. It's an error. There were several errors that day apparently. It's easy to see how this one was made considering the FDNY thought it would collapse.
1
". The WTC buildings were functionally obsolete and full of hazardous materials like asbestos, lead paint and the difficulty and expence of relocating the tennants." This is simply false. There was some asbestos in the lower floors of one tower. That's it. "Commercial buildings are generally thought to be functioally obsolete in a 20 year lifespan. " Also false. That's a ridiculous claim. "Demolition was necessary but getting the permits and EPA" Totally implausible.
1
"Remember that Donald Rumsfield had annon announced 2.3 trillion dollars was missing from the government the" Now missing, unaccounted for in an audit. It's been an ongoing problem for the government Within 6 months of 9/11 more than half of it was reconciled. Nothing to do with 9/11 at all. "Very unlikely that air traffic controll would not notice 4 jet liners deviating from their assigned flight path " That's harder with transponders off and thousands of planes in the air. ". So many inconsistencies and unanswered questions." You could find answers. Do you want to or do you want to pretend it's a mystery?
1
"Why where there explosions that went off in both towers before they collapsed? " Out of context testimony. We have footage of the towers leading to the collapse. No explosions. "Why was there Thermite found " There wasnt. "How is it possible for molten steel to fall " Molten metal....we don't know that it was steeel. "Everything was turned to dust but we managed to find the hijackers passport " Not everything turned to dust. The passport was found on the sidewalk before any of the collapses. "How is it possible to make cell phone calls at high altitude in a commercial jet? " Nearly all the calls were from airfones not cell phones. "Why where there no bodies found in Penn?" Body parts were found.
1
Here is a question - why don't conspiracy theorists do a few minutes of research?
1
Another big nothing story.....
1
" And then world trade 7 that wasn’t even hit by a plane completely collapsed" Hit by part of a skyscraper and burned away all day with no fire fighting efforts. "A building can’t fall from a pancake collapse at free fall speed." The towers didn't fall at free fall. It's free fall acceleration not speed. You're not from a physics background.
1
"Why not discuss OBL hacking into WTC to show his portrait on every monitor screen in the building? " You're making things up.
1