FLYJACK

"The oscillations were not a one time event. They happened over a period of time while Cooper made his way down the stairs." How do you know that?

Yes, there has been confusion but I still don't see your argument. Rat is throwing out an estimate decades later.. that isn't a literal fact. Logically, it makes sense that the oscillations continued after the pressure bump not before. Cooper going down the airstairs might cause some slight action if any but little compared to the oscillations after jumping. The stairs wouldn't spring up and stop, they would swing.. "My ear plug came out (pressure bump first) and I uh, we're getting some oscillations.. (oscillations after)" Oscillations caused by the airstairs closing after the unsub departed.. The evidence supports oscillations after Cooper jumped.

I checked the Google Earth measuring tool vs known distances and it is actually quite accurate.. better than I thought. I wasn't even going to convert and show ground speed in the analysis as it wasn't relevant. I added it just to see.. The measurement is ground distance in miles per marked segment minute * 60 = X MPH converted to knots. NORJAK speed was reported to have been lowered to 150 kn IAS.. which can be up to 20% below true airspeed. True airspeed and wind/angle can calculate ground speed. A 150 IAS into a wind could be about 166 ground speed. The ground speed calculations here are probably fairly accurate, however irrelevant here. These ground speeds reflect the map markings not NORJAK's true speed.. DO NOT CONFLATE THESE SPEEDS WITH NORJAK'S IAS or TAS. The minute marks on the map were by hand and not 100% accurate, distances between the minute marks will be off slightly also reflected in the a slight ground speed error. The exercise here was not to calculate NORJAK's ground speed but to ID any large deviation aka shorter segment/lower ground speed which indicates either a gross marking error or the plane slowing down. Since a gross marking error would have to be compensated for in adjacent segments that can be ruled out. The outlier identified here is the 20:10 - 2:11 time period indicating NORJAK slowed down substantially and that timeframe is supported by other evidence. Due to the TBAR money find location and lack of a case resolution everyone wants to change the evidence.. The evidence overwhelmingly supports a 20:10 - 20:11 jump time. Now, how did the TBAR money get into the Columbia R in Spring....

I knew those guys would screw this up.. Didn't I explain it. Is this thing on? Each segment was measured using the exact same method, those segments were converted to a speed which is not accurate because Google Earths tool measuring ground distance isn't entirely accurate, it might be out 10%. It doesn't matter as long as all segments were measured using the same tool they are all out the same %. We can compare them. Those speeds represent a ratio, not the actual speed, a proxy to compare to each other. The significance here is the deviation from the proxy not the proxy/speed. I could have left the speed data off entirely and used distance only, the result would be the same, a significant shorter deviation at 20:10 - 20:11. If the plane was travelling at the same speed the entire time you'd expect the segments to be very close, but when the plane slows down you get a shorter segment, that is what we have..

Yes, the distances were measured in Google Earth, so the ground speed is not necessarily accurate because Google Earth isn't accurate. But since the measuring method was consistent for all segments the deviation from the average exposes the anomaly. The deviation tells you how far above or below the average that segment is. The 20:10 - 20:11 segment is the shortest relative to the others aka the slowest of all the segments. We are comparing the minute segment lengths to each other, the shortest = slowest. It was always thought that the 20:10 - 20:11 segment appeared shorter based on visual, but the marks were made manually so an anomaly could be a marking error but checking the other surrounding segments that isn't the case. If an anomaly was created by a poorly placed mark the neighbouring plots would be seen to compensate, they don't. Where exactly was the plane at 8:11.. My best guess is to take the 8:11 time on the map and go +/- 1 minute. So, 8:10 - 8:12 on the map.. exactly where they thought he jumped. Why do you believe the oscillations occurred before the jump? Everything I have read and processed has Cooper jumping, the stairs go up and cause the pressure bump, effectively the first oscillation,, then the stairs oscillate until reaching their equilibrium. They are simultaneous but the oscillations continue until dissipation. It matches the 20:11 time as well.

