MeyerLouie

QuoteQuote "If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe Hey Marilyn: why would I need a link from you to get to Geoff Gray, when I have his personal cell number? Duhhh. ------------------------------------------------------------ Georger, this is so mean spirited. It's a low blow, c'mon!

I believe he works for the county - Planning & Zoning, something like that. Safe may have been the one who concocted the fake money find - using modern twenties no less. Was kind of funny. It was covered here - do a search. Logic? No. Just Safe's version of informal logic - he picked the idea up somewhere. His intentions were good but his results were meaningless and full of contradictions. For one thing, Safe had but a few of the real-world logical options covered in the premises he made - but he loves to make videos. Nice young man. It sounded good while it lasted - he had Ckret going ! Well, this should be fun. MeyerLouie, there are unnamed people I mention in that video series. People I call "Cooper Enthusiasts" that have been on this forum for years spinning their wheels. Meet Georger, KING ENTHUSIAST. He likes to throw dung on the wall to see if it sticks. He also likes to make assumptions and incorrect premises and hypotheses. I'll confess, I've done it too when I foolishly thought he was Skip, LOL... but that's how long I've been away from here and really don't follow (what's there to follow?) 1. I do not live in the NW any longer and have never concocted a fake money find. I did happen to view a youtube video where someone was claiming to have found money in a tree - I called BS in a comment that I left. Perhaps this is where this opinion comes from? Yeah, I use a lot of informal logic. I also use knowledge from all sorts of areas. My personal opinion on this case is that there are too many things to hold in the memory for a single person to unscramble unless they know the evidence backwards and forwards. There are also plenty of biases and attribution errors that people make - which adds up to a lot of stupidity. The thought like I like to make videos, not really - but how else do I explain some fairly complicated lines of reasoning? I've been meaning to do another series but simply do not have the time. The next series, if or when I do it, will not take the step back and examine the evidence approach that I used in TTLOL. It boils down to mathematics really. You have a choice. Accept the evidence as it is and then deal with one of 7 potential solutions, or challenge the evidence and deal with the three paradoxes as I called them. One way gets you there fairly quickly (under 10 years). The other gives you something to do day after day with nothing to show for it. The law of parsimony ought to be followed as best as can be for a simple reason... for every less than 1 probability you introduce, you reduce the odds of your scenario. The particular choice I said most closely resembled the evidence not only explains the evidence, but also includes the fewest entities (variables as I call them) - each of which would have less than 1 probability. Mathematically speaking, that's the choice you ought to favor. But I can (but won't for now due to time) go much much further into that choice. There's a reason why I made a blank bet on this forum more than a year ago. No one had the conviction to take me up on it. It's really simple, put up some money that your guy did it. I say he didn't do it. There's only one guy you're not allowed to bet me - and even if I bet against him, they still can't put him on the plane, so it's an easy sure thing. Perhaps that's why people would rather write books about their father, uncles, etc on pure speculation. Where is Marla Cooper? Geez, what a fraud that was (and that was the moment I made the bet) Ckret (or agent L. Carr), FWIW, couldn't follow my train of thought down this path. I tried. I never ever "had him going". That's laughable actually. Nice to hear from you, SafecrackingPLF. I understand about the anonymity issue, I just thought since some folks on the DZ know each other by their real names, someone might know your real name. Not necessary to know. Your TTLOL series must have been a major undertaking, I applaud your efforts. I enjoyed the series, twice. I am always intrigued by how folks apply statistical logic and mathematics -- it's what I do, I'm a college math teacher. No one's perfect; granted, you took some liberties, but you took on something that very few folks would even dare. I was definitely intrigued by your application of the the normal curve/empirical rule to the timeframe for the Tena Bar money find the year before discovery(your discovery and money axioms), and the third paradox about the Tena Bar money: the money must have traveled in the money bag v. the money couldn't have traveled in the money bag. That's the one that's got me thinking. If you create something new in the future, I'll check it out for sure. Best wishes. MeyerLouie

