FLYJACK

TBH. DZ isn't really a place for newbies.. not that they aren't welcome. The people here have a very high case knowledge level and since the learning curve is massive there isn't anything new a newbie can bring to the case. We have thought it or heard it all before. It is hard for a newbie to get into or grasp the discussions. IMO, I have said it before but the problem is people even Cooper veterans use speculation to reject suspects or theories. This case is still in the investigative phase and you can't do that. You use facts and evidence to reject or eliminate. If you use conjecture you may be blocking a legitimate line of enquiry.. My problem with Ryan and others that have done this is that they misrepresent the facts or elevate an opinion to fact then use that to reject a line of inquiry.. A strawman. It is irrational and counterproductive. This case is unique in that it wasn't solved, something or some error caused it to remain unsolved, using assumptions, opinions or conjecture to reject what may be true does not advance this case it stifles it. Your bias should be open until the facts/evidence prove otherwise. The other fallacy is that we all are processing the same information, we aren't and that causes conflict.

Your opinion of Hahneman is irrelevant. Your judgement is terrible. You don't have all the images or evidence I have. His look changes, his hair style and weight, for the collection pics I have he looks like three completely different people. Believe it or not his sketch was shown to witnesses and some said it was not him.. So far, there is nothing that eliminates him. I have even discovered a big error that the FBI made. As for skip, he has a scar in that video and two noticeable bumps on his face close to his mouth, I posted this earlier. His forehead and eye wrinkles are obvious and severe and no witness ever mentioned that. He is not Cooper based on the obvious evidence. You keep defending him to defend Limbach, it is clear he can't be Cooper with those extreme facial features alone plus zero connection to the case. Skip is a joke. As for your matrix,, Skip who is clearly not Cooper is #1, don't you think that proves your matrix is flawed.. perhaps having severe forehead and eye lines should be a big negative.. it makes your matrix worthless to have somebody #1 who clearly is not Cooper.. just sayin. Maybe, you should do a vid explaining your matrix.. to make it clear to people, maybe you can improve it. I did a matrix with close to 200 points.. and it does get tricky because you don't have all the info you need for each suspect.. For example what does he drink? If that is known for one but not known for another it becomes a bias. You don't know Cooper's height.. You keep using your own opinion to eliminate people under 5' 10". Hahneman was between 5' 9" and 5' 10" in shoes.. The FBI used 5' 8" as the lower bound for Cooper suspects even going lower for strong suspects. You once again claim to know more than the FBI. Many witnesses pegged Hahneman at 5' 10", 5' 11" and and many at 6 feet.. the initial Cooper description was from 5' 9", it was updated to 5' 10" due to reflect Tina. There is no evidence other than in your own mind that Cooper could not be between 5' 9" and 5' 10".. and must be over 5' 10". This is a provably absurd position you have. And using your opinion to eliminate is a rookie move. Use facts. It isn't just you many do this.. You have posted lies and misrepresentations of the evidence regarding Hahneman so the bias is with you. You clearly have a bias against Hahneman, you make him shorter than he was, you ridicule his glasses, you lied repeatedly about the FBI file evidence. You distort reality to fit your own bias and support an irrational opinion. The fact is I have been researching Hahneman for a long time and it goes very very slow.. it is not finished. I have not found anything that eliminates him, but also can't put him on the plane though I am trying to obtain the evidence that could put a suspect on the plane (any suspect). So, I am not finished. If solid evidence pops up that eliminates him then so be it but I am not going to use speculation to eliminate a legit suspect. That is the mistake you and most people have made. Do you ever wonder why I stopped talking about my Hahneman research years ago... Think about it.

It is an undisclosed image of Cooper. I have made that clear. YES, it is big and would go right in your book. Why you have this persistent need to misrepresent facts in abundantly clear.

That is a good point, Ryan belittles the DZ but Cunningham's fake map times, the Barb/Clara nonsense, Hall, Vordahl, sketch A, Orchards, Cunningham's silly sunglasses would never get traction if presented and vetted here.. They get oxygen on FB where a small group drives the narrative. The entire RemCru metallurgy Ti patent thing was bogus... many here rightly dismissed it. FB is a social group, it has its place but it is a net negative for the advancement of the case. A petri dish of bad ideas, bad logic, bad suspects and bad analysis. Many who know too little influenced by a few who think they know it all. What could go wrong.