Here are some very interesting results of an analysis I have meant to do for while.. I took the flightpath and imported into Google Earth,, then measured the distance between the time marks in miles. The time marks on the map were manually drawn so they are not precise but comparing them may expose an anomaly. The plane did slow down when Cooper jumped. If a manual mark was off you'd expect that to correct on the next mark. When the plane slowed we would see a shorter distance between time marks. We are comparing the averages and deviation. This is not precise but can expose a data outlier. and it did,, there is a large deviation between 20:10 and 20:11 suggesting the plane slowed to about 166 knots/192 MPH vs the average. If one of those marks was just marked off then you'd expect the surrounding marks to compensate and they don't. 20:11 thru 20:13 are significantly below average. We are comparing the deviations, the relationships between the minute marks. The 20:05 start minute mark may be off due to the missing 20:04 mark. It is not proof but the data deviation appears to show Norjak slowed down significantly to about 166 knots/192 MPH between 20:10 and 20:11 while the average speed over the time series was 189 knots/217 MPH. Note, the distance/speeds are not precise but measured the same way. We are looking at the deviation from the average. That deviation may be a poor manual mark or an actual change in speed. The 20:10 - 20:11 deviation suggests a speed reduction. If NORJAK slowed down in this time series it was between 20:10 - 20:11. The speed/distances are not precise but the distances were measured all using the same system so the deviation is what is the key. IMO, the FBI got it right Cooper jumped between 20:10 and 20:11... Legal notice, Georger, Eric Ulis, Robert99 do not have permission to use this post or any information within, or copy this post in any form whatsoever. Everyone else has permission. Copyright March 17, 2021

Georger,, FAIL The money was in BUNDLES... rubber banded bundles of packets. You continue to prove that you do not understand the issue.. The first step is the hardest.. admit you have been wrong for a decade. or keep lying to everyone and yourself.

you can PM here..

Georger can't help himself, he has to lie again... After being exposed for plagiarizing my comment he has to lie with a straw-man and ridicule... Is said the dig image "SUPPORTS" Palmers assertion that the frag at depth was deposited by dig operations,, based on the image, my statement is true. Goerger lied and claimed "CERTIFIED" and "PROVES" which is an untrue claim that he then riducules. This is what Georger does, he is a serial liar, a fraud, an intellectual lightweight who needs to lie... he has even manufactured case evidence.. NEVER EVER EVER TRUST ANYTHING GEORGER claims about the case itself or others. He is a few bills short of a currency packet. Moving on to more important info,, Eric Ulis's TBAR theory busted. I found some very good overhead images of the money spot. By measuring the pixels and comparing them to the 20 ft grid lines marked on TBAR. The money spot measures 34.8 feet from the River Feb 1980. The slope is 10%, that puts the money spot 3.5 feet above the water level. This confirms a previous estimate made from a profile image of TBAR. Comparing the Satellite images the River looks to be the average level which is 2-4 ft. 3.5 ft plus 2-4 ft = 5.5-7.5 ft So, the money spot is at the 5.5-7.5 ft level.. There were reports at the time that the money spot was at the high water line and recently underwater. These reports are consistent with money at a 5.5-7.5 ft level.. Eric claims as fact that ONLY the extreme floods of about 21 ft in June 1972 and June 1974 reached the money spot... he is 100% wrong. In fact, the June 1972 flood max level would have the put the money spot about 14-16 ft underwater. Eric is just a sloppy researcher and thinker, he also falsely claimed the placard was from inside NORJAK. The River level was frequently over the money spot.. I find it difficult to conceive of the money getting driven up to the surface and pushed onto the shore.. But, if the River level was well above the money spot, that spot would effectively be the bottom of the River where the money would have buoyancy and get pushed along the bottom by higher Spring water flow. Money goes into the Columbia as one bundle as it was given to Cooper in Spring gets pushed to its spot which is underwater at the time. It is possible more bundles went into the River but were never found. That is it,, now, how did the money get into the Columbia in Spring when the water level was above about 5.5-7.5 ft.... stay tuned to this channel.

