Comments by "Mark H" (@markh1011) on "National Geographic" channel.

  1. 1. The plasco building. 2. The towers didn't collapse due to just fire. Did you forget about the planes? 3. If all that happened on 9/11 was a fire at WTC7 then it would have been put out.
    6
  2.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  That's all you've got? You've just been handed a lesson.
    5
  3. Ohh you started a whole thread about me. John Lear was a nut who believed in many crazy conspiracies including alien abductions and secret bases on the moon. It's quite telling that this guy is the best you can come up with! 😂😂😂😂
    5
  4. You basically just repeated the same flawed claim I addressed. Nothing to do with corruption. All to do with a guy who wasn't rational and fell for silly conspiracies.
    5
  5.  @darlenehowell2274  It isn't relevant at all. Then again nothing you say ever is.
    5
  6.  @darlenehowell2274  So, wizards and porky pig and bugs bunny were involved. Yeah sounds like you're building a solid theory there.
    5
  7. The WTC7 collapse was quite different from the towers collapse. But to answer your question it collapsed due to fire.
    5
  8. Water is used to cut steel. Think about that for a min
    4
  9.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  "So almost no flames blows" Several hundred people jumped to their deaths. They chose to jump instead of painful death by burning. But you cherry pick a quote from people not near the fires and claim there were no fires. 🤦‍♂ Sigh... conspiracy theorists... so disrespectful to the victims with their dishonest arguments.
    4
  10.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  "No plane smashing into a battleship without bombs would sink it, not one." You're comparing military vessels to a skyscraper.... 🤦‍♂
    4
  11. "I'm one of so many from Europe ,the towers should of never collapsed like that ." They shouldn't have but planes loaded with jet fuel hit them.
    4
  12. "ten damaged storeys cannot damage 90 perfectly fine storeys" That's not how the collapses worked. 15-20 stories fall on to a weakened floor and the collapse continues, now you have 21 floors worth of material falling then 22 23 24 and it continues. It was a progressive collapse " tower 7" and? " Pentagon hole being too small" It was the size of the fuselage.
    4
  13.  @darlenehowell2274  "and remember what Galileo said" Please tell everyone and then why it's relevant.
    4
  14.  @darlenehowell2274  You've got no evidence....just a string of excuses and evasions.
    4
  15.  @darlenehowell2274  Bowing and sagging - WTC 1 - NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-24 and 2-25, and NCSTAR 1-5A Figure 8-108. WTC 2 - NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-37 and NCSTAR1-5A Figures 9-46, 9-59, 9-80, 9-82, and 9-83. Floor sag NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-40 Are you actually claiming the towers didn't collapse? You know we have them collapsing on video right? Wow you're loopy.
    4
  16.  @JuanJimenez.  The building didn't free fall. Some outer walls were in virtual free fall for a moment in a later stage of the collapse. Of course fire can do that.
    4
  17. "Jet fuel does not melt steel, top to bottom. " 🤦‍♂ Sigh.
    3
  18. "Especially after this show top of building would’ve just toppled over" Gravity pulls down, not sideways.
    3
  19.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  ...on top of that, we can actually see the fires in the photos and video. We can even see the steel gradually weakening from the fires. So everything you say is wrong.
    3
  20.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  🥜🌰
    3
  21. Buildings have collapsed due to fire since 9/11.... you have no idea.
    3
  22.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  " because under Newton's laws we all know what happens" You've shown you have no idea about physics.
    3
  23.  @michaelp4218  "In essence what you are saying is that you can start a large fire 10-15 floors from the top of any skyscraper and in less than 2 hours it will come tumbling straight down onto its own foundation " Did you forget about the planes loaded with jet fuel smashing the buildings had high speed?
    3
  24.  @darlenehowell2274  " The top of the north tower lean so much that it should have slid off into the street" So you're now conceding that it wasn't symmetrical. You're all over the place. "How do think that it righted itself?" The upper blocks were falling, but one side was lower. . With a little rotation of that block to make one side lower, that side that is lower starts experiencing more and larger impacts so that opposes that rotation overall and there is a natural righting.
    3
  25.  @darlenehowell2274  You're now trying to pretend you haven't told me about Crowley and rituals being behind it. You're a complete mess. Go away crazy person.
    3
  26. "So why did Newton's laws stop operating on this one day in history? " Prove that happened.