Not sure, but I assume when I finish my research which about 95% done but as everybody knows that can move really slow in this case. Some things have taken years to resolve. I have shared it with some privately,, not Ryan, it would go right into his book.

Yes, it is better... far better. If it was made public the Vortex would explode. The 8:11 time stands as the default even without my new data, that is independent corroboration. There is no evidence supporting a later jump other than speculation. So, you have the burden of proof backwards. You still use Cunningham's bogus FP times as evidence.... you just aren't serious and always flip the burden of proof. I never said you don't want a challenge, you like to argue, especially when you are wrong, you just don't get a material challenge elsewhere. I am working with others on a Cooper project, why would I share it all publicly? It would 100% end up in your book or other books or films... no thanks. Do your own homework. You have lied and misrepresented evidence, used Hahneman to try to discredit me and I just don't respect you. If I did I might share more info, but I don't. I don't respect your tactics, your judgement and your ability to process evidence. You have so many important things wrong that I just don't take you seriously. You claimed the FBI now believes Orchards,, you know Larry's opinion is not speaking for the FBI,, that was intentionally misleading. Nobody challenged you on that but me. You aren't the victim Ryan. Skip has two prominent facial bumps, a scar, a crooked eyebrow, severe forehead lines and eye wrinkles,, 100% NOT COOPER, you never question it and even claim he is #1 on your matrix. IMO, Skip is the new Duane Webber. A complete waste of time. Cunningham changed the FP times,, completely bogus, you never question it and even use and disseminate it. Is it in your book? careful... IMO, your desire to win arguments is greater than your pursuit for the truth. In the adversarial court environment the most skilled advocate wins, neither side is pursuing the truth. That is the wrong mindset to advance this case. On that note, I am not interested in discussing this distraction any longer.. I am trying to solve this thing. If you don't like what I say then ignore me. I only have one request, have any opinion you want but don't lie and don't misrepresent the evidence.

It is Ryan misrepresenting the facts as usual... I have an unknown image of "Cooper",,, not a photograph taken of Cooper. Ryan mistakingly thinks he has a right to have all my research...

No, I don't trust you.

Good for you.. run with that.

Larry does not speak for the FBI and has had many things wrong.. his current opinion is not the FBI's. Your claim was not accurate and misleading to the jury.. nice try though. You said "the FBI now believes" to give the illusion of credibility to your Orchards opinion, very deceptive. I don't expect people to just believe my 8:11 claim.. no problem there. Facts don't seem to matter anymore in the Vortex.... I have very good reasons for not sharing it. In fact, I have a lot of stuff I don't share publicly. I have discovered many Cooper things over the years and shared them so I have earned the right to keep some things for another project. Calling that lame is well, itself lame and makes me want to share even less.. that is why I stopped posting. Your claim of Orchards or the FBI conflating or a time delay is pure speculation. Speculation is fine, but you and your crew sell it as fact and reject 8:11 with no or false evidence. IMO, your argument for a later jump has no merit. Even without my new data the 8:11 time is the most likely jump. I always claimed 8:11-12 time but was open to the possibility of up to 8:15.. my new data confirms 8:11 and removes the possibility of a delay. It was 8:11, a few seconds before or after.. but really close. You people are smart enough to figure it out on your own, eventually. The default position with the known evidence should be about 8:11 unless there is significant evidence to the contrary and there isn't any. My new data is just a bonus.. The burden is yours to disprove 8:11.. it is not mine to prove it even though I have.

