If the buildings were completely empty and the 110 floors pancaked precisely on top of each other the debris pile of pancaked floors may well total around 12 floors. In any case we see no pancaked floors in the remains yet we are to still believe it was a pancake collapse? The testimonies of workers who were in the buildings at the time including the lobby area and sub basement and who reported hearing explosions and seeing dead and injured people are grounds alone for having a new independent investigation.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
If the buildings were completely empty and the 110 floors pancaked precisely on top of each other the debris pile of pancaked floors may well total around 12 floors. In any case we see no pancaked floors in the remains yet we are to still believe it was a pancake collapse? The testimonies of workers who were in the buildings at the time including the lobby area and sub basement and who reported hearing explosions and seeing dead and injured people are grounds alone for having a new independent investigation.

No, no, no! Not stacked to a height of 12 storeys, a height of 12 metres! Metres! What's that? 3 to 4 storeys?

There was a basement as well? Well, I guess some of the debris filled that up as well.

I am not surprised that a structure, even though the floors are light weight concrete construction, has them broken up as they cascade down, given that as well as the floors there are 200,000 tons of steel.

Office furnishings no doubt get crushed in all that, so would present little extra to that debris pile, minus the material that was pulverised and pushed from the site.


Are we now agreed that the debris pile was very unlikely to be 35 storeys? I think we can agree that it might be higher than 12m, but that the concrete from the floors would only ever reach a height of around that. If you want to go to 110 storeys, you are still only talking just over 12.5 Metres. (Still 3 or 4 storeys.)

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
The testimonies of workers who were in the buildings at the time including the lobby area and sub basement and who reported hearing explosions and seeing dead and injured people are grounds alone for having a new independent investigation.

Now onto your point about loud explosions.

This was a steel building. These people didn't heard loud explosions before the planes impacted the buildings. They heard them after the planes had impacted the buildings. This would be consistent with some structural changes/breakages in the structure. Steel easily transmits sound. I have no problem believing that a diconnection somewhere in the structure would sound like explosions to people in the basement.


Onto the other point about seeing 'dead and injured people' in the basement. I think we have chased that one around a few times and found absolutely no reference to dead or injured people in the basements. If you think there is, post it.

I wonder if we should created 9/11 threads in the windsurfing or kitesurfing forums. People there could be missing out!

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
Structural failures that were 80 and more floors below the impact area that resulted in numerous deaths and injuries?

Remember these 'failures' happened well before the collapse of the building.

The exact speed of a pancaked collapse I do not know but I can say to break through 80 floors that are all structurally sound is going to take considerable time. In the remains of the debris pile you would see a pile of pancaked floors (around 35 storeys high) on top of each other if this is what happened. You do not see this - instead the debris pile is minuscule with no pancaked floors visible.

Peter, how in the world can you say " to break through 80 floors that are all structurally sound is going to take considerable time" when the facts and the physics show that is not true.

Is there something wrong with your computer? Can you not see the vids of very fast collapses that I showed earlier?

Are you saying that the witnesses to the L'Ambiance collapse, for example, are liars? The collapse rate they reported - just as in the vids - is vastly faster than the collapse rate you claim. The fact is that physics, eyewitness testimony and videos show that you are WRONG.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

petermac33 said..
The testimonies of workers who were in the buildings at the time including the lobby area and sub basement and who reported hearing explosions and seeing dead and injured people are grounds alone for having a new independent investigation.

Now onto your point about loud explosions.

This was a steel building. These people didn't heard loud explosions before the planes impacted the buildings. They heard them after the planes had impacted the buildings. This would be consistent with some structural changes/breakages in the structure. Steel easily transmits sound. I have no problem believing that a diconnection somewhere in the structure would sound like explosions to people in the basement.


Onto the other point about seeing 'dead and injured people' in the basement. I think we have chased that one around a few times and found absolutely no reference to dead or injured people in the basements. If you think there is, post it.

Quite right, FN.

