FLYJACK

The problem is,, you are just making it all up... You have zero evidence to back up your opinion. NADA.. it is pure speculation. You are using a false generalization fallacy and false premise fallacy. It is even possible you might be right, but by taking that position based on assumptions you have closed off a path of inquiry.. You can reject everything with assumptions. This is my pet peeve with many Cooper researchers,,, Basic logic.. NEVER EVER use assumptions/logical fallacies to eliminate a line of inquiry... USE FACTS. A good researcher's bias should be open not closed. You can hold a counter opinion and still pursue a theory.. Using an opinion to reject a theory is bad strategy..

If you demand absolutes you get nowhere, like Ryan.. The evidence indicates what is most likely,, you can always claim it isn't proven or there is some possible exception. The evidence indicates.. Cooper had military and some parachute experience,, Asking for 2 parachutes, backs and fronts means he was neither asking for nor expecting bailout rigs. Checking for cards does not mean he knew they were bailout rigs. He complained about the lack of D rings.. in his possession he still did not know they were bailout rigs. If he knew they were bailout rigs why didn't he reject them and ask for mains.. most likely he did not know. A bailout rig increases survivability but also injury..

My statement is correct,,, I said supports not proves. Looking at the card does not indicate he thought they were bailouts if mains also had cards. As previously assumed. Asking for front and back indicates mains and complaining about no D rings suggests he expected mains.. and thought they were. Put it all together and it suggests he did not recognize them as bailout rigs.. and that supports Cooper was not a very experienced jumper. Evidence also suggests he has some knowledge so he most likely had some experience but not much. IMO, he had a few jumps in the military,,, definitely not a Braden type and not a total wuffo. It is interesting that Cossey said the rig used had a 28ft but the packing card said 24ft... more consistent with a cheap bailout rig bought to meet regs..

The drag from the wheels down, flaps down condition was already built in when Cooper went down the stairs.. I find it hard to believe the lowering the stairs with Cooper on them would not add to the existing drag and slow the plane some amount... maybe 10-20 knots? Those stairs are acting like a big flap,, 30 sq ft... it had to have some effect.. I got 3200 lbs of drag.. probably have something wrong here what is wrong?? the angle? https://www.symbolab.com/calculator/physics/drag-equation?calculator=drag-equation&density=1.204&density-units=kg/m^3&velocity=195&velocity-units=mi/h&drag_coefficient=1.12&area=30&area-units=ft^2&drag_force=3210.3&drag_force-units=lbf If the drag coefficient is adjusted for angle you get 2100 lbs..

Wasn't that slowdown due to Cooper's problem with the stairs..

Have you read the book? Gunther was initially contacted by somebody claiming to be Cooper in February 1972. He suddenly disappeared a few months later. 10 years later Gunther is contacted by a woman "Clara"... She claimed Cooper died early 1982.. Gunther wrote a letter to the FBI in 1982 about a contact "Clara" and asked if they were interested..

You have zero evidence for any of that... nothing. It is completely made up.. Anything is possible but that is a low probability. It is highly probable that he was contacted by somebody claiming to be Cooper.. If you take that position based on an assumption -- the initial contact never existed then you close the intellectual inquiry that it may have been the real Cooper. Not that it is but you have close that possibility not based on a fact but an assumption. He mentioned others who were also contacted. That supports a real contact.

Thanks,, that is a big deal.. It supports Cooper being military checking the cards,, and (likely) not knowing they were bailout rigs..

Robert,, I am still convinced that the airstairs dropping with Cooper at the end would slow the plane at least some.. acting as a 10ft x 3ft flap... The stair did drop enough for a man to stand at the end.. according to the test. Wouldn't that cause the plane to slow some... that is a lot of added drag during flaps down. It wasn't this far open/down...

I can't see Gunther taking that risk to make up the Cooper part then he would have to make up Clara parts to match.. He was still in contact with Himmelsbach... If we assume for the sake of argument that it was Cooper and a female accomplice,, "Clara" would not tell a true story... she couldn't.. they needed to conceal their identities.. Clara's story is a fabrication if they were legit or scammers. I still can't see another motive for Clara.. other than claiming Cooper died.. What motive is there... Doesn't seem like something a scammer would do..

Most people fail to understand the context of the book.. and dismiss it because of the errors.. The book is not a true account of the hijacking.. he admits he is just telling Clara's story told to him.. It is so obviously false Gunther wouldn't make it up. The plot or narrative is what he experienced, he never claimed it was true.. Clara's story is obviously not true.. IMO, Clara was just conveying a made up story,, her motivation was to publicize Cooper's death via Gunther which probably wasn't true and characterize him as a good guy.. What other motive would Clara have.. she was real.. My working theory,, obviously can't prove it but the first "Cooper" wanted money.. then disappeared. 10 years later that "Cooper" and a female associate "Clara" re-contacted Cooper with a story for the purpose of using Gunther to publicize the "Cooper died" narrative even pursuing contact Himmelsbach with that letter. It is clear that was the agenda,, the story is made up or mostly. Gunther said she was telling her story from notes..

Gunther was contacted by a "Clara".. "Clara" confirms the first "Cooper" existed. Therefore,, Gunther was contacted by two people, one claiming to be Cooper.. How do we prove it was or wasn't Cooper?? Since Clara's story contains fabrications, we can't dismiss "Cooper" because of those.. I seems Clara's motive wasn't money but to publicize that Cooper was dead and was a really a good guy... that is not the motivation of a scammer.

