FLYJACK

The money was about 4ft above the water level at the time of the find in Feb 1980.. Less if it was buried 6 inches.. That makes sense.. Fazio stated the "place is periodically underwater during high river runoff, like last week"

Yes DAVE, your site is a clown show, a toxic environment that YOU enable.. I responded to the BS and attacks against me from your site, I don't instigate, this is what you fail to understand. I am doing my own thing and you clowns copy my stuff from this site and attack me. Your clown show instigates. Then you blame me when I defend myself.. you are a joke. Everybody knows your site is toxic, people don't post there or they hold back because they don't want to be attacked and feel the need to defend themselves all the time. I have never posted pics from your site and I have only responded to smears and disinformation instigated there. Don't use my stuff from here and don't mention me on your site and problem solved. Just pretend I don't even exist. Thanks. I really just want to focus on the Cooper case...

I don't care if people use stuff I post to advance the case.. I take issue with personal attacks, lies, misinformation and disinformation from ignorant people who contribute nothing.

Here is what I found.. (if you don't like it, do your own homework) The money spot was about 4 ft above the river level in Feb 1980. Not 9 ft, not 10 ft. You don't need the 72/74 flood event for the River to reach the spot. According to reports from the site (and images), the money was found at the 1980 high water line. Here in June (seasonal high water flow) 1978 it was right at the water line. (Eric's false facts and theory busted again) There are two distinct active designated disposal sites (1975): The Southern Fazio sand and gravel operation and the property N of Fazio's owned by Egger. The N site is a beach replenishment site and on the map it encroaches slightly onto the Fazio property. The material for the Fazio operation is used for a commercial purpose, it is placed in large piles.. The Northern beach replenishment serves a different purpose. Beach replenishment was done after flood events. The 1973 image looks like beach replenishment after the 1972 flood.. 97.1 is the Fazio sand and gravel operation.. The Northern site is nearly entirely on the Egger property. 1971/1973,, that looks like beach replenishment and it is right at the money spot. The money find spot is very close to the intersection of 3 separate parcels, Fazio's to the S and two adjacent one's owned by Egger.. There is a report that is was actually on the Egger's side though the digging to the S was on the Fazio property. I have tried to pinpoint the exact spot and it looks like it was on the Egger's side but I can't say for sure. It is really close to the boundary. The property line depicting the shoreline (North/South) is estimated according to the source (Clarke County) On the Egger side of boundary. Palmer pointing to spot, on Egger side. Red line boundary. I can't confirm it is on the Egger side but it might be or very close. Point is the beach replenishment on the Egger side would have included the money spot. The spokesperson for the Army Corp of Engineers in Feb 1980 said that dredging was continuous, last one in 1974. Show me all the records for both sites,,

FACT is, I posted the tie dating research on Shutter's site and emailed it to others long before Eric ever mentioned it.. FACT is, I didn't care about any attribution. I posted it for anyone to use. I have no reason to lie... why would I care.. The only dumpster fire is Eric's Sheridan alt flightpath, burial, retrieval narrative, we all know it but others won't say it publicly. The tie was NOT manufactured in 1963, if Eric did the research he would know that.

Get the facts right. I posted my tie dating research to contribute to the general case knowledge for everyone. I never expected credit.. it was to advance the case for all to use. I also emailed it to several people. About 1-1.5 years later Eric posts the same research, he claimed it was ALL his and then called me a liar and troll ever since. Eric is a liar and a complete fraud. Eric cherry picks/contorts info that fits his Sheridan narrative while completely ignoring or discrediting contradictory info. His Sheridan narrative is a joke and everyone knows it. Eric did three things.. He used my research and claimed it was his. He made a false claim about the date, he claimed the tie dated to 1963 to advance his Sheridan narrative. FALSE, it was NOT 1963. If he did the research he would know that. He then called me a liar and troll ever since. Because of this I stopped posting everything I have. IMO, this is one of the most overlooked pieces of evidence.. The tie was manufactured from about Spring 1964 to the end of 1964. So, it likely sold roughly Spring 1964-early 1965. The tie particles accumulated from then to the hijacking. Pinning down a suspects environment from those dates forward is crucial.