I believe he works for the county - Planning & Zoning, something like that. Safe may have been the one who concocted the fake money find - using modern twenties no less. Was kind of funny. It was covered here - do a search. Logic? No. Just Safe's version of informal logic - he picked the idea up somewhere. His intentions were good but his results were meaningless and full of contradictions. For one thing, Safe had but a few of the real-world logical options covered in the premises he made - but he loves to make videos. Nice young man. It sounded good while it lasted - he had Ckret going ! Thanks Georger for the information...I know, I need to do a search, I won't ask folks here to cover ground that's already been covered. Safe's series was certainly an interesting read, I was definitely entertained. He did know a lot about the case. True, there were contradictions. I take an interest in statistical applications -- I teach an Intro to Stats course at a community college. Safe certainly took some liberties, but he certainly understands the empirical rule and the basic notions of linear regression. You have to applaud the guy for taking it on -- all those videos must have been a major undertaking. MeyerLouie

Jo, To change the subject a bit: Speaking of Duane, I just visited YouTube and watched, for a second time, the series by SafecrackingPLF: DB Cooper: Through the Lense of Logic (TTLOL), where he uses statistical principles (quite liberally I might add) and Occam's Razor to develop his 3 paradoxes, 7 possible solutions, and his choice for solution to the DBC case: Cooper survives, places the money somewhere, then 7+ years later puts the money in the river. SafecrackingPLF goes through the list of possible suspects (there are so many), and then he says that of all the suspects, Duane Weber is the one suspect who best fits his solution requirements. I'm sure you have heard of or seen the SafecrackingPLF series, and SafecrackingPLF says he used to visit the DZ. Toward the end of each episode of the series, he appears with Mr. H, so I'm guessing he's FBI. Do you know the true identity of SafecrackingPFL? He looks familiar, but I may be wrong. I know Occam's Razor has been discussed here, before my time, but I would like to get your take, and who this guy is. MeyerLouie

Side Note: Cat I adopted a few months ago is fully recovered now. He had a hurt foot and had to wear the Elizabethan collar and bandages for almost two months. ... I finally took him in, took him to the vet, and then kept him for good. A more polite cat you've never seen. ----------------------------------------------------------- What a nice thing you did Blevins! I have raised, loved, and cared for many cats (mainly Manx) over the years. I think they're the best pet in the world. You're not so bad afterall. That was a wonderful thing you did there, and the kitty looks great. MeyerLouie

Well, you make some good points, and frankly I think I have presented some reasonable evidence that makes Kenny Christiansen's life at least interesting. However, I stopped taking Georger's comments seriously some time ago. When people get personal, no matter what you post, simply because they don't like you...then you tend to take them less seriously as an amateur investigator in the Cooper case. On points that have nothing to do with KC, it has been the same thing. Let me give you a good example. A while back, Galen Cook posted some pictures of suspect Bill Gossett at the Coast to Coast AM radio website. I noticed that most of the pictures he presented were of Gossett years before the hijacking..all except ONE. And that one was taken less than 18 months after the hijacking. It shows an overweight guy who looks nothing like Cooper, or at least the official sketch. I pointed out that the guy was overweight and looked nothing like the sketch. I also mentioned in passing that he had hairy arms. Instead of addressing the fact that the picture looked nothing like Cooper, most of the people here made fun of the fact I mentioned the guy had hairy arms, and ignored the obvious non-resemblence to the hijacker. I came right out and said that this showed Galen Cook was misleading people by presenting much earlier pictures, when in reality Gossett looked nothing like Cooper close to the time of the hijacking. Some folks said maybe he just put on all that weight to disguise himself, i.e. to change his appearance. My response: How about a picture of Gossett from 1971, then? Or an FOIA request to see Gossett's duty log records on the week of the hijacking? Laughed off. This is why I think some people live to discuss the case, but shy away from actually solving it, or at least eliminating suspects. There also seems to be a problem here with actual witness testimony from living people. More people accept the idea that Gossett supposedly told a judge he was Cooper...but that this statement can't be proven because the judge is dead now, and while he was alive he didn't comment on it. Yet people give that supposed statement a lot of credibility. I don't create conspiracies or hide identities. Because I gave out the names of the witnesses, and said who 'Dawn J' really was (Bernie Geestman's sister) it would be reletively easy for anyone to check out these people on their own. Another point: I constantly have to remind people here that I don't know, and cannot prove that KC is the hijacker. And...that I am open to the idea of another suspect. If you think about it, this has to be true. Even though there is a certain amount of circumstantial evidence that brings Kenny into the spotlight, there is no way to prove it, and the odds are he WASN'T the guy. I mean...if you were to bet on it. It could even be someone who escaped notice completely and has never been on the suspect list. I think it's time to move on, too. On Kenny, that is...unless something new comes up. I've presented everything I have on him (although, yes...I am withholding a couple of small things as a control, like the FBI does, which I think makes sense). Look, even I get tired of talking about him. You've seen everything, and like people tell me here, you can go back on this thread and you'll eventually find everything. There are also the Newsvine articles and the book, yes. Since everything has been presented on KC, it is time to go somewhere else on this thread. Geez...people stop me in the aisle at Fred Meyers and Safeway here in Auburn. Or on the street. Auburn isn't that big, and being on the planning committee for Auburn Days, and landing in the local paper so many times, and the deal with History Channel and Comcast Sports ('Adrenaline Hunter') my face around this town is well-known. My voice wears out answering peoples' questions LOL. I do try to be polite, though. So yes. Let's move on. If I discover anything new or significant on KC, then I will post it, but anything else would be a rerun. It's probably boring to readers here, and certainly is to me.