Georger is plagiarizing my comment,, If the serial number from the frag found at depth was not from the 3 packets found by Brian the FBI would know and have used it in their analysis. But here is the dig spot,, I wasn't sure if these people were at the exact money find spot or somewhere else on the beach,, but I can confirm that the stick/stake is the money find spot. The branch on the tree behind matches the branch behind the reporter pointing to the money spot in her report. They changed the stick though. This dig is chaos and supports Palmer assertion that the money frag found at depth was deposited during the excavation process.. and the money spot looks about 30 ft from the River. With a 10% slope that is only about 3 ft above the water level. money spot stick,,, matches top image dig chaos... The FBI had the original Recordak of the bills in physical order not numeric order.. the FBI bill list they released was reordered to be alphanumeric. This is an actual Recordak for the Cooper case displayed by the FBI. There were several.

yup.. serial number 307551 and the date Feb. 21, 1946 are stamped on a parachute found in North Clark County, Wash. as seen in Seattle on Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Georger, you are moving the goalposts and dodging with false arguments.. You still can't admit that Carr was wrong in that statement and you pushed the same false narrative for a decade. It is your version of the Western Flight Path and Placard drift... LET IT GO. Paper vs rubber bands is irrelevant.. The evidence supports paper but it doesn't change the conclusion. The packets of bills were still in 100's. The evidence supports the money going to Cooper in 100 bill count packets.. those packets were rubber banded in random counts into bundles.. Do you disagree? A strap is paper and 100 bills. Ralph Himmelsbach “There were 10,000 twenty dollar bills assembled in straps of 100 bills to a strap and individual straps held together with rubber bands.” at 6:35 of video…

The FBI may have Rats "mark your maps" info,, we have a fraction of the files. After 8:13 is possible.. 8:15 is max.. IMO, the "pressure bump" was caused by the first oscillation up. The stairs had max thrust upward from Cooper's weight leaving then diminishing oscillations up and down until achieving an equilibrium. Cooper's jump initiated the oscillations.

Georger, respectfully, you still do not understand this. Carr was wrong.. here is his statement, if you can't even see or admit that this is 100% wrong then you don't grasp the issue.. "The money was packaged in varying amounts, so one bundle would have $500.00 another $1,000.00, there was no uniformity to it. I have been searching for the evidence report from the lab but have not found it yet, lots of files to go through. When I get it you'll be the second to know." I can claim he was wrong because it is clear he was. You keep denying it, do you beleive the above statement is correct? He got it wrong... the money was 3 "groups" of $2000... given to Cooper that way and found on TBAR that way.. So, why did Carr get it wrong,,, because he conflated the meaning of the term "bundle". You still refuse to admit that statement was wrong... until you admit it, you just don't get it. I am not defining the terms, I am clarifying them.. You were pushing the same line Carr had above,,, the 3 TBAR groups of bills were each random counts.. it made no sense. How did money go to Cooper in groups of 100's, get randomized by the bank employee and then get into groups of 100 of bills again on TBAR in the same order given to Cooper? ANSWER, the bundles were randomized not the packets (groups of 100 bills) You guys didn't get it then and you still don't,, you have spent years now attacking me for your own ignorance. When I read Carr's error it made sense. The answer was simple, they bank guy didn't randomize the groups of 100 bills (packets) as you and Carr claimed, he randomized and rubber banded the bundles, the groups of packets. You and Carr had conflated the meaning of the term bundle. The words themselves are irrelevant, the problem is the meanings and their interpretations. Now you are using your own misunderstanding to reject evidence that suggests the TBAR money likely arrived as one single rubber banded bundle.

Rat's comment,, our friend took leave.. is well documented from him but do not appear in the 302's and do not have any time reference. The FDR noted a "blob" at 8:09,, the FDR is right in the tail next to the airstairs. The "pressure bump" was at 8:10 or 8:11 both times are noted. Since those times are not precise and not synchronized.. it is reasonable to conclude that those were the same event. Now, we move to the flightpath. It has an error rate of 1 minute.. Applying the blob and bump with the 1 minute error that puts the sweet spot at between the 8:09 - 8:12 physical marks on the map, about 9 miles long. Those physical marks are not necessarily the exact real time. The problem is the relationship between the FDR time, transcript time and flightpath time, they all have a build in error rate and are not synchronized to each other. We have to find a nexus with three different baselines.

A no-pull body in that area would probably be found by now. It is widely accepted that the time stamps on those transcripts are 1 minute later (plus rounding error) than real time occurrence, the stamp was at the end of the transmission. Generally, deduct 1-2 minutes, even that isn't really precise. The crew feels something, then articulates it then the time is stamped at the end of the transmission. The timestamp will always be later. You'll notice sometimes the FBI says 8:10 and other times 8:11 for the same event.. The search area did go S to Battleground. Merwin and Ariel got the publicity.. Generally, the search area migrated South because of the TBAR money find bias,, it is human nature to try to make it fit.. we all have done it. The Vortex can distort your analysis.. Robert99 and Eric created a new flightpath to make it fit. Some have tried to put the money in the Washougal drainage area. The reality is, nobody knows exactly where Cooper jumped.. it is conjecture... evidence indicates Cooper jumped between 8:09 at the very earliest to 8:15. Anywhere in there is equally valid and outside of that while possible becomes significantly less likely.