T What a clown show... over there. STOP using my stuff. Do your own homework. The shoreline clearly shows deposits after sept 71 and before July 1973 right at the money spot.. This is Sept 74 showing the documented fresh dredge spoils, and in Sept 75 it is almost gone, but you can still see slight bumps on the shoreline.. just like the 73 spoils at the money spot.

The money find location was about 4 ft above the water level in Feb 1980.. These images end Eric's nonsense burial theory.. There is clearly dredge spoils on the beach in '73.. exactly where the money was found.. the shoreline is dramatically different. Right Sept 1971 - Left July 1973

The "continuously" statement is accurate, it didn't come from Fazio... it came from a local resident who walked the beach daily. There are two dredge spoil designations there.. the Fazio's property and the beach area which goes onto the adjacent property.. The money find was in the Northern site, most of it off the Fazio property. Eric said Fazio didn't even remember the correct money spot. Existing disposal sites 1975 97.1 Fazio site 96.6 Adjacent Fazio site 95% off Fazio property

This is July 1973, looks like dredge material right at the money spot... A local said they dredged to replenish TBAR beach "continuously".... prior to 1974.

BTW a 10-11% slope = 5.71-6.28 degrees

I posted a comment here on the soda cans months ago.. Shutter's site is looking at it now, but I did work on this a while back. Palmer found soda cans in the same top layer as the money and suggested that if the soda cans could be dated it may help determine the arrival time of the money on TBAR. Palmer also stated that the debris in the upper layer with the money was fresher and not very damaged. There is NO suggestion the soda cans came from Cooper. It looks like the Sioux City Sarsaparilla was introduced 1973+.. I found one reference for 1973, another source for 1974 and an ad for Aug 73.. so late '73.. "White Rock" did have a sarsaparilla way back but it had a different name. This suggests the money did not arrive on TBAR before 1973. Further, I have analyzed a really good profile shot of TBAR during the dig from 1980.. The slope is 10-11%, the distance from the river waterline (Feb 1980) to the money spot is about 40 ft.. THAT IS ONLY A 4-4.5 ft ELEVATION RISE from the Feb 1980 River level. Reports at the time claimed the money was found at the high water mark and was frequently under water,,, you don't need the 72/74 flood for the River to reach the money spot. Those floods at 21 ft put the money spot 60-70 ft into the River. The seasonal high water flow for the Columbia is Spring.. matches spring diatoms. Kaye = exposed to River in Spring. Palmer = arrived within about a year. All of this suggests the money arrived within a year or so of the 1980 find,, spring 1979 or possibly spring 1978.. Eric's TBAR burial theory is complete nonsense, it doesn't fit the facts and is speculation well beyond reason. Eric, as usual is claiming supporting facts that just are not so. AND there is NO evidence to support the claim AS FACT that the money could have ONLY arrived as three separate packets. Most likely, they were part of a single rubber banded bundle, that is how it was given to Cooper. It is reasonable that as the rubber bands holding the bundle deteriorated the three packets then separated slightly and were found together. The three packets of 100 bills were in the same order as given to Cooper.

In 1976 can was steel.. https://www.canmuseum.com/Detail.aspx?CanID=23706

"What is Sioux City Sarsaparilla? Sioux City Sarsaparilla is the signature drink from White Rock's Sioux City line. In 1973, White Rock president Albert Morgan wanted to start a western inspired line of classic American soft drinks, with a frontier feel. He chose Sioux City as his inspiration! Sioux City Sarsaparilla is known as "the Grandaddy of all root beers" and has a creamy taste somewhere between root beer and cream soda. And it's the most bought sarsaparilla in the US!" https://www.siouxlandfamilies.com/2020/08/the-story-of-sioux-city-sarsaparilla.html This seems to indicate it was started in 1973,,, if so, since it was found in the same layer with the TBAR money then that suggests the money arrived after 1973... I found an ad for it dated Aug 1973..

At the TBAR money spot the estimated slope from money spot to the water.. in 1980. slope in degrees,, 5.7 - 6.5 slope % 10 - 11.4 Don't ask.. but the claim that the money spot was only reached in the 72/74 flood is false.

