DB Cooper

[olemisscub 548]

49 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

Sure, you can have any opinion you want,, even wrong ones. In this case, you don't even have an argument for your opinion. It is pure speculation. Explaining why the FBI was wrong would help... You want everyone to explain things but suddenly, you are exempt, you know why, because you can't answer it.

Don't have an argument for my opinion? I literally just showed you MULTIPLE INSTANCES where ACTUAL case agents stated that their lower limit for entertaining Cooper suspects was 5'10 or 6'. I provided the receipts to back up my opinion. 

I don't have to speculate that they eliminated potential suspects for being 5'8 or 5'9 or even 5'10 and for no other reason. I literally just showed you. Again, let's look at the Boeing File Review:

Your brain is so steeped in your own Hahneman confirmation bias that literally every single belief you have in this case is tainted by it. Everyone sees it. 

It is no coincidence that the things you most vociferously take issue with me on are my opinion about Cooper's nose, his height, and which sketch is more likely to be an accurate representation of Cooper. 

If Hahneman had a small nose, could pass for Comp A, and was 6 feet tall, you would have NO issue with my opinions on those matters. NONE. 

 

Edited June 14 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 772]

35 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Don't have an argument for my opinion? I literally just showed you MULTIPLE INSTANCES where ACTUAL case agents stated that their lower limit for entertaining Cooper suspects was 5'10 or 6'. I provided the receipts to back up my opinion. 

I don't have to speculate that they eliminated potential suspects for being 5'8 or 5'9 or even 5'10 and for no other reason. I literally just showed you. Again, let's look at the Boeing File Review:

Your brain is so steeped in your own Hahneman confirmation bias that literally every single belief you have in this case is tainted by it. Everyone sees it. 

It is no coincidence that the things you most vociferously take issue with me on are my opinion about Cooper's nose, his height, and which sketch is more likely to be an accurate representation of Cooper. 

If Hahneman had a small nose, could pass for Comp A, and was 6 feet tall, you would have NO issue with my opinions on those matters. NONE. 

 

No you didn't.. you have shown incidents that include other things.. agent elimination was subjective and included everything. The FBI memo effectively said do not eliminate SOLELY on height to 5-8".. they also used that standard for Elsinore. There were interesting suspects investigated who were known the be shorter than your bogus 5-10 line.. 

So, height under 5-10 ONLY was NOT an automatic elimination. Elimination was based on a comprehensive evaluation by agents,, Carr said it was subjective..

You didn't make any argument,, you posted information irrelevant to the point. Looks like a fake it til you make it thing.. might fool some people.

That Boeing post is nonsense.. they didn't eliminate based on those heights.. you edited the full file where most employees had more information.. Do you think they eliminated two people SOLELY because they were 5-10..  that is nuts and misrepresentation. That is NOT what that means.

I point out where you are wrong based on evidence.. claiming I have a confirmation bias is a strawman, your go to when you have no argument. I am agreeing with the FBI in both those cases yet you claim I am biased.. while you won't or can't explain their error.

Cunningham did the same thing, he went crazy when I agreed with the FBI/Soderlind jump zone and rejected his River landing..  

For both sketch A and height minimum the FBI disagrees with you. In both cases, you can't explain why. 50 plus years later you claim to have figured out what the FBI got wrong,, they do get things wrong but you either can't reveal it by choice or just can't do it..  I don't think you can because it is just your opinion.

I know this case very well and you just don't have anything to back up your opinion here.

You have overestimated the reliability of the witnesses in this case.. very small sample size and reliability of some.

You can't accept or challenge the memo to NOT eliminate to 5-8. Some suspects under 5-10 were investigated.

You have made up a false argument that Cooper wasn't overestimated by some witnesses.

 

Finally, this case is unique in that it wasn't solved,, there is a good possibility that something unique happened in this case to hinder solving it.. So, it is especially important in this case to NOT reject based on assumptions. Your bias should be toward being open, not closed.

Claiming all under 5-10" are eliminated SOLELY on height is absurd. It was not the position of the FBI and it is not reflected in the evidence.

It exists only in your imagination.