A few things to consider,, First, the timestamps are not that accurate, they are entered at the end of a transmission and after the crew has verbalized their "experience" and whole numbers. Those times are probably 1-2 minutes after a reported occurrence. Combine that with a N/S time error on the flightpath map, those time stamps are not exact. So, we are trying to pinpoint a spot using two variables with built in errors. The FBI had all this info and more and put the Southern point at about 8:15 on their map. Here,, the FBI has the pressure bump at 8:10.. no later than 8:15. The hard part is confirming exactly where the plane was at those time. There was a "blob" on the FDR at 8:09. (based on the FDR time different from transcript time) Oscillations vs Pressure Bump... I think the pressure bump was first, stairs go up max thrust after Cooper leaves causing the pressure bump then stairs oscillate in a decreasing swing up and down... but they were very close in time. pressure bump at 8:11?? Cooper would have to jump at 8:18 over Portland to land N side of Columbia R.. we know the wind at Portland. IMO, Cooper would not choose to jump over an urban area like Vancouver and Portland. Pilots stated they saw the lights of Portland and other distinctive lights in the area,, that would include Vancouver's lights... that suggests Cooper jumped N of Vancouver.. I would think that the seeing lights of Portland would include Vancouver. Everybody at some point has considered and tried to put Cooper landing in the Columbia River, but the Spring diatom's negate that.. landing near on land, possible but a body would be found. IMO, 8:15 about Brush Prairie is the farthest S. Yes, the most likely source of the money is from the River,, I have a few theories that put the money into the R, maintain the jump zone, flightpath and Spring diatom constraint. There are probably others.

Lots of them, I haven't kept track. Off the top of may head maybe a dozen... Without Cossey, as sketchy/conflicting as his descriptions were, there is no way to confirm any chutes now. Any chutes found now or in the past are unverifiable and have no evidentiary value.

Brilliant Georger where did you steal that from.. The FBI would know from the serial number if the frag came from the packets Brian found or another 4th packet. We'd probably know if that was the case. And the packet vs bundle is still a mystery to Georger.. he just does not understand the significance. All it does is explain why Carr got it wrong, people used/beleived the term "bundle" to refer to two different things.. Georger is stuck on the words, the issue is the meaning. Carr claimed the 3 "bundles" found were of different counts, they were not. He thought "bundle" meant the "packets".. Get it,, you can call them whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that Carr was 100% wrong. You need to clearly distinguish a group of 100 bills from a group of groups of 100 bills. Ulis is wrong the FBI files and crew transcripts note that Cooper's initial demand was airstairs lowered in flight. I don't know how Ulis phrased the question to Rataczak or if he remembers accurately. I don't trust Ulis to extract the facts. He probably asked the question vaguely. This is a very nuanced issue and Eric refuses to accept the existence of the files.. Rataczak should be shown the FBI docs and crew transcripts that show Cooper INITIALLY asked for airstairs lowered inflight... but Ulis refuses to acknowledge these docs even exist. The question to RAT isn't if Cooper's initial demand was airstairs lowered on takeoff... that doesn't capture the issue. Rat assumes the question is referring the fact that Cooper was convinced to change to airstairs lowered in flight. You get an answer to the wrong question.. but that is how Ulis rolls. The better question is,, when Cooper made his initial demands the crew transcripts convey airstairs to be lowered IN FLIGHT, did Cooper later change his demand to lowered ON TAKE OFF as the FBI files note before being convinced to lowered IN FLIGHT. The crew transcripts state it before negotiating while conveying Cooper's initial demand.. aft stairs to be lowered after takeoff. This is easier to read,,, HJ initially demanded aft stairs extended after take off. Later fully extended before take off.. Crew advised take off with air stairs down impossible and HJ advised asked if partial... The FBI made it clear... Cooper changed the airstair demand from lowered after takeoff to before. Initial demand noted... airstairs lowered inflight.