I have just as much a right to present evidence against a suspect as you do. My research may not lead to the conclusion that Christiansen was Cooper, but I do keep good records. All interviews were voice-recorded and catalogued. Some are on video. I kept extensive notes. I have copies of all the offered documents and pictures. Yes, there are a few reserved from open posting on the internet. ------------------------------------------------------------ You are right Blevins, you have just as much right to post your beliefs and opinions as anyone else here. But every time you open your mouth, Georger goes beserk, and several others continue to question your premises and conclusions. Your story is a broken record, same ol' thing, over and over again, ad nauseum. Don't you think there might really be something to all this criticism directed at you? Insanity is to continue to do the same ol' thing but expect different results.

Blevins, Rather than repeat your whole post, let me cite some of your numbers and see where that leads.... While the above doesn't explain where his non-NWA income, or the coins, came from, it does suggest that a hijacking is not necessairly needed to build up the nest egg that he left... Personally, I consider your theory about the hijacking being the source of his money as being very weak. Robert99 ----------------------------------------------------------- And of course Blevins had to type up pages and take up a whole lot of room to post his "very weak" theory. As I stated earlier, his posts are getting longer, but I keep asking, "Where's the beef?" Blevins either misses facts completely (then innocently apologizes with some lame-ass excuse) or he slightly misstated facts and goes on like it's gospel truth. Good, substantive research would have solved these issues. And I've caught Blevins mistaking his assumptions for gospel truth. Blevins, you've been around the forum for only a few years. Others here have been around since 11/24/1971. You're taking up way too much air-time with your long-winded narratives that are packed full of ridiculous statements, erroneous assumptions, and shoddy research. Why don't you let some of the experts here take over -- some who know way more than you do, some who have actually done quality research, and some who don't let their agenda, biases, and assumptions cloud their every word. There's some good research courses offered at your local college. You may want to sign up for one. MeyerLouie

Blevins said|: i]Others believe that a certain suspect is the ONLY suspect. And I think some people don't really want to know what happened, or who Cooper really was. Blevins, maybe you ought to practice what you preach here. You keep trying to tell us LC may not be the guy, but every post you post is an LC sales call, you sing his praises every chance you get. ------------------------------------------------------------ Blevins said, One of the reasons I'm not obsessed with the Cooper case .... Are you kidding Blevins, you are one of the most obsessed people on this forum. Maybe even a bit obsessive-compulsive, anal retentive, and somewhat of a control freak about it all. Try to listen to yourself just once. Ever stop to think that some folks on this forum might be somewhat justified in their dislike for you? ------------------------------------------------------------ Blevins said, Long, involved posts with veiled satirical hints don't really make a point. As I said earlier, your posts are getting longer and more involved all the time -- lots of the same ol' same ol' as you continue to sing LC's praises -- in spite of yourself and all the rebuke. And I'm sorry to hear you are supporting our vision-less, leader-less, glaringly inexperienced president... the leader of the free world who hasn't so much as even run a McDonald's. And, I'm sorry to say, the alternative ain't no bargain either. Maybe it's time for that independent party to step up. MeyerLouie