 

 

 

[Nicholas Broughton 78]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

Don't have an argument for my opinion? I literally just showed you MULTIPLE INSTANCES where ACTUAL case agents stated that their lower limit for entertaining Cooper suspects was 5'10 or 6'. I provided the receipts to back up my opinion. 

I don't have to speculate that they eliminated potential suspects for being 5'8 or 5'9 or even 5'10 and for no other reason. I literally just showed you. Again, let's look at the Boeing File Review:

Your brain is so steeped in your own Hahneman confirmation bias that literally every single belief you have in this case is tainted by it. Everyone sees it. 

It is no coincidence that the things you most vociferously take issue with me on are my opinion about Cooper's nose, his height, and which sketch is more likely to be an accurate representation of Cooper. 

If Hahneman had a small nose, could pass for Comp A, and was 6 feet tall, you would have NO issue with my opinions on those matters. NONE. 

 

Confirmation bias is a helluva drug 

[FLYJACK 772]

8 hours ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

Confirmation bias is a helluva drug 

Nich.. you are the King of confirmation bias.. you are the last person to accuse others of confirmation bias. As for drugs.... well...

So, how is taking the position of the FBI confirmation bias?? 

and if you or Ryan thinks the FBI eliminated those two Boeing guys solely for being 5-10" you need to leave the Vortex and find another hobby.. 

No, accusing me of confirmation bias is a strawman fallacy designed to discredit because you have no argument.. just an opinion. 

To claim as Ryan has that any suspect under 5-10" is automatically eliminated based on height is not supported by any evidence and contradicted by the FBI file..

It is a baseless opinion that neither of you guys can back up with evidence or even a rational argument.

 

There are examples of interesting suspects in the FBI files under 5-10 that were investigated after the FBI knew their height,, like Melvin Cooper, 5-8 to 5-9.. still investigated.

The Elsinore suspects,, 5-8 lower bound.

Height is one variable, it is not the SOLE reason to eliminate to 5-8 as the FBI memo makes clear.

If the FBI found Braden interesting even at 5-8 in shoes he would not have been eliminated based solely on height.. 

You guys are just wrong... there is a reason you keep finding terrible suspects.

 

Ryan overestimated Darren's height..

Edited June 14 by FLYJACK

[Kamkisky 13]

4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Nich.. you are the King of confirmation bias.. you are the last person to accuse others of confirmation bias. As for drugs.... well...

So, how is taking the position of the FBI confirmation bias?? 

and if you or Ryan thinks the FBI eliminated those two Boeing guys solely for being 5-10" you need to leave the Vortex and find another hobby.. 

No, accusing me of confirmation bias is a strawman fallacy designed to discredit because you have no argument.. just an opinion. 

To claim as Ryan has that any suspect under 5-10" is automatically eliminated based on height is not supported by any evidence and contradicted by the FBI file..

It is a baseless opinion that neither of you guys can back up with evidence or even a rational argument.

 

There are examples of interesting suspects in the FBI files under 5-10 that were investigated after the FBI knew their height,, like Melvin Cooper, 5-8 to 5-9.. still investigated.

The Elsinore suspects,, 5-8 lower bound.

Height is one variable, it is not the SOLE reason to eliminate to 5-8 as the FBI memo makes clear.

If the FBI found Braden interesting even at 5-8 in shoes he would not have been eliminated based solely on height.. 

You guys are just wrong... there is a reason you keep finding terrible suspects.

 

Ryan overestimated Darren's height..

Melvin Wilson and a Melvin Fisher 

Im not familiar with Melvin Cooper? 
 

Also, I believe Ryan posted a stat about height guesses generally being within two inches. Posting a screenshot of him guessing Darren’s height within two inches only supports that concept.  
 

My two cents…Cooper was taller than Tina. She would have noticed if she was looking him in the eye. 

Edited June 14 by Kamkisky

[FLYJACK 772]

47 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

Melvin Wilson and a Melvin Fisher 

Im not familiar with Melvin Cooper? 
 

Also, I believe Ryan posted a stat about height guesses generally being within two inches. Posting a screenshot of him guessing Darren’s height within two inches only supports that concept.  
 

My two cents…Cooper was taller than Tina. She would have noticed if she was looking him in the eye. 

 

If Ryan's opinion was only that Cooper was 6 feet that isn't a problem.. 

but he is claiming all suspects under 5-10 are eliminated based solely on height.

