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

  1.  @alfie8472  ". The video "the force behind the motion" proves it " lol no... I know that video... I've posted on it I'm sure... it doesn't take into account the progressive collapse.... I explained this to you many posts up... no doubt it went above your head.
    1
  2.  @alfie8472  "Whether it is 110 stories or 5 stories, it can't be done" It has been done. .... I keep pointing you to a demolition technique based entirely off the physics involved. "You have no evidence to prove it " I have the videos of the collapses supported by all known physics. 1. Debunk it. 2. What do you have? Go. I'm waiting. ..
    1
  3. So ...still waiting... " So why did Newton's laws stop operating on this one day in history?"... when are you going to back this question up?
    1
  4.  @mooneyes2k478  Yeah I get sucked in too easily by these types of posters who have no idea. It's a failing.
    1
  5.  @alfie8472  "If 9/11 was a real thing nobody would be allowed in high rise buildings ever again, for fear of them falling over." A real thing? What an absurd thing to say. 1. Many building codes were changed as a result of the 9/11 collapses. 2. They don't design buildings like that any more as a result of the 9/11 collapses. 3. These buildings didn't just fall for no reason.... it was a terrorist attack.
    1
  6.  @alfie8472  "What are you talking about? On every other day in history Newton's laws operate" I'm waiting for you to show me that they didn't on 9/11. You can't though.
    1
  7.  @alfie8472  "whuch is why you can't show me another example of a supported tower destroying itself from top to bottom. " I've given you multiple references. I've referred you to the plasco building collapse. I've referred you to watch examples of the verinage technique which not only gives examples of buildings collapsing this way, is entirely dependent on it being possible. You've not been able to refute these.... so instead you dodge and repeat.
    1
  8.  @alfie8472  "The only conclusion is what we were seeing was a manufactured event. " Yep... terrorists intentionally hit the buildings... that is manufactured. ". Care to comment on the burnt out cars toasted in car parks some distance away from the towers?" So moving on are you? You were challenged to prove your claim about Newton's laws... you couldn't do it. So now you're moving on You are admitting your failure.
    1
  9.  @alfie8472  "burnt out cars toasted in car parks some distance away from the towers? " They were moved there to make room for emergency vehicles as part of the rescue/clean up. "Where did that heat & radiation come from? " They were near building buildings. People got out and left them where they were. "are to comment why the fires in the pit after collapse could not be put out for a couple of months?" 220 floors of combustible material smoldering away. "Care to comment on the molten steel? " No one ever confirmed molten steel. " Care to comment on the Dancing Israelis" No evidence of anything was found and they were released. Did you get your list from 2005?
    1
  10.  @alfie8472  So after you were called out about your claim ... you panicked and are just flailing about, picking off old claims from the tired old list. You're not very good at this. So you've yet to support a single claim so far. You're running away from my posts....beaten... looking panicked.
    1
  11.  @alfie8472  " They didn't operate because there was no resistance from the larger & stronger building below. " Sigh... I educated you about your misunderstanding above. You're just making the same error. Here it is again. It's not a 20 floors V 90. 20 floors smash down on a weakened floor... on an angle... that floor cannot stop the upper block and it progresses... then you have 21 floors falling onto the next one... then 22 onto the next one... you're hitting undamaged floors now but you've got 22 floors coming down with momentum... the floor directly below will never be able to stop that... 23 24 25 and it continues. They were progressive collapses. Halfway through the collapse it's not 20 floors dropping, it's half the building.
    1
  12.  @alfie8472  " That is why you can't show me one other example in history of this happening. " The fact that you keep lying speaks volumes. I've referred you to the plasco building collapse. I've referred you to watch examples of the verinage technique which not only gives examples of buildings collapsing this way, is entirely dependent on it being possible. " Newton says there should be an equal & opposite reaction from below." ....and there was. But you don't understand the progressive collapse. As each floor is destroyed, the material from that floor joins in on the collapse. Can you understand this? Don't dodge like you always do. Can you understand this? If you say "but you haven't shown" you will be lying again.
    1
  13.  @alfie8472  So after you were called out about your claim ... you panicked and are just flailing about, picking off old claims from the tired old list. You're not very good at this. So you've yet to support a single claim so far.
    1
  14.  @alfie8472  " You know you can't so stop wasting my time" I have but all you have are lies... that's how desperate its become for you. " You know you can't so stop wasting my time" I've given multiple real life examples but you keep lying.
    1
  15.  @alfie8472  " When they announced Building 7 had fallen 30 minutes before it did." There were incorrect reports that day... that was just one of them. It's easy to see how they got that one wrong as the FDNY thought that the building was so unstable that it would collapse...long before it did. Does it make any sense that a national media company from the UK would be involved? Conspiracy theories never seem to be remotely plausible.
    1
  16.  @alfie8472  "Obviously the plane that came down in Pennsylvania was meant to hit Building 7. OOPS! " Ah yes... obviously Al Qaeda was going to attack 4 important landmarks... the pentagon... the WTC...1 and 2....and..err.. the building next to the WTC... 🤦‍♂ These conspiracy theories are so amazingly dense....
    1
  17.  @alfie8472  "The fires that could not be put out for weeks " I responded to that as well. You keep evading all my responses it seems. It's pretty clear that you have no idea about this and you're in a constant state of lying and dodging. The fires smoldered for a very long time. You had 220 floors of combustible material. Actually more because there were floors below the ground floor.
    1
  18.  @alfie8472  " Want to talk about gravity?" lol...this from someone who has no understanding of physics. "Want to tell me how multi ton building sections were hurled 900 " Impact from the plane. Your script is from 15 years ago..... this is too easy.