Thanks to people like Georger and Ulis I have publicly posted only about 20% of my research... and I have so much stuff I forget what I have already done.. I went back in my files.. Palmer believed the fragments found at depth were deposited by digging actions.. I agree, that is most likely, the digging was sloppy and few frags were found. I found a high resolution image of the fragment found by the FBI and with 5 digits from the serial number plus the letter G matched a Cooper bill. G21056376B was the serial number for the larger bill fragment found by the FBI. It is not in my TBAR bill number list but I have accumulated only 85 out of the roughly 285-300 bills in the three packets. If this bill number was not from the three packets the FBI would know as the FBI had the micro of bills in order. This is not the hi res image.

I am still looking at some aspects of a new theory.. it has a two best options, both are proving impossible to prove. I don't believe Cooper jumped into the Columbia.. based on diatoms and evidence indicates he probably did not jump South of about Brush Prairie, the 8:15 time, based on pilots statements and the oscillations.. Brush Prairie happens to be right on the railroad tracks and within walking distance/time of the Heisson store approx. 11:30 break in.. also next to the same tracks.. that isn't proven to be Cooper but is a bonus.. But, the money was on land for some time before entering the River. Cooper could have lost some money and very rare natural event occurred in Spring that could have introduced a money bundle or maybe more into the Columbia River upstream of TBAR... that event occurred when the TBAR money spot was under water in Spring. The money "in theory" could have come from where Cooper lost it on land or more likely from a place right on the Columbia that I have identified. I have been trying to track down the people associated with that place but after 50 years it is really tough. One of those people could have been Cooper, known Cooper, helped Cooper or found money Cooper lost.

Not necessarily June, could be June but was in Spring. TBAR spot was underwater probably every or most Springs from 72-79..

Palmer,, No evidence that the money was three feet down, it may have been deposited there in digging actions. The evidence suggests that the money most likely arrived as one single rubber banded bundle of packets of 100 bills each... eliminating theories based on the assumption that the money only arrived as 3 separate packets is poor logic. From there, I have several theories and none point to any particular suspect whatsoever. Everyone is open to figure out their own theories. but, theories must fit the evidence. Eric's claim that the money spot was only underwater June 72 and 74 during a high flood is completely false. He just made it up. In June '72 the money spot was about 10-15 feet underwater. The idea that Cooper buries the money next to a River in a remote area when there are far safer areas to bury money then rushes back during a flood to dig it up from far underwater but loses some packets is ridiculous, even for conjecture. Tom's diatom analysis indicates the money was initially exposed to the River in Spring. The money had to be outside the River until a Spring entry into the River. The money was in the same order and form as it was given to Cooper. The money sinks. I would like to know what a bundle actually does on the bottom, some debris remains suspended just off the bottom after sinking. Spring is the seasonal high water flow for the Columbia R. The "FBI" flightpath should be considered accurate within a small error. The 8:11 to 8:15 jump time should be considered accurate. Two unproven variables.. The Heisson store break in. The railroad tracks..