This is irrational, it isn't supported by evidence and is actually contradicted by the FBI...

 

This is what Ryan does, he takes a hard position which is just an opinion claims it as fact then tries to justify it twisting the evidence,, it is an inversion of logic and reason.

But what is really dishonest is when he uses a strawman to discredit the same positions that are supported by the FBI. He always goes there, not just with me. 

Ryan's wants to win an argument more than advancing the case.

Cooper was most likely taller than Tina.. So, how tall was Tina.. She is 5-8" in her passport and Al Lee said she was 5-6"..

That is one of the reasons the FBI used 5-8" as the lower bound.. there is a variability in reported heights.

This isn't even debatable.

From day one I thought Cooper was around 5-10"..

Edited June 14 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 548]

On 6/14/2025 at 12:41 PM, FLYJACK said:

but he is claiming all suspects under 5-10 are eliminated based solely on height.

 

I sometimes wonder if you even know what an opinion is.  You personally think Skip Hall should be eliminated because he had forehead wrinkles. I think that's idiotic. But that's your prerogative to form that opinion based on your extensive research on this case. 

I have the prerogative based on my research to personally eliminate people for any reason. Cooper being under 5'10 is an OPINION of mine. I'm not law enforcement. I'm not actually eliminating anyone. I'm expressing an opinion of mine as to what I'm looking for in my ideal suspect.  

[FLYJACK 772]

24 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I sometimes wonder if you even know what an opinion is.  You personally think Skip Hall should be eliminated because he had forehead wrinkles. I think that's idiotic. But that's your prerogative to form that opinion based on your extensive research on this case. 

I have the prerogative based on my research to personally eliminate people for any reason. Cooper being under 5'10 is an OPINION of mine. I'm not law enforcement. I'm not actually eliminating anyone. I'm expressing an opinion of mine as to what I'm looking for in my ideal suspect.  

Yes, it is your opinion... you can keep it.

But you constantly dismiss and mock with your arrogant prose that Hahneman and others for being slightly under 5-10...  based on your opinion, not evidence. You even accuse  me of confirmation bias for agreeing with the FBI.

You even mock Hahneman to discredit me,,, the irony is you are using an assumption not facts. That assumption is bogus.

The FBI used 5-8" as the lower bound for suspects.. Your opinion is WRONG. 

Nobody knows exactly how tall Cooper was.. not you, not me, not the FBI..

Edited June 15 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 548]

Hear ye, hear ye! By order of His Most Esteemed and Infallible Majesty, Lord High Arbiter of Internet Truths, Sir Keyboardius Maximus, it is henceforth decreed that all thoughts, musings, hypotheses, and inconvenient counterpoints not originating from His Supreme Forumness Flyjack shall be stricken from the realm. All Cooperites shall now adopt his opinion as sacred gospel, no matter how much his opinions and cherry picked sources are informed by his suspect confirmation bias. May his posts forever remain uncontested under pain of receiving a 1,000 word rebuttal wherein he states what an idiot you are for forming opinions contrary to his. Long may he reign. 

 

[olemisscub 548]

7 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

Nobody knows exactly how tall Cooper was.. not you, not me, not the FBI..

 

But you DO know how tall Cooper was, right?

 

Edited June 15 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 772]

44 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

But you DO know how tall Cooper was, right?

 

He wasn't 5-8" standing in a plane in shoes.

You try to make him shorter and Cooper taller,, it is as if your brain is stuck. At least you stopped saying he was 5-7.. that was funny. You made Hahneman 2 inches shorter and Cooper 2 inches taller.

Hahneman also has a card that says 5-9" as well as other confirming documents. 

 

 

Witnesses had him up to 6 feet..

He was between 5-8 and 5-9 without shoes.. 

He was between 5-9 and 5-10 in shoes.. I have explained this to you but it just doesn't penetrate your ego.

But keep distorting the facts to fit your opinion. It is your pattern. 

There is no evidence or argument to automatically eliminate a suspect between 5-9 to 5-10" based solely on height.. 

Your opinion is just irrational... it is not supported by facts and is contradicted by the FBI.

Keep your goofy opinion but don't use it to try discredit others.