In the collapse of the Sampoong Building, there were loud bangs from the top floors five hours before the poorly-designed and poorly-modified building fell down. The Mianus RIver bridge made noises for weeks before its collapse. The New World Hotel was making cracking sounds for over a day before it collapsed, with "loud bangs" and "rumbling sounds" shortly before it fell.

Anyone who claims that loud bangs before structural failure must be explosives is just being dishonest, because there is lots of evidence that they occur before collapses caused by other factors, and because we know why they occur.

Incidentally, North Korean terrorism was initially suspected in the collapse of the Sampoong building, but the fact that it fell down onto itself, as the WTC buildings did, was seen as evidence that NO explosives were used. So the evidence that 911 conspiracy theorists see as proof of that explosives had brought about a building collapse had earlier been used to show there were NO explosives in a building collapse.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
If the buildings were completely empty and the 110 floors pancaked precisely on top of each other the debris pile of pancaked floors may well total around 12 floors. In any case we see no pancaked floors in the remains yet we are to still believe it was a pancake collapse? The testimonies of workers who were in the buildings at the time including the lobby area and sub basement and who reported hearing explosions and seeing dead and injured people are grounds alone for having a new independent investigation.

Absolute BS, as others have shown. Look at the pics of other collapses and do the simple maths about the thicknesses of the slabs and it is apparent that you are totally wrong.

Select to expand quote

cammd said..
Chris there is 243 pages devoted to 911 in HW, if those 243 pages can't convince PM33 I don't think you will, his conspiracy theory will out last any logic or evidence you post. FYI there is another 100+ pages across multiple threads trying to convince him the earth is round, unfortunaltley we as a seabreeze community failed in that as well.

Fair call. I wasn't aware of the flat earth thread. That's weird.

Select to expand quote

Chris 249 said..>>>Fair call. I wasn't aware of the flat earth thread. That's weird.

As I said before Chris, Pete lives in a different universe, to the rest of us.
Up and down are universal constants, there's a dome overhead with the universe painted on it in some strange manner, that allows the various bits to move around. The south pole is actually a ring of ice around the flat earth that holds the oceans in.

All logic from this universe is irrelevant in his universe, that has it's own logic, so there's no hope of a logical discussion because we share no common logic.
But for some reason I fail to comprehend, Pete is able to function very well in our universe.

I know of people who got reconstructive surgery as the walls hit them in the face - in the basement.

The parking garage and the machine shop reduced to rubble.

A few testimonies from many. Take the time to listen,it has been posted many times before but is dismissed conveniently.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

Chris 249 said..>>>Fair call. I wasn't aware of the flat earth thread. That's weird.

As I said before Chris, Pete lives in a different universe, to the rest of us.
Up and down are universal constants, there's a dome overhead with the universe painted on it in some strange manner, that allows the various bits to move around. The south pole is actually a ring of ice around the flat earth that holds the oceans in.

All logic from this universe is irrelevant in his universe, that has it's own logic, so there's no hope of a logical discussion because we share no common logic.
But for some reason I fail to comprehend, Pete is able to function very well in our universe.

Wow, I didn't realise it was that bad. It's a particularly odd thing for a sailor to think, because if the earth was flat then the Round The World races wouldn't work the way they do - the boats that went closest to the ice would have to sail further, and their logs would show that they sailed more distance.

I do find it odd that he is too scared and bloody rude to even acknowledge the fact that vids show that buildings do NOT collapse slowly.

Select to expand quote

Chris 249 said. >>> I do find it odd that he is too scared and bloody rude to even acknowledge the fact that vids show that buildings do NOT collapse slowly.

Wrong universe, they don't count.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
I know of people who got reconstructive surgery as the walls hit them in the face - in the basement.

The parking garage and the machine shop reduced to rubble.

A few testimonies from many. Take the time to listen,it has been posted many times before but is dismissed conveniently.