I do have new data but won't share it now,, it is for my own project. I have lots of stuff I am keeping for that.. all that stuff will eventually come out. But it isn't really needed, it independently confirms Soderlind's 8:11 time. The bump was an extreme oscillation, not using that term then is irrelevant, it occurred at the end of the rapid increase seen on the gauge. Even Anderson said it was the biggest bump... wait what.. there was more that one.. Clearly, the crew's usage of the term is imprecise. The claim that the FBI conflated the bump and oscillation is speculation and imbeds a false premise that they were completely different events separated by significant time. A self licking ice cream cone, if you will. Soderlind had all the info, times and access to pilots, he came up with 8:11. To claim he was wrong you do need something more than speculation. The diversion around PDX has no relevance to the jump time.. Rat said the call to Soderlind was in the suburbs of Portland.. minutes after the jump. So, there is no positive evidence for Orchards even without my new data. I don't think you are misleading people intentionally on this, I just think you have misunderstood the evidence and presented an opinion as fact.. you kept claiming we now know he jumped at Orchards and the FBI now believes that.. Cooper jumped at 8:11, almost exactly.

Ryan, That is not what I am referring to... re: new data... For years, I did agree with many that there could be a time delay between oscillations and bump but new data confirmed 8:11. I am 95% certain Cooper jumped at 8:11.. I am not claiming 100% because I was not on the plane watching him jump. and DO NOT use Cunningham's altered map times.. they are bogus. The myth that Anderson claimed a delay has been used to justify the FBI conflating the bump and oscillation. The way I read the evidence, there were oscillations ongoing, they increased rapidly about 8:10 which drew the attention of the crew to the gauge. That culminated in an abrupt bump felt by the crew. The bump was an extreme oscillation. So, there is no legitimate argument for a later jump. The new data indicates that Cooper did not jump after 8:11 and that confirms Soderlind's initial analysis for an 8:11 time.

This is the key,,, how long was the money there. I haven't been able to solve that or find any convincing evidence either way and have different TBAR theories based on the deposit time. I am not committed to an early burial. But, if the money was deposited early the dredge layer being 1970 instead of 1974 makes more sense.. However, the money could have been deposited within a few years.... if the rounded off edges were caused in situ then the money was there longer, but if the rounded off edges were from tumbling along the River bottom then it arrived closer within a few years. I have found images of buried money and none has ever looked rounded off like the TBAR packets. Another wrinkle is the fisherman said the beach was replenished often, that was different from the channel dredging but we have no records..

The bump/oscillation jump is the most messed up issue in the Vortex. Cooper jumped at 8:11 almost exactly. I have new data. FALSE.. Anderson did not say they discussed it for minutes then the bump occurred. I monitored the gauges and reported to Captain Scott. We all agreed that the gauges were detecting a disruption of airflow, most likely caused by Cooper testing out the aft stairs. But we all felt one physically distinguishable "bump" with our ears which came abruptly after we had been monitoring the gauges. We all felt it almost in unison, surprised, "there he goes!" It was the largest bump by far, an abrupt pressure change. We all thought he had exited the aircraft at that point, because the gauges never detected any further major airflow disruptions after that ‘thud’. The re-test duplicated the oscillations and the pressure bump exactly. It was very dark, with virtually no ground reference except when we got in the Portland area. We bounced around the clouds, with occasional breaks. The 727’s slipstream initially overcame the aft stairs hydraulic system. The stairs weren’t opening like Cooper needed. Cooper called me on the interphone while Tina was riding up front with us. Cooper had let Tina come to the front. He yelled, "slow it down!." I stated back to Cooper, "OK." And we did; we slowed the plane. The oscillations continued, as I remember, but were smoother and we hadn’t heard anything from Cooper. Bill called back to him and he finally answered. He said everything was “OK”. More time passed. And then suddenly came that “bump”. After the final "bump" which we felt with our ears, we all discussed it for awhile, waiting for another bump. It never repeated, so we assumed that was his exit. But we discussed this among ourselves before notifying NWA. The truth is, we just didn't know for sure. I just don't recall how much time lapsed between feeling the final "bump" and reporting it to NWA via radio. That’s where the uncertainty has come from. But later we all thought that final bump was his exit.