To MeyerLouie and Robert Blevins The title to Sheridan's Book is: "The Idiot's Frightful Laughter" Snowmman knows how to get a copy and has researched Sheridan in the past. Bob Sailshaw sailshaw@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks Bob. MeyerLouie

On reading Sheridan's book, the answer is yes and many times as it has information about Sheridan and what he did. I have only read Part I (339 pages) and I don't think Part II is done or out yet but suspect it will describe how the DB Caper was done. Bob Sailshaw _________________________________________________ Bob, Do you know how I might get a copy of the Sheridan book? MeyerLouie

"If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe ------------------------------------------------------------ Blevins: Of all the people you could have quoted, why Marilyn Monroe? You know she had to sleep with her lesbian producer one time to get the part. I love Marilyn, she's an Amerian icon, the first playboy centerfold, she was smarter than she was ever given credit for. But you are hurting for credibility here Blevins...try to put our best foot forward...maybe try quoting Einstein or Mark Twain or some famous playwright. Not so, you chose Marilyn Monroe -- the proverbial scholar and stateman (or statesperson, rather).

Are you sure about all that Blevins? How did you become such and expert on who knows and who doesn't know, and what credentials are required at the Burke Museum? What about the janitors at Burke Museum, what do they need to know to be there? I guess you have never learned that respect has to earned. Picking the low hanging fruit all the time doesn't earn you that respect. Maybe you should start really paying attention to all the criticism you are getting.

This worries me greatly as Bruce is very active in responding to my e-mails and phone calls normally. I fear he has had some kind of heart attack and is in the Hospital or even worse. Mark (377) have you heard anything? _________________________________________________ Hey y'all: I got an email from Bruce. He's fine. He was back east, visiting family, taking a break. I'm sure you will be hearing from him soon, if he hasnt't already checked in with the DZ. MeyerLouie

Blevins said: Well, Auburn Days is over for another year...and I'm still interested in supporting the idea of a second Cooper symposium. To be honest, only if there is enough strong interest in having one. __________________________________________________ What does your Auburn Days anecdotes have to do with anything here? Thjis falls under the category this time of "TMI: Who cares?" Second Cooper symposium? Will it be as good as your first one? Please Blevins, don't ever offer to put on a DBC symposium, you're not up to it, period.

Blevins said: Auburn Days has been a big success. The Book Swap was crazy. They let me address from the main stage a couple of times. I did a sicko poem at the theater, discussed Kindle and Today's Digital Publishing. Blevins, this might fall under the category of TMI, too much information. And to think, you could have organized a DBC symposium at Auburn. Instead, we get to hear your wonderful anecdotes about books and poems and other such irrelevant information. I guess that was your intention all along. Wished you would have just said up front that you were never interested in doing something really productive and useful -- like organizing a quality symposium. The real you just continues to emerge -- it's the gift that just keeps on giving.