9/11 conspiracy theories are a deep state false flag to derail climate change debate. Check any global warming post on any forum if you don't believe me.
9/11 denier = unpaid shill for Big Oil

The vast majority of buildings collapse at close to free fall speed. The building in Tehran also appears to collapse at a similar speed.

Any person that chooses to attack the messenger rather than the overwhelming evidence of controlled demolitions being used on 911.....

It is also likely the Conversation refuses to discuss evidence contrary to the official story.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

Chris 249 said. >>> I do find it odd that he is too scared and bloody rude to even acknowledge the fact that vids show that buildings do NOT collapse slowly.

Wrong universe, they don't count.

Yeah, and the ultimate answer to those questions is either 'they were in one it' or 'they were gotten to'. Its the answer to everything.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
I know of people who got reconstructive surgery as the walls hit them in the face - in the basement.

The parking garage and the machine shop reduced to rubble.

A few testimonies from many. Take the time to listen,it has been posted many times before but is dismissed conveniently.

Its good. It shows that it was 'heard' explosions. "heard bang bang bang". Not 'saw' explosions, but 'heard' them.

You should quote the stuff that is taken from somewhere else. For a second there I thought you personally knew someone... unless of course you are the fire fighter(?) quoted in the clip.

I will concede the point on the dead or injured in the basement. I am going to go on the basis of that clip. Did these injuries occur before the planes impacted or after? Of course, it will be after, which means its impossible to separate them from the building losing structural integrity.

What are we supposed to infer from this? That explosives were used in the basement?

You REALLY think a plane impacting the 80 th floor can cause a loss of structural integrity to the sub - basement to the extent that it results in serious injuries and deaths in the sub - basement?

Are you in favour of having a new independent investigation?

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
You REALLY think a plane impacting the 80 th floor can cause a loss of structural integrity to the sub - basement to the extent that it results in serious injuries and deaths in the sub - basement?

Are you in favour of having a new independent investigation?

No. I think that the fires created structural problems and caused joints to separate. I am not sure if that's the official narrative, but that's what I think is most likely.

Its a steel building, and described as 'a tube within a tube'. There is mention of the steel being 4 inches thick at the base, but only 1/4 inch thick at the top.

A new investigation makes no sense now. What are they going to investigate? The unbelievers are already ontrack with their own theories, and what else would they get access to that would change anything. Who is 'they' anyway. It seems like a lot of disjointed people with the opinion that something happened, but not a consistent view, and unlikely to have anyone rational that would see the whole thing through and investigate the facts without going off into a foregone conclusion.

I personally don't actually believe the assertion that there were injuries and deaths in the basement caused by 'explosions', but I am willing to concede the point as we don't have any evidence and sweemingly not even a formal "I saw this and this is what happened in the basement", just a clip provided by someone.

They could have happened. I am skeptical though.

I will go even further. I wouldn't be surprised if there was something substandard in the construction. Whether it was inferior materials or inferior construction. I have no basis for that belief other than a guess. I remember seeing a documentary on the golden gate bridge where they identified that a certain amount of the components of the steel cables were not up to spec, and seemingly supplied by someone with mob connections. Luckily the engineering margins they allowed could cope with the level of inferior strands.

What proof do I have? None.

There are numerous clips from different people all saying the same thing - they heard explosions and saw people injured thereafter.

Because you are sold a lie it does does not been you should buy the lie.

I made the mistake of buying - then I dumped the lie.

People want to be associated with the winning side.

They dissociate from evidence that conflicts with the majority or the winning side. Ive read cognitive dissonance is at least partly caused by the ego. It makes a lot of sense....

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
The vast majority of buildings collapse at close to free fall speed. The building in Tehran also appears to collapse at a similar speed.

Any person that chooses to attack the messenger rather than the overwhelming evidence of controlled demolitions being used on 911.....

It is also likely the Conversation refuses to discuss evidence contrary to the official story.