Edited June 15 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 772]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

Hear ye, hear ye! By order of His Most Esteemed and Infallible Majesty, Lord High Arbiter of Internet Truths, Sir Keyboardius Maximus, it is henceforth decreed that all thoughts, musings, hypotheses, and inconvenient counterpoints not originating from His Supreme Forumness Flyjack shall be stricken from the realm. All Cooperites shall now adopt his opinion as sacred gospel, no matter how much his opinions and cherry picked sources are informed by his suspect confirmation bias. May his posts forever remain uncontested under pain of receiving a 1,000 word rebuttal wherein he states what an idiot you are for forming opinions contrary to his. Long may he reign. 

 

Seek help.. that is an embarrassing screed..

Cooper could be 5-9 or he could be 5-11.. from day one I thought he was about 5-10...

I agree with the FBI and the evidence, if you want to call that confirmation bias it only demonstrates your own desperation to defend your baseless opinion. 

Ryan, seriously keep your opinion I don't want you to change it.. I asked for your argument behind it to be polite, maybe there is something I don't know.. Turns out as I suspected you have no evidence or argument.. What I really despise is when you use ridicule and false claims of confirmation bias to discredit others who don't share your opinion.. it is intellectually dishonest. 

 

 

Edited June 15 by FLYJACK

[Kamkisky 13]

The funny part is you both think Cooper is within two inches…the margin of error. 

Cooper is taller than Tina (I fail to see a counter argument), but he isn’t unusually tall for the period 6’2’’ +. The middle range for Cooper is 5’10” - 6’ (where you both have him), not short but not abnormally tall for the era. It’s another Cooper is basically an average dude stat. 

If we have to lean one way it’s likely taller IMO given witness statements but it’s all in the wash…a 5’9” suspect (barefoot military measurement at 18 or younger) and a 6’1” suspect (in shoes) are within the margin of error. One inch outside the median doesn’t determine Cooper. The argument is upper range or lower range. 

This reality hurts tall suspects as much as shorter ones. Yeah, there are more short people than tall but the facts we have don’t change.  

Cooper is likely 5’10”-5’11”. YMMV. Everyone can have their own standard…as long as it is not insane. 
 

Edited June 16 by Kamkisky

[FLYJACK 772]

58 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

The funny part is you both think Cooper is within two inches…the margin of error. 

Cooper is taller than Tina (I fail to see a counter argument), but he isn’t unusually tall for the period 6’2’’ +. The middle range for Cooper is 5’10” - 6’ (where you both have him), not short but not abnormally tall for the era. It’s another Cooper is basically an average dude stat. 

If we have to lean one way it’s likely taller IMO given witness statements but it’s all in the wash…a 5’9” suspect (barefoot military measurement at 18 or younger) and a 6’1” suspect (in shoes) are within the margin of error. One inch outside the median doesn’t determine Cooper. The argument is upper range or lower range. 

This reality hurts tall suspects as much as shorter ones. Yeah, there are more short people than tall but the facts we have don’t change.  

Cooper is likely 5’10”-5’11”. YMMV. 
 

Two guys had him at 5-9, another at 5-10..  opinions for Cooper's height are worthless, they have no meaning.

That 2 inch error does not apply to Cooper witnesses, the variables are not the same.

Some saw him briefly standing, some seated, some before he was known as the hijacker, some after. Plus, it is a very small sample size.. 

The FBI used 5-9 initially in the description but updated it to 5-10 to reflect Tina's estimate.. one person.. that was not what the FBI used to vet suspects, they used 5-8 as the lower bound. 

Ryan's opinion is that any suspect under 5-10 is eliminated solely based on height, that is an irrational position.. contradicted by logic and the evidence.

I am not claiming Cooper must be under 5-10.. rather that he could be. That is the difference. I accept the range the FBI used whereas Ryan rejects the FBI range.

Ryan can't or won't explain why.. and accuses me of confirmation bias for agreeing with the FBI. 

The FBI can make errors but you need something substantial to show their mistake.. Ryan has nothing.

So, I am not claiming Cooper is below 5-10, I am only acknowledging the evidence that he could be.

 

 

[Kamkisky 13]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Two guys had him at 5-9, another at 5-10..  opinions for Cooper's height are worthless, they have no meaning.