Willow Bar was dredged at TBAR 1965, 1970 and 1974.. It does make a lot of sense if that the layer identified by Palmer was actually the 1970 dredge layer, not 1974. It was 2 feet below the money in 1980. Scenario 1.. The money arrives on TBAR above the 1970 dredge layer and before (under) the 1974 dredge layer.. from 1974 to 1980 TBAR erodes down through the 1974 dredge layer to the money. Still 2 feet above the 1970 dredge layer. Scenario 2.. The money arrived after and above the 1974 dredge layer, from 1974 to 1980 TBAR erodes to expose the money two feet above the 1974 dredge layer,,, this doesn't make sense. IMO, that dredge layer under the money was the 1970 layer. The money arrived before the 1974 layer was put on top and eroded to 1980 exposing the money still two feet above the 1970 dredge layer. No way you get 6 years of erosion to expose money still 2 feet above the 1974 dredge layer.

Cooper wasn't a Yakima Indian. Yes, white/caucasians do lose their dark olive complexion if not exposed to strong sun,,, are there exceptions, sure. But we get nowhere elevating the exceptions. Research dark olive complexion, it comes from the sun, it is a tan.. The witnesses are actually seeing Cooper's tan, it is just dark olive and not the reddish bronze for most people. I guess it depends on what you call dark olive. If people said Cooper was white/caucasian with a (regular) tan we would have no disagreement. No tan in the PNW in November. It is a tan, my impression is that it was noticeably dark for a white/caucasian. The sketch is not dark olive,, that may be because if it was not permanent the sketch would be misleading.. and it is hard to get it accurate. I believe a white/caucasian with a dark olive complexion is far more likely from a tan than being permanent.

Yeah, not necessarily. Those are more "native" names or 1st generation. Cooper was described as White/Caucasian with dark olive complexion. That could be latin American or Mediterranean decent.. or a mixed race.

Don't understand your argument. Not all Latin appearing people have Latin names.. many don't. Maybe you are thinking "latin appearance" means something more specific.

Sure, we can infer it... it isn't 100% but it is a strong likelihood. Cooper was described as dark/olive/swarthy and Latin appearance.. that is caused by the sun, they get dark quickly when exposed to strong sun, that is their genetic trait. The witnesses noticed it so it had to be obvious (other than Mitchell). Cooper was a Caucasian with a dark olive complexion. That is a reaction to the sun. It is a suntan. They do go lighter when not exposed and darker in the strong sun.. people are not exposed to strong sun in November in the PNW. I have pics of Hahneman and he is dark others looks light,, Skip has pics where he looks light. Dark olive complexion is a suntan. Two of my friends growing up, one is Italian and one Greek,, their parents moved here. So, legitimately Mediterranean. Both got noticeably dark olive in the summer sun, very fast.

Huh...

Yes, you can. I live in the PNW,, in November it is mostly cloudy and rainy and on the odd sunny day the sun is very weak. Temps are very rarely freezing. People do not tan at that time unless they are up in the freezing snowy mountains. You can argue Cooper was climbing on the top of Mount Baker in November and got a snowburn but that is another example of using an extreme outlier.. it is possible but extremely unlikely. So, unless Cooper was skiing or ice climbing recently in the PNW, he was not from the PNW. With a very high probability Cooper was not in the PNW for very long before the hijacking. He obtained his recent dark/olive complexion elsewhere. This is how you have to evaluate the evidence when you don't have 100% facts.. If you emphasize a rare possibility, you get nowhere and go in circles. You can always find an exception to anything. Beyesian analysis and probabilities is the only way to move forward.. Portland average high November 53F average low 40F average snowfall 0

It suggests that Cooper was recently in a strong sunny climate in November... that is not the PNW. I assume he chose that flight, just that he was not local or at least not recently. Point is, his dark/olive "tan" would not have been caused by the PNW climate November 24. It was likely obtained elsewhere.

In the FBI files there were suggestions to target "Latin" groups but no follow ups in the files so far... The FBI did use Latin/Olive when screening suspects. Doing some research on dark olive complexion, they turn dark olive quickly when exposed to sun, a tanning process. The PNW in November is NOT a sunny environment which indicates that Cooper being dark/olive was likely NOT from the PNW.

I call it the "elephant in the room" because many people even high profile Cooper researchers try to dismiss, diminish or even ignore it. This blindspot has gone on for years. Clearly, he is a Caucasian with a Latin/Olive/Swarthy appearance.. one of the best clues we have.

Elephant in the room,,,