Georger dodges and weaves, spews misinformation... TAKE THE L... Sourpuss.. You are making false claims.. it is your perception that is shifting not my argument or the evidence. I have been saying the same thing the entire time.. and I have always said this does not rely on paper bands vs straps... that is not even relevant but the evidence supports paper bands for packets and rubber bands for bundles. It doesn't even rely on packets vs bundles,, that just explains the error. You can call them lemons and limes if you prefer the conclusion is the same but they are different and need to be defined as such. The conclusion is that the TBAR money most likely arrived as one single bundle... Georger has NOT challenged that conclusion. It does NOT rely on paper/rubber bands or packets/bundles. Georger, as far as I can see, is incapable of processing the issue. He is emotionally invested in being right. I don't recall Georger ever admitting he was wrong. Carr stated... "The money was packaged in varying amounts, so one bundle would have $500.00 another $1,000.00, there was no uniformity to it. I have been searching for the evidence report from the lab but have not found it yet, lots of files to go through. When I get it you'll be the second to know." This is FALSE. Carr was wrong. Georger refuses to acknowledge Carr's obvious error. Georger claims the multiple references of packets (in 100's) in the FBI docs are wrong. Georger claims Himm's money statement is wrong. Georger doesn't seem to accept Pringles statement about the money from a single bundle found on TBAR. Georger claimed Tina's "bank-type bands" actually means rubber bands. She was asked he claimed.. (LIAR) Georger rejects logic. If the bank guy randomized the packets/limes right before going to Cooper (as Carr and Georger claimed) how did the TBAR money get back into the same order in 100's... IT CAN'T. Sounds like Eric's Western Flight Path Placard argument... reject all the evidence and everyone is wrong except Carr who actually made a 100% false claim. Eric claimed as fact that the Placard was from inside NORJAK and the FBI confirmed it, it wasn't and they didn't. What is Georger's argument? I am not sure but he seems to be rejecting all the evidence but putting up no conclusion or argument. Is Georger claiming the packets/lemons were random counts? Is Georger claiming the TBAR money could not have been in paper bands? Is Georger claiming the TBAR money could not have arrived as one bundle/lime? I pointed this out long ago and got trashed by ignorant people. I asked you guys over there to explain it... if the money was given to Cooper in packets/lemons of 100 bills then how did it get into random counts of packets/lemons on TBAR. NOBODY could explain it and several people attacked me for asking that question. The answer was simple. The TBAR packets/lemons were not in random counts, Carr was wrong. Carr had conflated the packets/lemons with bundles/limes... It was NOT the packets/lemons that were made random as Carr believed, It was the bundles/limes that were made random.. The TBAR money was described as found with rubber band frags attached, there is no evidence to indicate if those band frags were from each packet/lemon or from the entire bundle/lime. According to Georger, there is no difference between a group/packet/lemon of 100 bills bank banded or rubber banded.. and a bundle/lime of packets/lemons... The evidence is that the money went to Cooper in packets/lemons of 100 bills each. Those packets/lemons were rubber banded into bundles/limes of a random count. This example, 1 rubber banded bundle of 5 banded packets of 100 bills each. Cooper received packets of 100 bills each rubber banded into bundles of random packet counts. Why is this important...... Georger has really become irrelevant in the Cooper case.. his case knowledge is stale and stuck in 2011. His arguments display poor analysis. Cooper newbies confuse his arrogance with competence. I am using Georger as a foil to advance my argument and the Cooper case. The conventional thinking has been that the TBAR money arrived as 3 separate "packets" which constrains how they could have arrived on TBAR.. In fact, that is an assumption, not a fact. The TBAR analysis has been constrained by an assumption which I argue is very unlikely. It is more likely that the money arrived as one single rubber banded bundle of a number of packets of 100 bills each and theories and analysis should be pursued with that in mind. Georger may not realize it but his ego is restricting the Cooper investigation within a false paradigm. That explains why Georger and a few others have not advanced this case in a decade. Assumptions and errors elevated to fact and used to reject evidence is just poor analysis. Eric Ulis.. Robert99.. Georger..

Georger, you are a serial liar, nothing you claim has any credibility... you should go back to your Unabomber theory. Did you explain Carr's error to Tom... of course you didn't. That's the whole point. You have no idea what the issue really is.. Carr was wrong, that is a fact, you can't even admit that fact. Why should anyone take anything you claim seriously. You don't even have an argument,, what is it? Carr was right? Cooper didn't get the money in 100's which were rubber banded into bundles? The TBAR money only could have landed as three separate "groups of bills"? None of those things are true.. Do you dispute my conclusion that the TBAR money most likely landed as one single bundle? Here is your lying in action, your modus operandi.. "distort, fabricate and misdirection (strawman)" First you selectively misstate Tina's 302... the 302 statement "small packages with bank-type bands around each package." You claimed "she said bands",, that is the distortion. then you claim she meant rubber bands. She was contacted and asked.. that is the fabrication. then you selectively edit the 302 passage to fit your argument. that is the misdirection. You pull this crap all the time. It might fool the Cooper newbies but people who have been around a while know what you are, they avoid you to avoid the hassle. I use you as a foil... Bank-type bands are not rubber bands.. of course your next claim will be that the FBI agents just made it up in the 302's and they made up packets too.... the FBI made it all up but Carr didn't get it wrong when he claimed that the 3 TBAR packets were all different bill counts. Of course he was wrong. Why, he conflated packets and bundles. When he learned that the bundles were made random and rubber banded, he assumed that was the packets. He was wrong and you have been wrong for a decade. Georger's comment. Tina's 302..