LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

From the folks at Purdue University.

Fascinating, yet horrifying look, at the impact of the plane on the North WTC Tower from multiple angles. Someone page Rosie O'Donnell please.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cddIgb1nGJ8[/youtube]

That is pretty impressive. The guy sounds like a complete dweeb though

Cool stuff!

Makes me think of the people on the floors of that building as that plane comes busting through. I couldn't imagine experiencing something like that.

I wonder if that same software is used for forensics analysis. The technology behind that software is nuts.

ZagGrad wrote:Makes me think of the people on the floors of that building as that plane comes busting through. I couldn't imagine experiencing something like that.

I wonder if that same software is used for forensics analysis. The technology behind that software is nuts.

Probably not. CSI uses stuff that works way faster. They should probably donate their machine that can do DNA as fast as you can print the results to actual law enforcement.

UofMLaxGoalie11 wrote:

ZagGrad wrote:Makes me think of the people on the floors of that building as that plane comes busting through. I couldn't imagine experiencing something like that.

I wonder if that same software is used for forensics analysis. The technology behind that software is nuts.

Probably not. CSI uses stuff that works way faster. They should probably donate their machine that can do DNA as fast as you can print the results to actual law enforcement.

Hopefully they load the right version of the Hollywood OS on it.

There was an article a couple of years ago about how juries expect DAs to have all these fancy results because they are used to seeing it on TV. Even defense attorneys paying off this same misunderstanding, leaving the DA scratching his head about the lack of money his department has.

When I was called in for potential jury duty on a rape/molestation case, the attorneys asked us a lot of questions regarding TV and what our expectations were for what was and was not necessary for the case. I think the judge even gave us a speach about not applying TV court dramas to the case.

Will,

Let's just hope you're not a "peer" to the accused. I assume that's why you didn't actually serve on that jury.

Or was it because you're well educated, capable of critical thought, problem solving, and generally speak in complete, coherent sentences?

Just an article about this:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/06/21/newyork.simulation/index.html