9/11 Loose change 2nd edition

i saw the first one. it struck me, mostly, as the kind of nuttery that claims we never went to the moon, only with a far more sinister twist to it.the primary thing wrong with conspiracy theories in general is that they assume our government is competant enough to both execute the conspiracy, and then keep it a secret. and if there's anything our government is not, it's competant. probably to try to save all the people they could. it's not SMART, but it is heroic. evidently, not enough to knock them down. as i'm sure you're aware, tall buildings are built to absorb a certain amount of lateral force. they actually sway in the wind a bit, but will stand hurricane force winds (cat 3? i forget the specifics).slamming a plane into the side of one wouldn't push it too much, because as you could see, the plane went into the building. most of the force would be diffused. the only bit of the conspiracy theory that i think is plausible is that flight 93 was shot down. that is, if i recall, the protocol when an aircraft comes into or towards protected airspace without broadcasting call signs. considering a plane had just hit the pentagon, this would have been a wise thing to do as well.i'm not sure how well the official story lines up -- how well cell phones work in airplanes? i know quite a few that don't even work in elevators, but in a plane you have the added problem of distance from the tower. i haven't flown since i got a cell phone (very recently...) and i haven't seen any reliable studies one way or the other (considering that until just last week, using a cell phone in an airplane was against the law).anyone been on a plane recently, and can tell me if they had any bars?Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

---

as you point out, b-17's and jet airliners are very different things, and the structure of the empire state building is completely different. well, i think distance would be a bigger problem than direction. they might have been low, yes. i know the one that hit the pentagon came in from a low angle. but the other one was much further away when it went down. yeah, that much i saw on mythbusters. (though it was a much smaller plane)

---

but one of the cameras DID catch a plane, in the air, seconds before impact. it's just blurry, from it being in motion.also, you really don't begin to understand just how bad the average security camera is until you've had to use one.

---

i saw something that looked like a plain. it was a large white streak -- exactly what a plain moving at several hundred miles an hour would look to a security camera. so say the conspiracy theorists. i have, and not very likely, and bad. they tend to run at only a few frames a second, if that. you'd be lucky to get one frame of something moving that fast. people who subscribe to conspiracy theories often do so because they feel (irrationally) that information is being kept from them. but i think your portrayal of our government's information-gathering skills are a little exagerated.besides. dc is a BIG city. while airplanes move a little fast for security cameras, they're quite slow enough for the human eye. how do you suppose the government shut up all the people who observed what "really" happened?the pentagon is actually just across the highway from reagan international. lots of people, lots of airplanes -- and a flight control tower. shall we involve them, too?

---

you know, with the local news regarding people being held secretly by the us gov't without charges filed in various military prisons around the world... it's not that far fetched.

---

yeah? is that a bachelor's of science in engeneering, or a masters of science in engeneering? or a doctorate in engeneering?normally i don't pick on spelling and grammar errors, because god knows i make them. but one thing's for damned certain, i can spell the name of my field of study. ok, well, "art" isn't very hard to spell... but you get the point.you'll also notice that the op has 11 years experience fireproofing buildings.Edited by arachnophilia, : typo (ironic!)

---

i only had the opportunity to vote against him once. yes, especially ones built like the twin towers were.

---

just pointing out that there are a lot of people with engineering degrees (some more advances) and people in fire-protection engineering specifically, that consider the official explanation the ONLY explanation. just yankin' your chain a little, no offense meant. but we do get the occasion person here that does claim to be someone he's not.

---

fair enough. well, cellphone antennas are actually kind of special. they are a fractal pattern, called a serpinski carpet, that maximizes length for area. i'm not totally sure an antenna of this design is especially affected by direction. but i don't know. mythbusters is the greatest show on television. science, skepticism, crazy engineering, and a really cute intern. i have a major tv-land crush on kari byron...

---

snazzy. interesting information, thanks.