Blevins said: I didn't 'throw tantrums' about it. That's ridiculous. I'm about the most easygoing guy you'll ever meet. You, easy-going, are you serious Blevins? The reason no one offered to participate in your so-called Symposium was because of you, no other reason. You were the reason, you were the problem. Who in their right mind is going to sign on with someone who tells everyone he's going to organize a symposium and then threatens to quit every other week when things don't go his way? That's exactly what you did, and that's why no one came on board. It wasn't them, Blevins. It was you. __________________________________________________ Blevins said: THERE WAS NO INTEREST....Wait and see how many people are really interested. Probably not very many. No interest? Are you kidding? How about just the DZ here? You're wrong Blevins, there's plenty of interest in having a symposium -- and I made a case for that in my previous post. Moreover, I think we should make it an annual affair -- for so many good reasons. An annual symposium is essential for our long-term survival -- it's that important. And I think it should be over Thanksgiving weekend, and it should be in close proximy to Ariel, WA. __________________________________________________ Blevins said, "Besides, doing it in the middle of Auburn Days probably wouldn't have worked. You have to park a block or two away from the theater, then make your way through the crowds in the streets. (Downtown closed to traffic all weekend) Auburn Days would not have deterred a single DBC sleuth from attending a DBC Symposium in Auburn. it's all in the way you organize, package, present, and advertise your product. Your performance was dismal on all counts here. __________________________________________________ Blevins said: In addition, the symposium was held on the same day (roughly) as the 40th anniversary of the hijacking, followed directly by a trip to the celebration in Ariel later that day. There is a big difference between that, and lowly little AB of Seattle trying to do something similar in a small-town theatre with almost no backing. As if somehow you and AB "own" the symposium because you've taken it upon yourselves to organize and finance some of it. You should do nothing of the sort! Rather, it would be more effective to do some consensus building with the collective DropZone group and all interested constituents, then bill it as "our" symposium rather than just your symposium. It may come as a big surprise to you Blevins, but the universe does not revolve around your belly-button. I know... that probably comes as a real shock to you. Hang tough though ... you'll eventually get over it... and come to accept it.

Coming to Auburn for a symposium would have meant Dona Elliot packing a ton of merchandise into a truck or van, and driving 150 miles with it each way...and no guarantee she would make enough to cover expenses. I did speak to her about this, and she said yes...she was willing to do it. But then I canceled the symposium idea. I was not saying that Dona should come to Auburn. Once again you confuse your assumptions with fact and reality. My idea is for her to stay put in Ariel and we have the symposium there, at her bar, the Ariel Tavern. When Bruce and I visited her recently, she said the place has 3 floors. How about offering to help clear out some space right there at the Tavern and have the symposium right there, over Thanksgiving weekend. I would be happy to call her or drive down to Ariel and ask her if she'd agree to this arrangement. Another option: there's Ariel Dam and the park right below the Ariel Taven. We could pitch a tent, bring in tables and chairs, get a computer connection, get an overhead projector and have everyone come with RVs and tents and make a real DBC weekend of it. It will take a few dedicated folks to put in some time to make it happen. Basically, there WASN'T a lot of interest. I left a page up at our website for almost six months describing the event, along with an email link...and NOT ONE MESSAGE CAME IN. That's where I got the idea it wasn't going to work. One or two people did offer to help, but it just wasn't enough. There were nine hours of speaking time to fill. That's harder to do than you think. You're wrong Blevins. If you would have attended GG's symposium in Portland last November, you would have seen the exact opposite -- folks are very interested. People at the symposium were eager to share their information and ideas, people were enthusiastic, there was great synergy and energy. There were experts -- folks with great knowledge and specialized skills -- all eager to learn, connect, and contribute. You're wrong Blevins, the interest is there -- folks flew in from all over the country, even some of the key players in the DBC drama, at their own expense, to be at that symposium. As I see it, you had a golden opportunity to put on a quality DBC Symposium this summer in Auburn, and as far as I'm concerned, you blew it. You had the perfect venue, the Theatre, and the perfect location, to have a great ymposium. It could have been a great time, a great thing, for all of us. The problem wasn't people being disinterested, the problem was you, your attitude, and the way you handled things. You had to control all things and every little thing, and when you didn't get your way, you announced to everyone that the symposium was off. Your tantrums went on for weeks, even months. There are some very educated and knowledgable people here with some very specialized skills -- experts in scientific and forensic research, journalists, skydivers, folks with advanced degrees. What you fail to see is that most of these people are interested in this case and would have eagerly participated in planning and contributing to a DBC symposium. If you would have been a little more laid back, more flexible and open to lots of different perspective -- like Geoffrey Grey was with his symposium -- then things might have been different. It might have actually taken off -- it all might have come together, naturally. People would have come forward. It all would have created a life of its own. Look, if I see some REAL interest in this, I can try to arrange something for next year. Maybe we can rent the theatre. You can...it's owned by the city now and costs $278 a day, which is actually peanuts. I'm friends with the city guy who arranges the rentals. If people started contacting me with real ideas, and I thought they were serious and would show up, I would pay for the theatre and we could organize something. This can be done anytime, not just in August. Theatre is available all year for events and easy to rent. Until I see that happening, well... I, I, I...there you again. So you could have gotten the venue for next to nothing -- add that one to my list above of lost opportunities. Blevins, it all might go better if you just get out of the way and quit trying to control everything and everyone. Let the people set the agenda, not you. Let the agenda emerge, don't force it. Gray got soooo many quality people to come from miles away, at their own expense. I'm not saying we have to try and match that -- a more local symposium would be okay. It just may be that you're not the man for the job -- maybe putting together a symposium should be left to someone who is more knowledgable, flexible, and open.