That 2 inch error does not apply to Cooper witnesses, the variables are not the same.

Some saw him briefly standing, some seated, some before he was known as the hijacker, some after. Plus, it is a very small sample size.. 

The FBI used 5-9 initially in the description but updated it to 5-10 to reflect Tina's estimate.. one person.. that was not what the FBI used to vet suspects, they used 5-8 as the lower bound. 

Ryan's opinion is that any suspect under 5-10 is eliminated solely based on height, that is an irrational position.. contradicted by logic and the evidence.

I am not claiming Cooper must be under 5-10.. rather that he could be. That is the difference. I accept the range the FBI used whereas Ryan rejects the FBI range.

Ryan can't or won't explain why.. and accuses me of confirmation bias for agreeing with the FBI. 

The FBI can make errors but you need something substantial to show their mistake.. Ryan has nothing.

So, I am not claiming Cooper is below 5-10, I am only acknowledging the evidence that he could be.

 

 

If a fantastic suspect arises who is 5’9” or 6’1” I think the vortex can handle it. That’s actually a big range in real life and likely not generally mistakable, but 50 years on we have to use a wide view, and the witnesses had a variance so we are justified in doing so if most other things align.

Ultimately though it’s a variable each person gets to set within reason…the FBI can have a standard. Ryan can have a standard. You can have a standard. It’s all good…it really comes down to the rest of a suspect’s case.
 

Braden is tiny and considered a quality suspect…it happens. Does his height help his case, no. Did it prohibit his case being made, no. It’s like eye color or accent, there’s some wiggle room (brown or hazel/Ohio or Kansas). 
 

 

[FLYJACK 772]

12 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

If a fantastic suspect arises who is 5’9” or 6’1” I think the vortex can handle it. That’s actually a big range in real life and likely not generally mistakable, but 50 years on we have to use a wide view, and the witnesses had a variance so we are justified in doing so if most other things align.

Ultimately though it’s a variable each person gets to set within reason…the FBI can have a standard. Ryan can have a standard. You can have a standard. It’s all good…it really comes down to the rest of a suspect’s case.
 

Braden is tiny and considered a quality suspect…it happens. Does his height help his case, no. Did it prohibit his case being made, no. It’s like eye color or accent, there’s some wiggle room (brown or hazel/Ohio or Kansas). 
 

 

You are being diplomatic,, I have tried that and it doesn't work with Ryan he is very stubborn..

Having an opinion on height is fine but virtually useless for vetting suspects within the FBI's range. The FBI even looked at compelling suspects under 5-8... 

Ryan's view that Cooper can't be under 5-10 undermines the case and as a Cooper influencer misleads people. 

Further, he uses that opinion to discredit and ridicule others. He actually weaponizes ignorance.. a low level tactic that works for low level thinkers.

The twisted irony is Hahneman has many reported docs with a 5-9 height,, he might even be 5-10 in shoes and Ryan still ridiculous him and eliminates him based solely on height.. because he trying to discredit me using Hahneman as a proxy,, 

I really don't care what he thinks, he has many things wrong based on false assumptions,,, 

IMO, Cooper could be 5-8 or 6 feet in shoes.... the odds are greatest at about 5-10. Extremely low under 5-8 or above 6 feet.. 

Braden is not a good suspect because he has grey eyes, dimples, a crooked mouth and thinner hair.. He is also a legit skilled badass and no connection to the case, Cooper was not a badass and less skilled. Not 100% sure how tall Braden was in shoes... if 5-8 that is really borderline but not the sole reason to eliminate. Carr has explained it,, elimination is subjective based on a combination of factors, there was a suspect eliminated who was re-examined.. Unless they are wildly off in description or have an alibi most of these people aren't really technically "eliminated". 

I have found that many people express opinions in this case with a level of certainty that isn't warranted or supported by evidence. It makes for great arguments but doesn't advance the case. I would really like to advance the case based on the evidence rather than dispute opinions.

 

[olemisscub 548]

13 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

I have found that many people express opinions in this case with a level of certainty that isn't warranted or supported by evidence. 

