Comments by "Mark H" (@markh1011) on "New York Post" channel.

  1.  @SquidProQuo80  " there were other accelerants and there is documented proof of nano-thermite on the columns." Jet fuel was the only accelerant identified. No one found nanothermite. That's a claim from a couple of kooky scientists that they themselves have never confirmed. "I can't believe that there are still non-experts who want to lecture professionals on nonsensical theories." Yeah like people who don't even understand the difference between speed and acceleration? 😂
    21
  2.  @SquidProQuo80  "Floor trusses "pancaking" still would not fall at free-fall speed " The towers didn't fall at free fall so your argument is invalid. Oh and you are referring to acceleration, not speed. "we clearly see molten steel literally dripping out of the building and incinerating everything it touched" You don't know what metal that was. There were other metals inside nearby. There was tons of aluminium. There were server rooms with UPS nearby that contained lead. Conspiracy theorists act like steep is the only metal (well iron).
    19
  3.  @Dan_druft  "Strange because the fire could never be hot enough to melt steel and molten aluminum doesn't glow red" You don't see red steel coming out the sides so it's odd that you say that. A molten material was seen coming out the side. It was unlikely to be pure. It was probably a mix. It certainly could have been mostly aluminium.
    16
  4.  @sarah_751  "And still, you get these sheep who’ll come out with absolutely anything." You mean the 9/11 conspiracy theorists....
    14
  5.  @shredder9643  "2 planes, 3 skyscrapers... " Every building in the area was destroyed or damaged beyond repair. It was more like 2 planes, 11 buildings... perhaps more. ..and? It's funny that people think this is some sort of argument.
    12
  6.  @jadedmastermind  "Journal of the American Society of Safety Engineers published an article in which they say" Where is this article? The only accurate readings taken of the pile were from NASA's AVIRIS and the maximum temp they recorded was about 730C from memory. "Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolitions, Inc, was told by contractors at Ground Zero of “hot spots of molten steel in the basements" Unsupported testimony. You can't identify what a molten metal is purely by sight.
    10
  7.  @peppergrand1072  "The building would have been leaning towards the weakest point then" On the sides where the temperatures were the highest, the perimeter columns bowed inwards until those columns failed. The buildings leaned towards those sides as they collapsed. There is no evidence for the conspiracy.....
    6
  8. "You will never convince me that that day was not an inside job," Those are the words of an irrational person.
    4
  9. Sigh... skyscrapers have collapsed due to fire before... Edifício Wilton Paes de Almeida and the Plasco building are two examples. Conspiracy theorists don't do basic research.
    4
  10. Enjoy your fantasy world.
    3
  11. "No one saw plane number 1.... " Everything you said was wrong.
    3
  12.  @peppergrand1072  That's a really poor deflection.
    3
  13. So what you're saying is that you don't understand physics.
    3
  14. Not really.
    3
  15. "The steel the concrete turned from a full solid into billions of tiny particles" A lot of the concrete yes. The steel no. "It was cooked from the inside. That's why people jumped." People chose to jump over burning to death. You forgot about the fires. "It's called direct energy weapon " 🤦‍♂
    3
  16.  @Urfavdwplayer  what?
    2
  17. "This was done by our own Government" 🤦‍♂ .....and NASA is hiding the flat earth right?
    2
  18. "Anybody after all these years who thinks the buildings just fell down because a plane hit them is incredibly naive..." Do you even understand the official story on why the towers collapsed?
    2
  19.  @K3ndex1210  " Did bbc report building 7 had fallen before it actually had "fallen"?" It was an error. There were several errors that day. It's not hard to see how they could have made that error as multiple buildings collapsed and partially collapsed that day and WTC7 was looking so unstable that the FDNY thought it would probably collapse.
    2
  20.  @robertmarszalek1978  "and then resulted in as they describe the pancake Theory" The pancake theory was FEMAs explanation of collapse initiation. NIST did not support that theory. If you're talking about pancaking as if floors hitting the floors below during the collapse, that undeniably happened. Do you know what you were referring to?
    2
  21.  @robertmarszalek1978  ". I really hope that you watch all the documentaries" Yes yes I've seen plenty of conspiracy documentaries. They are terrible. They work on the gullible and those who don't bother to do the research to verify the half-baked claims. Are you informed on this topic?
    2
  22.  @robertmarszalek1978  So that's all you could come up with to respond to my posts? Not surprising.
    2
  23.  @ronaldgreene5733  And we'll wait forever as you avoid the original question." You're projecting your own dodging. You have made two claims: 1. An unusual lack of turbulence. 2. Imperfect projection technology. I'm waiting for you to back this up. You've evaded for several posts now. Again - why did you bother posting when you couldn't back anything up?