So if you now agree that buildings collapse at close to free fall speed, why did you say a couple of day ago "It would take minutes not a second off free fall speed dah. The symmetrical collapse of Building 7 again in close to free fall proves beyond any shadow of a doubt explosives were used."

A couple of days ago, you claimed that the fact that the building collapsed at close to free fall speed indicated explosives were used, now you agree that most other building collapse at close to free fall speed. Therefore you have now contradicted your claim of a few days ago, and therefore destroyed yet one more plank of your conspiracy theory.

And don't complain about "attacking the messenger" when your message is one of hate, vilification and contempt for those who carried out the real investigations, and for climate scientists, and for scientists who study mobile phone radiation. If you are going to sling around hate and claims and implications of corruption, lies and incompetence, it is ludicrous to whine if you cop flak in return.

The flipside of conspiracy theories is sound, logical, evidence-based research and investigation and one critical thing - R.E.S.P.E.C.T. for other people, their professionalism, skills and knowledge. I was involved in the investigation that resulted in record fines against a major (now defunct) company and in investigations against senior members of the Australian establishment. While you and the "truthers" have been ranting on the net, many of us have been proving things and winning battles. Our way works, yours does not.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
You REALLY think a plane impacting the 80 th floor can cause a loss of structural integrity to the sub - basement to the extent that it results in serious injuries and deaths in the sub - basement?

Are you in favour of having a new independent investigation?

Yes, of course it can. The collapse of the Sampoong building was largely caused by air conditioners being moved on the roof. The collapse of L'Ambiance was caused by the failure of a jacking point on the top story. The partial collapse of Ronan Point was because of a minor gas explosion about 25 stories up. There are many other cases where damage high up causes devastation at ground level and below.

This is very, very basic stuff, Peter. Incredibly basic and simple. To find it, all you had to do was read a few books from authors like Salvadori etc and J E Gordon, and check the web.

Once again it is apparent that you haven't even bothered to do the most basic research into the causes of building collapse. The fact is that collapses CAN begin at the top, for reasons that physics and research can demonstrate. A second year schoolkid could know that.

The injuries and deaths mentioned in the video happened before the collapse of the North or South Tower and in the basement 80 floors or more below - not caused by the collapse.



Nearly all buildings collapse fast as they are a result of controlled demolitions. The three WTC buildings should not have collapsed fast as the floors,columns,cross beams etc were officially not taken out by explosives.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..>>>>Nearly all buildings collapse fast as they are a result of controlled demolitions. The three WTC buildings should not have collapsed fast as the floors,columns,cross beams etc were officially not taken out by explosives.

Again Peter you completely ignore Chris.
Yes a lot of buildings are demolished, but Chris's examples weren't meant to collapse!!! Something untoward happened at the top and the domino effect started. The whole lot went down in a hurry.

Anyway this 911 stuff is largely irrelevant.
It's in the past, we can't do anything about it now.
We have to act in the present to protect the future.

The rapid rate of the three collapses are only one of many indicators to the official story being a lie.

WTC 7 is the best example - it looks identical as in precisely identical to a controlled implosion.

A 650 foot superstructure that was not mentioned in the 911 commission report.

I agree we have to act in the present.

A new independent investigaton is what is needed and can potentially lead to convictions.

Irrelevant - you have to be joking. Your apathy is galling.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it - no?

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
The injuries and deaths mentioned in the video happened before the collapse of the North or South Tower and in the basement 80 floors or more below - not caused by the collapse.



Nearly all buildings collapse fast as they are a result of controlled demolitions. The three WTC buildings should not have collapsed fast as the floors,columns,cross beams etc were officially not taken out by explosives.

Oh my god - the ones I mentioned and showed on the vid were NOT brought down by explosives and yet they came down fast. How the hell can you be so devious and dishonest as to ignore that fact, which was clearly noted in the earlier posts?

Once again, stop being so gullible and do some research. In the collapse of the hotel in Singapore, for example, there were cracks and damage IN THE BASEMENT BEFORE THE COLLAPSE, JUST AS IN THE WTC TOWER.

