[Hans Norling]

Originally Posted by DouglasReed

What plane crashes look like

Basically your argument is that a plane has only crashed when there are big chunks left openly and visibly at the impact zone then?
Your logic here dictates that, for example, that UA Flight 585 didn't crash, or Swissair Flight 111 etc.

Not all plane crashes look alike, and as you've been shown there are several crashes that leave little discernable debris left in the way many other plane crashes do.

9/11 is so much fun. You can start absolutley anywhere, and you're bound to run into a wall of b.s. in no more than 3 minutes.

Yepp, usually bs from truthers.

CeeCee was the one of the people with magic cell phones that work in air planes

Ah yes, I should have figured you would bring up this as well, that cell phones can't function on airplanes while en route. You just believe anything you hear as long as it is pro 9/11 conspiracy, don't you Martin? Hook line and sinker, sans actually researching it?

Here's a bit information of why some cell phone calls made it through, but why they didn't last more than seconds or so:

Because wireless networks are designed for terrestrial use, the fact that so many people were able to call from the sky brings into question how the phones worked from such altitudes.

Alexa Graf, AT&T spokesperson, said systems are not designed for calls from high altitudes, suggesting it was almost a fluke that the calls reached their destinations.

"On land, we have antenna sectors that point in three directions — say north, southwest, and southeast," she explained. "Those signals are radiating across the land, and those signals do go up, too, due to leakage."

From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude, she added.

Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that RF signals actually can broadcast fairly high. On Sept. 11, the planes were flying low when people started using their phones. And, each call lasted 60 seconds or less.

"They also were digital phones, and there's a little bit more leeway on those digital phones, so it worked," she said.

http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/...final_contact/

Here's a brief and concised article on cell phone calls from planes:
*Mobiles at Altitude
A few excerpts from this article:

An FCC study in 2000 found that cell-phone use aboard aircraft increases the number of blocked or dropped calls on the ground. That's because at high altitude, cellular signals are spread across several base stations, preventing other callers within range of those base stations from using the same frequencies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Making Calls From The Air , by Brad Smith
September 24, 2001 c 2003, Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.

When several passengers aboard the hijacked airliners made calls to family and spouses from their wireless phones on the now-infamous Sept. 11, it came as a surprise to many that the calls actually were completed.

Although airline passengers are warned against using their mobile phones in flight, it's fairly well-known that private airplane pilots often use regular cellular and PCS phones, even if it is illegal. Not quite as well-known, however, is that people have used their wireless phones to make surreptitious calls from the bathrooms of airliners.

The technology is there to support such airborne mobile connections. Take the Colorado company Aircell Inc., which uses FCC-approved equipment for wireless phone service.

But how does a terrestrial technology work in the sky?

First, altitude in itself is not a problem. Earthbound wireless phones can talk to base stations up to 10 miles away, depending on the terrain, while a typical passenger jet flies at an altitude of about six and a half miles. Since cell site antennas are configured to pick up signals horizontally and not from overhead, performance is usually compromised in calls from above. Nevertheless, cell sites can pick up signals from the air from great distances.

Toby Seay, vice president of national field operations for AT&T Wireless, says the technological limits to using a cell phone aboard a plane include the signal strength, potential signal inhibitors and "free space loss" as the signal gradually loses strength. The frequency used can make a difference, too. A signal using an 800 MHz cellular frequency can travel farther than a 1900 MHz PCS signal because of the different propagation characteristics of the two wavelengths.

The biggest problem with a phone signal sent from the air is that it can reach several different cell sites simultaneously. The signal can interfere with callers already using that frequency, and because there is no way for one cell site to hand off calls to another that is not adjacent to it, signals can become scrambled in the process. That's why wireless calls from jetliners don't last long, says Kathryn Condello, vice president of industry operations for CTIA. The network keeps dropping the calls, even if they are re-established later.

No, there is nothing "magic" about it.

Good work guys. But apparently not enough coordination. CeeCee was supposed to be married to somebody named Castrillo when she got her driver's license in the name Lyles.

I do not get this part. Do you believe she was not a real person who died? I suspect you'd be ready to confront her husband with that information would you, seeing as you have made a lot ado about being the big guy and confronting people in the flesh. Why don't you accuse her family, husband and sons of being liars then? That she never existed or whatever your argument is.

Disgusting truther nonsense is what it is, which knows no bounds in my experience. It reminds me of when Alex Jones accused the FDNY guys of being complicit of murder on 9/11.

Btw here's a skeptic who checked the name-controversy up:

Just got done emailing the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles about Cee Cee Lyles Drivers License.

Her license, which was recovered from the crash site in PA, is indeed CORRECT and the dates do indeed match her situation as far as last names, marriages, etc.

Cee Cee Lyles went in to the FL DMV in June of 2001, and changed her name. Her new license included the ORIGINAL ISSUE date of 1997 and the DUPLICATE DATE of 2001.

From the FL DMV ----"That is correct. It will show both the original and duplicate dates."

First, my email to the FL Drivers License Office:

From: XXXXXXXXXXX [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 8:49 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Customer number XXXXXXXX Email Tracking System Updated Record

Just to clarify, if someone was issued an original license in 1997, then changed their name in 2001, would the new license say "issue date 1997" AND duplicate date "2001"?

Thank you,

XXXXXXXXXX

02/12/08

And the response from the FL Drivers License Office, my emphasis added.

Subject: RE: Customer number XXXXXXX Email Tracking System Updated Record
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:04:48 -0500
From: "XXXXXXXXXX" <[email protected]> Add Mobile Alert
To: "XXXXXXXXX" <[email protected]>
That is correct. It will show both the original and duplicate dates.

The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is committed to Service, Integrity, Courtesy, Professionalism, Innovation and Excellence in all we do. Please let us know how we are doing via our online customer service survey at www.hsmv.state.fl.us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For future references your customer number is XXXXXXX

Please visit our website at http://casey.hsmv.state.fl.us/ddl/em...lrecordadd.cfm

------------------------------

Oh well, there goes ANOTHER "smoking gun" of the movement!!!!

You guys got anything else?