    2
  24.  @ronaldgreene5733  "Wake turbulence in the smoke and fire," You're making the claim that something is missing. I'm waiting for you to back this up. Why did you bother posting just to commence a tap dance routine when challenged to back up your claim? 👯💃👯💃
    2
  25.  @ronaldgreene5733  You have made two claims. You've been challenged to support them. Take the dress off and end the tap dance routine. 👯💃👯
    2
  26.  @ronaldgreene5733  " and see the complete lack of any turbulence in the smoke and fire" Prove that there should be something visible that's missing. ""Backed up" lol....repeating a claim isn't backing up. 🤦‍♂ This is comedy. You made two claims. I'm waiting for you to back them up. Give us another diversion. We'll wait. 😂
    2
  27.  @ronaldgreene5733  "You are a desperate rehash as everyone has seen the smoke and fire only seconds after the passage of a 500 mph large passenger airliner. " So then it would be easy for you to back your claim up. ""back it up" . . "back it up" LOL, You have lost, Mark." You can't back up your claim so that means I've lost? 🤣🤣 🤦‍♂ Troll logic.
    2
  28.  @ronaldgreene5733  " We can continue this forever, Mark" Yeah trolls like you probably can. Not much else to do in mummy and daddy's basement I guess. 😆
    2
  29.  @ronaldgreene5733  "True desperation in your great efforts here. " The projection is mildly amusing. You have made two claims. Look at how much energy you're spending AVOIDING backing up your claims. Every time you do this, you are conceding.
    2
  30.  @ronaldgreene5733  "Smoke and fire seconds later at both towers" ?? lol...yeah there was.... and? You're a mess. This is comical. You came here with claims you lack the ability to support. But you sure put on a frantic tap dance! 👯💃👯💃 😂
    2
  31.  @ronaldgreene5733  "In the smoke and fire seconds later at both towers -- zero turbulence after passage of a 500 mph large passenger airliner" What does this even mean? You're not making sense.
    2
  32.  @ronaldgreene5733  "Repetition is in my favor" No you sound like a crazy person who can't make a logical argument. 🤣
    2
  33.  @ronaldgreene5733  Still waiting for you to back up your claims. Why did you bother coming here just evade? 😂😂 Bizarre. A big L.
    2
  34.  @ronaldgreene5733  Another dodge. You came in with nothing and now you're frenetically tap dancing....lol... Why make the claims if you're too scared to support them? 😂😂😂
    2
  35. "Why did the 3rd building collapse?" It burned away freely all day until it collapsed. The FDNY thought it would collapse long before it did because it looked so unstable. No big mystery.
    2
  36.  @peppergrand1072  🤦‍♂ No.
    2
  37.  @peppergrand1072  ", than challenge the unsupported physics of skyscrapers and black boxes " What are you claiming here?
    2
  38. Ah yes Graeme Graeme MacQueen's absurd list. I remember reading through it. There were plenty of loud exploding type noises that day. Planes hitting buildings, jet fuel exploding, buildings on fire...buildings collapsing. It's really no surprise that some people used that term. If you actually bothered to look at the testimony you'd see that many are just describing the collapses. We have them on video and there were no mysterious explosions. This proves a point. People say 'explosion' for things that are not related to demolition explosives.
    2
  39. " Start with the movie Loose Change." This movie is for people who have the critical thinking skills of a flat earther.
    2
  40. "Then examine Architects and Engineers for 911 truth. And most importantly, read the book Where did the towers go by Dr.Judy Wood. " They contradict each other! They reject each other's theories. You're just accepting everything without any thought. 🤦‍♂
    2
  41. Do you understand why it collapsed?
    2
  42.  @leelunk8235  Do you actually have an argument?
    2
  43. 🤦‍♂...sigh.
    2
  44. It collapsed due to fire. It was looking so unstable it was expected to collapse. It's not such a big mystery.
    2
  45.  @bangkobangko1391  The fire fighters who were there weren't surprised. But obviously you know better than them.... sure.
    2
  46.  @friendlyadvice2792  " 800° is the max temperature for these combustibles." Office fires exceed 600C and can exceed 1000C. "Underground fires burned for 100 days at temperatures over 2000° " The fires smouldered for a long time which is not surprising. No such temperature was recorded.
    2
  47. "Why all the Jews did not come out on this day to work " Many Jewish people died in the WTC attack. Stop being so gullible.
    2
  48. It's been over 20 years and no one can support the conspiracy theories...
    2
  49. "marvin bush put bombs in the building" 🤦‍♂.... did aliens help him?
    2
  50. You're hearing things. Also, thermite is an incendiary not an explosive.
    2