Again, try some very, very, very basic preschool physics, and you will understand the way stresses shift in columns and other structural members, causing cracks, bangs etc in basements BEFORE COLLAPSE.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..>>>Irrelevant - you have to be joking. Your apathy is galling.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it - no?

Hmmm, It's certainly irrelevant to THIS thread.
It's also none of our business, Surely this is for the USA to work out. Australia is out of the picture.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

petermac33 said..>>>>Nearly all buildings collapse fast as they are a result of controlled demolitions. The three WTC buildings should not have collapsed fast as the floors,columns,cross beams etc were officially not taken out by explosives.

Again Peter you completely ignore Chris.
Yes a lot of buildings are demolished, but Chris's examples weren't meant to collapse!!! Something untoward happened at the top and the domino effect started. The whole lot went down in a hurry.

Anyway this 911 stuff is largely irrelevant.
It's in the past, we can't do anything about it now.
We have to act in the present to protect the future.

Hmmmm....maybe Peter is part of a conspiracy. Maybe he is controlled by giant lizards, who are taking over the world and using people like Peter to throw around utterly ludicrous, vicious and dishonest conspiracy theories as a smokescreen in order to hide the real truth - that the lizards are in control.

You're right, I really should ignore him. I just get a sick fascination in trying to work out what makes someone like him throw around so much hate and so many lies.

I also notice that Mike Pecoraro, the witness who say bodies etc, said;

"When the room he is in starts filling with white smoke and he can smell kerosene (jet fuel), he heads upstairs with a co-worker toward a small machine shop on the C level......Pecoraro will say he only later hears that jet fuel actually came down the elevator shaft, blew off all the [elevator] doors, and flames rolled through the lobby. That explained all the burnt people and why everything was sooted in the lobby." See www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=mike_pecoraro_1

So the very man that Peter uses as his source for the allegations about the basement says that the soot, damage and burns came from JET FUEL, which he could smell himself and is hardly surprising in the circumstances, and not explosives. It's very, very dishonest for Peter to conceal that Pecoraro said jet fuel was involved, not bombs.

I think that Peter must be lying for his lizard overlords. It's the obvious answer.

I'll leave this topic on this thread alone for now as I'm not getting any straight answers to relevant questions.

Decrepit - i am pretty sure Australia sent troops to Afghanistan immediately after 911 so Australia is clearly not out of the picture as you put it.

You and others have akin to a religious belief on 911.

By that I mean your defence of the official story is based on blind trust in their science and media propaganda.

We are being sold a lie on 911 - doesn't mean you have to buy it.

Select to expand quote

petermac33 said..
I'll leave this topic on this thread alone for now as I'm not getting any straight answers to relevant questions.

Decrepit - i am pretty sure Australia sent troops to Afghanistan immediately after 911 so Australia is clearly not out of the picture as you put it.

You and others have akin to a religious belief on 911.

By that I mean your defence of the official story is based on blind trust in their science and media propaganda.

We are being sold a lie on 911 - doesn't mean you have to buy it.

Stop lying, Peter - that is disgusting behaviour. You ARE getting many straight answers to many relevant questions from us. It is dishonest to say you are not. Please stop it.

For example, you asked whether a plane impact on the 80th floor can damage a basement and I gave you a researched, factual, honest answer. It is a lie for you to deny that. That is merely one example where you got the straight answers you wanted so don't talk BS.

You, on the other hand, are weazeling around, dishonestly ignoring facts such as the undeniable truth that buildings that are NOT being demolished collapse at high speed. You should be ashamed of your dishonesty.

The reason this riles me so if that your world is so full of hate that you impugn the honesty of people who were there, such as the firefighting chief who saw 7 bulging due to fire a long time before it fell down. There were many people like firefighters who were out there, dying or risking their lives, and you are abusing them by claiming they are part of a cover-up. That is disgusting, cowardly, vile and vicious. People like that deserve respect, not your implied insults.