    3
  27.  @jason8952  In short - a combination of impact and jet fuel initiated fires. You don't even know what the official story is do you? Do you understand the collapse initiation or do I need to explain that to you? It would be very embarrassing for you if i did. You see, I actually downloaded and read the NIST report many years ago, which is why I can tell you have no idea about it.
    3
  28.  @jeffsundeen1680  It was hit by part of one of the tallest buildings in the world collapsing.
    3
  29.  @jeffsundeen1680  From the NIST site. "The Act, signed into law on Oct. 1, 2002, by President Bush, authorizes the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish teams to investigate building failures. " They were authorised. Your argument is pointless and incorrect. You're arguing for the sake of arguing and going backwards.
    3
  30. ​ @jeffsundeen1680  So you lost an argument. Learn from the experience. Get back to me when you know a little about the topic and have something to say.
    3
  31.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  " smaller buildings survived as was clearly shown by the press the following day. " Different situations. Many people have been shot and lived. That doesn't mean that bullets can't kill you.
    3
  32. "A theory is something proven by scientific method" Actually in science a theory is never technically "proven". "Most of the jet fuel exploded out of the side of the bldg during the second crash" A lot of it did. How did you determine "most" ...and why do you think this is relevant? "Also the center of the bldgs had heavily reinforced columns that should have still partially stood, " No they were smashed during the collapse. "even if the pancake theory is correct. Which it is not." You don't know what the 'pancake theory' is do you?
    3
  33. A passport was found on the sidewalk. Passenger items were found at every crash site. The collapse pattern? There are various analyses you can read if you're really interested. What don't you understand about them?
    2
  34.  @liarfire101  Here comes liarfire again with his nonsenical babbling. Have you learnt about the verinage technique yet? ...you know... the thing that you claim is impossible...
    2
  35.  @c.augustedupin2559  Why are you still posting? You made a fool of yourself. Accept it an move on. Go away troll.
    2
  36.  @c.augustedupin2559  Hopeless. 🤦‍♂
    2
  37.  @c.augustedupin2559  🤦‍♂
    2
  38.  @DT__1  " I’ve never seen and all I can say Now , no one never will be able to prove that my theory is wrong" What theory?
    2
  39.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  The flames were most certainly an issue as we can see that they were weakening the structure. A comment from people who weren't near the hottest fires at the time doesn't change that.
    2
  40.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  Which question? Scrubbing them? What are you talking about?
    2
  41.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  " there were little to almost zero flames." Because they were in the stairwell and not near the fires.... duh. " there were little to almost zero flames." Actually you need to. Don't just pick out a sentence and not understand the context. Cherry pickling quotes is a classic deceptive technique.
    2
  42.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  "Are you suggesting account hacking going on?" What are you talking about? Are you not all there?
    2
  43.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  "I asked you for proof of your claims the structures of the towers were being affected by flames," No problem. Gradually bowing and sagging steel. WTC 1 - NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-24 and 2-25, and NCSTAR 1-5A Figure 8-108. WTC 2 - NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-37 and NCSTAR1-5A Figures 9-46, 9-59, 9-80, 9-82, and 9-83. Floor sagging NCSTAR1-3C Figure 2-40. Over to you to refute.
    2
  44.  @yabbadabbadoo8225  "So who scrubs on YT??" Are you new to youtube?
    2
  45.  @darlenehowell2274 You're the one who thinks that it's a conspiracy when a 6 is involved....somewhere... you're challenging people about evidence. ..🤣
    2
  46.  @darlenehowell2274  "STATICAL MATHEMATICS PROVES THE NON-COINCIDENCE OF THE OCCULT NUMEROLOGY" Are you trying to talk about statistics but you keep calling it statics? You don't know the difference between statics and statistics? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    2
  47.  @darlenehowell2274  "One of which, I gave to you and you tried to say that I thought that the word occult meant, "wizards and spells"." Ohhhhhhhh that's right ... you didn't understand that "occult" had other meanings. So you don't know the difference between statics and statistics. You don't even know what "occult" means. hahahaha.... You're making it worse with every attempt.
    2
  48.  @darlenehowell2274  "Like I said, "I mock you for laughs" That's not even a good try. You're shooting yourself in the foot with every post and it's hilarious. "I don't argue with stupid people" You can't argue this subject.... you don't know anything about it.
    2
  49. ​ @shilIhunter4380 Fitz and I are different people. It's like the two of you are having a competition to see who can be more nutty.
    2
  50. "ow does an aluminium plane cut through steel like butter???" The plane was torn apart...and blew up... hardly cutting like butter.
    2