Dona Elliot is busy enough just putting ON the Ariel Tavern thing each year. Their phone number is public and you know what that means if you are involved with Cooper. They're always nice, though. __________________________________________________ How would you know if Dona Elliot is too busy to add on a symposium to the Ariel Cooper celebration? Did you even bother to call and ask her? I'm guessing, probably not. I've noticed sometimes that your assumptions get confused with actual fact. On a similar note: you could have put on a quality symposium at Auburn this summer yourself if you would have gotten out of your own way. Some of us offered to help your organize it, but you refused. A DBC symposium in Auburn could have been a really good thing for all of us. We could have benefited greatly by getting together and sharing mutual knowledge. Maybe next time try to put aside your big ego and control-freak tendencies, and let quality folks who have something relevant to offer the case be allowed to step forward and be heard. You're a trip dude. MeyerLouie Hey Blevins, I thought you were going away because of a possible conflict of interest with your views on the DBC case and your publishing company. Guess not, huh -- now your dropzone narratives are longer and more frequent than ever.

Jo: I've been wondering about Bruce too -- I usually try to email or call or reply Bruce every couple of weeks, but not lately -- been real busy. I'll ring him up this weekend or drop in. Bruce lives not too far from me, I'll try to find out. I have a feeling he's working on that book or is out doing some quality research. To all: I hope we are having a symposium this year. Talking to each other, face to face, is, in my opinion, the best way to learn the latest and greatest about the case. How about asking Dona at Ariel to set up a room for us at the Tavern there in Ariel (or close by) and having a symposium right there -- over Thanksgiving weekend, in Ariel? Or do we already have something set up? I've been out of the loop for a while. MeyerLouie

Hey Knoss, it was good to see you had taken a break from the forum for a while -- things settled down quite a bit in your absence. Folks starting talking about the case again. You were so disruptive before your break. Now you have returned -- possibly with a new attitude, a new approach. However, your posts are starting to get more frequent (and more bizarre) again, but what really irks me now is the picture that accompanies your posts. Now everytime you post, I have to look at your mug. It was bad enough reading you day in and day out, now I have to look at you. Talk about adding insult to injury...I don't know if I can take it. Can you send me a blowup of your post pic? I was thinking about putting a bullseye on it and sending it out to everyone on the forum to use for dart practice. Might even help alleviate frustration. What do you think. MeyerLouie

RB, I am planning to make the Ariel party in 2012 for sure. I will come early and I look forward to meeting you. Yes, the conundrum is exactly as you stated, it needs some clarification for sure. MeyerLouie

RB, coincidentally, I took a drive last weekend down to Amboy. I just drove around, I went up the Washougal River gorge for quite a ways, I went through Battleground, I even dropped by the Ariel Tavern. I see what you're saying about the Amboy, Yale conundrum. I must admit, I was confused when I first joined the forum. And now, after several months, I'm still feelings confused, but I feel I'm confused at a higher level now and about more important things! MeyerLouie

BobKnoss, thanks for being a good sport about my post. You took it in stride...MeyerLouie

I've been reading pages of Bob Knoss' rantings. BK, I liked you better before you started italicizing. Jo has a big ego, and is not truthful? I can't believe that's actually coming from you. So what happened Bob? Get dropped when you were a baby? Potty training took a tragic turn? Always the last one picked for dodge ball in the 4th grade? Got stood up for the senior prom? Maybe too much big house basement buttsekts? Something must have happened.... Once in a while you actually make sense, you actually have something substantial to say. Too bad it's a rare occurrence. You're a trip dude. You're definitely not stupid, but I'm thinking you might be a little crazy.