Angle would have very little impact. Before Cooper jumped they had sped up to about 170k at 8:00,, so the earlier slowdown had no impact.

I just think the two lights is most likely accurate. It fits with Cooper struggling with stairs at a relatively low speed vs Mac.. If he operated them correctly the first time they should have dropped some.. if he tried again the speed would not have had a material effect on the drop.. the only variable is Cooper.. and his operation of the lever.

The fact is she said see saw the light come on after the call from Cooper.. That trumps her time estimation.. and makes it irrelevant. Your argument is the equivalent of.. A women said it took her 15 minutes to drive her red car to work.. it actually took 25 minutes therefore she didn't actually drive a red car to work.. Fact is she said she saw the red light come on after the crew had reported it being on.. no way around that.. I thought she could have possibly mistaken another light coming on.. but who knows. It makes sense in the context of Cooper struggling with the airstairs.

The red/amber "aft airstair" light does not mean the stairs are opened.. The crew saw the red light on about 7:42.. Tina saw the red light come on just after 8:00.. The red light came on twice. The red light comes on when the lever is moved from the uplock detent,, it goes out when the lever is returned to the uplock detent. It does not indicate the lever is pushed forward or the stairs are open. The green "aft airstair" light comes on when the stairs are fully down and locked.. this never happened in NORJAK. For the red light to come on twice Cooper must have moved the lever from the uplock position about 7:42 then returned to the uplock and then moved again about 8:00... The red light above it is the rear cabin door indicator which was open..

very large bills.. a combination to include 1000's ,, he got lower bills,, it wasn't his error they didn't give him what he demanded. But that is irrelevant because he said that wasn't the real reason he returned.. As for motive,, that isn't clear, there is some evidence for political and for personal.. maybe both.. but it has not been confirmed.

Not much, I see them but none are compelling,,, I am focussing on Hahneman as far as suspects and looking at other case evidence..

This s great example for why I avoid discussing Hahneman.. You have an opinion and are now searching for confirmation using assumptions.. No, he did not get the denominations mixed up,, they gave him the wrong denominations but he said he really returned to delay the flight to ensure a night jump. and the FBI was messing with him,, that didn't happen to Cooper,, circumstances were different, there are also some false reports in the news.. Tina said about Cooper.. he was not nervous he was rather nice other than he wanted certain things to be done he never tried to harm myself and although he was impatient a few times he was never cruel or nasty or impolite.. Rogers,, (Hahneman's stew) said Behaviour sounds very similar...

Witnesses saw a composite sketch... that sketch looks nothing like his image I posted comparing to Cooper's sketch A.. His sketch was good around the eyes, the very thing Cooper witnesses are weak on. Nose bad, hair bad.. That image of H comparing to sketch A doesn't make him Cooper but it shows that sketches and images are not as reliable as people assume they are.. Look at Cooper,, we have 3 completely different sketches and a 4th different image.. which one is Cooper?? Nobody knows.. He did go to prison.. cut a last minute deal.. a legit criticism but it doesn't eliminate him. If I assumed he can't be Cooper like everyone else and not pursued him then I would never have uncovered all the stuff I have.. like a huge error by the FBI. There is no arguing on teeth, Ryan lied and spread misinformation to support his opinion. He was missing two upper bicuspids, very difficult to see and very common for people who get braces.. NOT DISPOSITIVE.. So, people have eliminated him based on assumptions or misinformation from Ryan.. not facts. The correct position for others is to be skeptical, not to accept him as Cooper but do not eliminate based on assumptions.

Why do you say he isn't Cooper,, what evidence demonstrates that.

So, you have a false premise... people should be skeptical, I am one of the most skeptical people around.. question everything. Skeptical is the correct position.... When I started researching H I tried to find a reason to 100% eliminate him,, facts, not opinions. I still haven't found it.. and I did find a massive error by the FBI. Skepticism is not the issue,, the issue is guys like Ryan and now Nicky who harass and attack me personally for not accepting their positions.. as if they are some arbiter if truth... they just lie to discredit me to justify their own opinions, not facts. I have seen a lot in this case but the lies and personal attacks from Ryan are off the charts.. if I said here what I really think of him I would get banned. Ryan is suffering from a cognitive dissonance.. He knows I am a very good researcher but he has eliminated Hahneman.. those things are incompatible. To resolve this internal conflict he has decided that I have "psychological defect", "won't admit I am wrong", "have a confirmation bias" etc... He must destroy me to justify his own position. Ryan doesn't even consider that he may be wrong. Why does he care what I think,, because he is not confident in his own position and I am a threat. He doesn't attack others who actively push suspects that aren't Cooper.. Ryan doesn't attack Limbach for Skip,, even though Skip has severe forehead lines and facial lumps,, and the claim he is wearing Cooper's Towncraft tie in a pic is debunked.. way too short. Now Ryan finds himself in another dilemma... he claims sketch A is best (B is best) and I posted a pic of H that matches A very well.. but he has trashed H saying he is the worst match in the world.. He trashed me saying I am only biased for sketch B because of H,, Now, the cognitive dissonance will be off the charts.. Ryan will ignore it, manufacture some incoherent excuse or just attack me more.. So no, skepticism isn't the problem,, absolutism is,, it a cancer in this case. Absolutists are low level thinkers... they are detrimental to the advancement of this case.

You still didn't answer the question.. Have you eliminated him? not that you think he is Cooper.. but you know he isn't.

You didn't answer the question.. FWW,, I am not making the case here or now... maybe tomorrow I find something that eliminates him 100%..

Not sure what you are saying.. You think that eliminates him?