    1
  19.  @alfie8472  So I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim - "So why did Newton's laws stop operating on this one day in history?" Come one kid. Oh that's right you don't actually know how to apply Newton's laws to the real world. Over 70 posts in and you're still not able to support your first claims.... ... 🤡
    1
  20.  @alfie8472  So I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim - "So why did Newton's laws stop operating on this one day in history?" Come one kid. Oh that's right you don't actually know how to apply Newton's laws to the real world.
    1
  21.  @alfie8472  "The pulleys are used to get the collapse to start - they remove structure." They pull some walls out to trigger the collapse and gravity does the rest. My point proven.
    1
  22.  @alfie8472  "sure, the kinetic energy of the topsection would be sufficient to break the 1st floor it impacted, thereby damaging itself also, TO A GREATER DEGREE," Lets say it was to the same degree. "That's action = reaction," Correct. "I don't know if u've heard of that? " I'm here explaining it to you. Pay attention - this is the part you're not getting. Lets say that the collapse starts at the 90th floor. The 89th and 90th floor are destroyed... you have 20 floors smashing down onto the 88th floor but that includes the material from the 89th and 90th floor and every floor abvove. The fact that the 80th and 90th floor were destroyed doesn't mean that they no longer have mass. This is what you keep messing up. You think that the impacts make them disappear. They don't disappear. The mass continues to fall onto the next floor. It can't make this much simpler for you.
    1
  23.  @MrYourfriendbutters  The steel columns were not wrapped in concrete .... there were concrete floor slabs going to the top.
    1
  24.  @MrYourfriendbutters  What 'design change' are you referring to? The concrete slabs were in the floors to the top. The steel columns were not covered in concrete. What are you asking?
    1
  25. ​ @MrYourfriendbutters  The floors trusses and columns were covered with a spray on fire resistant foam which contained asbestos.
    1
  26.  @MrYourfriendbutters  I could look all of this up.... but I'm not going to put any effort into doing so unless you have some sort of point. Do you?
    1
  27.  @lettherebeblight  "and fire so hot the passports are just fine afterwards yeah? " A passport was found on the sidewalk near the WTC. It was never in the hottest fires.
    1
  28.  @lettherebeblight  The fuel from the planes started very large fires very quickly. But the jet fuel would have burnt off in minutes. The hottest fires happened afterwards. Yes there were hot fires in the rubble as well. It was a mountain containing combustible material.
    1
  29.  @lettherebeblight  Among other materials.
    1
  30.  @jason8952  "and we've gone over NIST rather extensively in the past." You've yet to show any understanding of the NIST report at all. You have no idea about any of this.
    1
  31.  @jason8952  Got nothing? That's what I thought.
    1
  32.  @jason8952  " Sure, tell me all about it." So you don't know?
    1
  33.  @jason8952  Blah blah...you've got nothing.
    1
  34.  @davepowell7168  " Please don't just repeat a report you have yet to understand" What?
    1
  35.  @jason8952  " You were the one who asked me if I wanted to know what your take on the NIST Reports collapse explanation was." The explanation fits the evidence. A combination of impact and fires caused the collapse of the towers.
    1
  36.  @jason8952  "Now, are you going to explain what your take on the NIST Reports collapse explanation is or not" What? I just answered. ' What do you mean by "take"? Do you want me to explain it all to you? Are you aware of the sagging floors and bowing perimeter columns? Read the FAQ You haven't done basic research on this topic. 🤦‍♂
    1
  37.  @jason8952  "Look, you offered to explain the collapse to me A-Z" Actually I didn't. That was rhetorical. That was me mocking you for not even knowing the basics. 😂😂
    1
  38.  @jason8952  "I want you to explain it all to me." Read the FAQ. Get back to me with your questions.
    1
  39.  @jason8952  "You don't really do reading comprehension do you?" 🤦‍♂
    1
  40.  @davepowell7168  What evidence? I'm waiting for you to provide something.
    1
  41.  @davepowell7168  1. What links? What evidence? 2. What does this even mean? The vague non-answers are very poor.
    1
  42.  @davepowell7168  What does that even mean? Weren't you the guy claiming to be an engineer? Yet you spouting lines I would expect from a teenage rookie conspiracy theorist. Can you back up some of your claims?
    1
  43.  @davepowell7168  " welded together disintegrated." Progressive collapse. "However when 911 demolition or NIST FOIA clearly demonstrate most of the material" Show us your reference and calculations for this.
    1
  44.  @davepowell7168  "Site director claim '1.8 M tons of debris removed" Where? When? What is the context? You're being evasive. "Progressive collapse? No," Yes progressive collapse. Refute this if you can. "study the evidence." I have. I've not seen any indication that you have.
    1
  45.  @davepowell7168  You're still evading. You posted an out of context number. No reference. Nothing to back it up. "Next you will be asking me to figure out the volume of the slurry wall enclosure for you and the approximate mass?" You're deflecting from your evasion. I'm waiting for evidence and you're tap dancing. "Least informed shill l have had the mispleasure" Personal attacks aren't saving you.
    1
  46.  @darlenehowell2274  "The Oral History of the FDNY proves the NIST wrong." Nope. The oral history is consistent with the official story. You wouldn't understand of course because you haven't read it...or done any real research about this topic. You read some books about wizards and thought that was the answer.
    1
  47.  @jason8952  Where is the source for that testimony?
    1
  48.  @jason8952  Where though? Where is the source? I don't want your description about it. Have you not even listened to it?
    1
  49.  @jason8952  So prove your claim.... take your time I'll wait.
    1
  50.  @jason8952  So you can't prove your claim. I'm so surprised. Really I am. 🙄
    1