 

Hilarious that you claim my opinion that Cooper was around 6 feet tall isn't supported by the evidence when 3 of our 4 witnesses to him standing put him as tall as 6 feet. THAT IS THE EVIDENCE. What other evidence is there to base his height on other than people who saw him standing up??? But let's ignore them and claim that they weren't great witnesses to his height despite seeing him standing and instead rely on Robert Gregory and Bill Mitchell, two men who never saw him standing. Makes perfect sense....but only if you're trying to turn this person into Cooper. 

 

[olemisscub 548]

13 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

I really don't care what he thinks, he has many things wrong based on false assumptions,,, 

You clearly care a GREAT deal otherwise you wouldn't spend so much time watching my videos hoping to find something to critique. 

[FLYJACK 772]

Stop digging.

[FLYJACK 772]

Just now, olemisscub said:

You clearly care a GREAT deal otherwise you wouldn't spend so much time watching my videos hoping to find something to critique. 

TBH, I don't care what your opinions are,, what makes me respond is when you lie and try to discredit me.. you try to discredit me claiming I have a confirmation bias when I am just in agreement with the FBI..  that is insane. You do it because you have no facts to back up your opinion.

Fact is, it is irrational based on the evidence to claim Cooper can't be under 5-10.. then use that fallacy to ridicule suspects. Even a suspect reported at 5-9 is probably 5-10 in shoes..

If you believe he was 6 feet (reported 5-11 without shoes), that is different and I could care less..

[olemisscub 548]

13 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

You are being diplomatic,, I have tried that and it doesn't work with Ryan he is very stubborn..

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You are the LEAST diplomatic person in the history of the Vortex. Are you kidding me? You are one of the biggest villains in the Vortex because of what a colossal asshole you are to EVERYONE who disagrees with you.  You HAVE to be right about everything. You cannot ever concede a point to anyone. This is how you respond to "diplomacy".

[olemisscub 548]

1 minute ago, FLYJACK said:

TBH, I don't care what your opinions are,, what makes me respond is when you lie and try to discredit me.. you try to discredit me claiming I have a confirmation bias when I am just in agreement with the FBI..  that is insane. You do it because you have no facts to back up your opinion.

 

Ah yes, yet again, the only FBI documents that exist are the ones that YOU agree with. I literally showed you documentation where CASE AGENTS were writing that they put 5'10 as the baseline. That's cool that you've got a document saying 5'8 was the baseline. Ok. That doesn't negate other documents from case agents claiming that they eliminate suspects under 5'10. 

[olemisscub 548]

You know something I've literally never said to you? "You're trying to discredit me!!!" That's what wimps say when people criticize their opinions or thoughts. 

You act like the biggest bully in the Vortex but in reality you're just a weakling who can't take any criticism. Anytime someone disagrees with you they are trying to "discredit" you. EVERYTHING is not a personal attack on you, Flyjack. 

Why would I even need to "discredit" you? As if you're a threat to me or something? 

[FLYJACK 772]

 

44 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

You know something I've literally never said to you? "You're trying to discredit me!!!" That's what wimps say when people criticize their opinions or thoughts. 

You act like the biggest bully in the Vortex but in reality you're just a weakling who can't take any criticism. Anytime someone disagrees with you they are trying to "discredit" you. EVERYTHING is not a personal attack on you, Flyjack. 

Why would I even need to "discredit" you? As if you're a threat to me or something? 

Really, you keep claiming I have "confirmation bias" to discredit me. 

Disagreeing with you and agreeing with the FBI and the evidence is confirmation bias, something you just make up because I don't accept your opinion.

Funny, you are trying to discredit me in a unhinged screed claiming that you don't...

You need a break... 

Edited June 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 772]

20 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Ah yes, yet again, the only FBI documents that exist are the ones that YOU agree with. I literally showed you documentation where CASE AGENTS were writing that they put 5'10 as the baseline. That's cool that you've got a document saying 5'8 was the baseline. Ok. That doesn't negate other documents from case agents claiming that they eliminate suspects under 5'10. 

If you believe Cooper was 6 ft tall that is fine...  you run with that. 

He might be, but he might be 5-9 as well.

Fact is, the FBI and the evidence does not support your opinion that he can't be under 5-10. 

Is a suspect with a reported height of 5-9 and 5-10 in shoes also eliminated in your opinion..