CurveLight
Rookie
- Oct 16, 2009
- 9,768
- 317
- 0
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #121
Of course it does...if you're a troofer. If you are capable of rationality, not so much.
The only evidence you presented was the opinion of one college professor. I've provided info from the phone companies themselves as well as airlines. But you keep on repeating the claim cell calls would have worked at 30,000 feet on 9E. It's more evidence your camp will hold on for dear life to the most ridiculous claims to maintain your denial.
Curve,
You are arguing two points here.
The first being the statement made by Coburn from Popular Mechanics that "in 2001 cell phone technology would work at 50,000 feet".
Your second claim is that cell phones would not work at 50,000 feet. These two claims may be totally unrelated as I can find only two VERIFIED instances of "cell phone" calls that were made. The others are not specified and may have been made from Airfones which were located in the seat backs of many seats. Some actually verify Airfone.
One cell phone call was made by Edward Felt at 9:58 am. The plane elevation at that point was between 7000 and 6400 feet. Well below that 50,000 foot ceiling in your first claim making it quite likely that he could have connected to a cell tower.
Another call from CeeCee Lyles waa also made at 9:58 am when the plane was at an altitude between 7000 and 6400 feet.
Here is a link to calls made, some with descriptions 9-11 Research: Phone Call Detail
So what other calls do you have information on that were validated as being from cell phones that you are arguing about not being able to be made at 30,000 or 50,000 foot altitudes?
The only reason I titled this with the 50,000 foot quote was to show how unbelievably biased and dishonest poopular mekanics has become on the issue. That claim is so unbelievably laughable it's like the OCTA version of alex jones. PM was trying to say since phones were usable up to 50,000 feet (which we know is complete bullshit) that means nobody should ever question if cell calls were made from any of the 4 planes because none flew higher than 40,000 feet. So my first point is this: when ridiculous claims have to be made to defend a position that is inherent evidence the position is highly questionable.
My second point is there is no hard evidence calls from 77 were made. The first and most consistent reports were the calls being made by cell phones. Olson changed his story a couple of times from cell to seatback phones. The problem there is how would he have known either way? Since someone else simply transferred the call to him he would have no way of knowing how his wife called so why did he state it was a cell phone, collect call, or seatback? His seatback claim is also dubious because there is a lot of evidence showing seatbacks were non-operational on 9E on 757s. A common response to that is showing pics of phones on the seats. That makes about as much sense as pointing to cars in a junkyard and claiming since there are cars there they must be operational.
The clincher is the FBI, nor anyone, in over 8 years has been able to provide hard evidence calls from 77 were made. This is something OCTAs dismiss instead of respecting the weight of that anomaly. The airline, phone company, FBI, and Dept of Justice all failing to provide evidence of the calls is pretty damn amazing.