Eric Ulis keeps repeating the same lie,, over and over.. From this lie, he builds a false conclusion. EU - "Palmer was just plain wrong about this. How do I know? Well, let’s look at some other verifiable facts for compatibility.1) The money was found in February 1980. What high-water river events occurred between February 1978 and February 1980 that could have delivered, and buried, the money at the money find spot and replenished the area with several inches of new sand? ANSWER: There weren’t any." It was reported at the time that the money was found at the 1980 high water line.. frequently under water. The claim that the money spot was only reached by the River in the 1972 and 1974 flood events is false. This is why I pointed out that Eric got the GPS co-ords wrong, about 25 feet too far from the River. Eric does this often, he establishes a false premise then applies it as fact to support a false conclusion... rookie logic.

Clarification... Time to bust this myth. I keep hearing an inaccuracy. The context for "sequential" is misused. Physical sequence vs alphanumeric sequence. The FBI money list was not physically sequential as the bills were given to Cooper. They were given to Cooper in a random numbered sequence. However, the published FBI list was the microfilm list reformatted to be alphanumeric. So, checking a bill to the list would have been easy. The argument that the FBI Cooper bill list would have been too complex to check is false. In fact, I'd really like to find an original list of the bills in the order they were given to Cooper.

New FBI file #50.. It is almost entirely suspect tips, news clippings and letters.. otherwise, nothing new on the case. https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper /d.b.-cooper-part-50-of-50/view

The Money spot was at the N end of the Fazio property which is within a different site from the Fazio operation (97.1) This is a 1975 map of "existing disposal sites",, the red dot is the money spot which is the S tip of the N site.. It looks like the primary Fazio sand and gravel operation has nothing to do with the money spot. There is an adjacent site.

and Himmelsbach confirms the Corps of Engineers was on site... Now, Palmer and the Corps of Engineers, Himmelsbach and the media need to be discredited.. good luck.

article in FBI files.. The pop cans and most of the money were found six to eight inches below the surface, but fragments of the money reportedly were as far down as three feet. Palmer could not explain how the money might have been buried that deep. He said there was "no conclusive evidence" that money was in fact found three feet down, and surmised that it may have been deposited there in digging actions. It indicates Palmer did not believe the money fragments were three feet deep.

The Palmer Report and the article confirm and support each other.. both indicate the Corps was involved in determining the location of the dredge layer. The article only indicates they were on site with Palmer. Claiming the article is wrong with zero evidence... nice try. You can do that with anything, just deny it if you don't like it. That is how Eric rolls. Things don't have to be peer reviewed to be true.

The Palmer report was released in a recent FBI file... Georger is correct, it doesn't confirm the Corps IDing the dredge spoils on site.. it confirms their participation. But that is a red herring... The Corps of Engineers are extremely thorough and have very detailed records.. it is a big lift to undermine their claims. Eric will try, Georger will settle down with a chamomile tea and a blanket in his rocking chair and will eventually realize this is a game changer. I just report what I find.. don't shoot the messenger.

The max tidal swing on the Columbia is about 4.5 ft... But, the tidal numbers are not the absolute water level. It is only the tidal fluctuation, It does not account for other factors like flow.. The data shutter is using is based on gravitational maths for a general location. It has nothing to do with the Columbia R. It is an algorithm probably meant for the Ocean tides.

Georger is attacking me again with his typical strawman nonsense,,, and misinformation because he didn't check the source. No wonder some of these guys have got nowhere in a decade. NEVER EVER trust anything Georger claims without checking thoroughly. The FACTS.. QUOTE: "The agents were joined Wednesday by Leonard Palmer, Portland State University geology professor, and Corps of Engineers specialists in analyzing the area. The Corps of Engineers identified a layer of sand as having been deposited when the 40-foot ship channel was dredged in August 1974." and on cue Georger doubles down on stupid.. admit when you are wrong.. you can pop open the article and read it clearly unless you are still on that Commodore 64. The only thing funny is Georger getting caught again in his own ignorance... HILARIOUS.. We can start a gofundme to get you a modern computer so you can actually read my post and you don't have to make up stuff. I guess this flips the dredge spoils argument around... I was neutral on it but the Corps makes it very likely that the money was on top of the dredge spoils..