FLYJACK

Years ago, I suggested that the wind direction was possibly wrong but no proof. The FBI discussed this possibility in 1973 and established and planned new small area for a ground search, that area was never searched. The new error I discovered confirms 100% that the wind direction used in the LZ analysis was wrong. This is my revised LZ.. The most likely LZ is the top red triangle. Then the probability diminishes as you move south in the quadrants.

I can't reveal it publicly yet,, it may come up at CooperCon. I've been processing it and working on a revised LZ map based on Soderlind's analysis and correcting the error.. It was a simple mistake (not by the FBI or Soderlind) that nobody caught and it puts the LZ outside the ground search area. All analysis of the LZ has to be tossed and redone. and it is not the FP..

FBI part 84 https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper /d.b.-cooper-part-84/view They ID a VHS tape of the drop test. SE 875

This is the toxic side of this forum and one of the reasons I decided to stop posting new research,,,, Insect contributes nothing but tries to discredit those that do.. For everybody else, the case has shifted, after 50 years primary case information has been discovered to be an error.. The ground search was in the wrong area, if Cooper pulled his LZ was 95% outside that area. If he was a no pull he was under the flight path and likely discovered.. Don't be an Insect, incorporate this info into your case knowledge, I am sure it will be explained in due time. This is not suspect specific and I am still working through the ramifications..

No, I discovered that the ground search area was based on a gross error, Soderlind and the FBI weren't responsible for the error but never caught it. Basically, Cooper's LZ is about 95% outside the ground search area. They did canvass door to door in a wider area but the comprehensive ground search area was based on an error. This is a game changer,, It isn't speculation or conjecture, I have the receipts.

Well, I found a massive error in the investigation.. Over 50 years and nobody caught it. It means that the ground search was in the wrong area.

That is not true.. it does jeopardize further advancements.. You have no idea what I have gone through to get that file produced. There was a prior FOIA that was rejected. I also had an opportunity to bring big money into the case and you screwed that.. Now would it be OK for me to post your private messages to me here. There is some really interesting stuff in there..

True, you did a FOIA for the document that I got done and had to wait two years for,, you got in weeks because of me not years. You benefitted from my work. I can take criticism, if it is valid. I already explained this to you in private, it is not something for the public. You know I am working on something big and you are jeopardizing it.. you are also undermining advancement of the case because you are nasty and selfish.. Now would it be OK for me to post your private messages to me here. There is some really interesting stuff in there..

I have some fascinating PM's from no doxxxing aka olemisscub,,, no doxxxing fed me unsolicited info about Ulis, talked about NickyB and trashed the Facebook group.. might be some other things in there.. I never reached out to him he kept sending me stuff. Maybe I'll post those.. Nobody should ever trust this guy.. He talks trash behind your back,,

There is nothing exculpatory in there, some differences and some the same. I have explained much of this before as the environment was completely different, the actions of crew and the FBI was not the same. You think it is going to be identical.. For the record, that was my FOIA got, I had to wait 2 years for it.. I was withholding it from the public though I shared summaries with some people,, has decided to undermine my case out of spite,, in fact he may have just ended us finding the solution. I kept it quiet to be able to advance case knowledge. That is how messed up this guy is. He knows I am working on a project and decided to try to screw me. is a fraud,, he has nothing in this case, wasted a year on a non-suspect Vordahl so he tries to ruin my project. Fortunately, I do have far more info.. trashes me for not sharing my info then pulls this stunt proving why YOU DON'T SHARE INFO WITH FRAUDS..

You aren't as bright as I thought you were.. The FBI included 5'8" as the lower bound for vetting suspects but you seem to think you are smarter than the FBI... The teeth are not exculpatory either,, I don't have the facts to explain the discrepancy but I can come up many possible reasons for it.

It isn't a crutch, that is your imagination, not fact,, you are writing a book, others are as well. I can't give out my suspect specific or case specific info publicly when I am working on my own project.. DON'T BE STUPID, In what world does that make sense. What is accomplished, I prove to you something I already know... when you lie about me and try to discredit me with a claim that you have no ability to know. THAT IS HOW YOU ROLL.. I am not attacking Vordahl, I am proving YOUR claims about the tie linking Vordahl to Cooper are false. You have no defence, there is no response to that fact. I never expected one because there isn't one.. I haven't made provably false claims.. You really think I don't know Hahneman's height(s) or the Cooper witness estimates. 5'9"-5'10" in shoes isn't exculpatory.. You clearly think it is and that is good, many people do and they are all wrong. I am not going to waste time with an irrational position.

Correct, you weren't as deep into the particles as Ulis.. You are smarter than Ulis but made similar errors.. I questioned the tie particle connection from the start. but you did a presentation at CC, you did many podcasts on Vordahl, you have a web page on Vordahl.. you defended him and attack me for taking rational positions.... A guy who has ZERO chance of being Cooper.. There are very good reasons I don't have a Hahneman page.. I am not against investigating theories even if they don't pan out, I have done that myself.. part of the process. But, you still won't quite admit the facts.. I am not being hostile, I am being rational. Can we assume you have now dropped him? It sounds like you have but won't admit it. If not that is fine.. My issue is people repeatedly elevating terrible suspects prematurely and polluting the environment with nonsense... it hurts the case and the credibility of the community. The Cooper case has become a joke to outsiders, a new suspect every week.... I have taken an intelligent approach to this case to get to a potential resolution, you are undermining it. and I don't play basketball... You are the one who is in a hole and you don't know what I have.. you make it up to discredit me, is that how you roll.

Yes, the time frame is big issue.. there is no evidence the RemCru TiSb alloy was produced after 1953.. but since the tie particles don't even match the patent there is no evidence to claim the source was even RemCru/Crucible. That means there is no link between Cooper's tie and Vince Petersen or Milton Vordahl.. No link, no suspect.. The 1953 filed patent has the alloys listed and the 1965 patent is a process patent that doesn't show alloy production but only refers tangentially to a wide Sb range.. Ulis grossly exaggerated the patent significance claiming it was "commercial DNA" and those tie particles could have only come from that patent and RemCru... this is completely false.. we know Ulis does this, he has done this for years. There are only three TiSb (17%) particles on the entire tie that don't even match each other.. The other problem is the seen vs the unseen, we can see patent's, we can't see all the other potential sources of those particles so the bias is toward what we can see.. to argue it must be the patent/RemCru because we can't identify another source is a logical error. The patent with 17% Sb alloy is a coincidence, the rest of the particle elements do not match that 1953 alloy. Vince Peterson is a terrible Cooper suspect.. everybody knows it,, he doesn't even tick the basic boxes. Vordahl ticks more boxes but also has ZERO chance of being Cooper. He doesn't fit the Cooper profile and there is no link from the tie to RemCru to Vordahl and at 58 Vordahl was athletic, a competitive tennis player and into organic foods... no way he is a smoker at 58. Without the tie particle connection there is no evidence to support Vordahl being Cooper. He is just another random guy. Ulis is great salesman but a terrible sleuth.. his recurring exaggerations of evidence undermine the credibility of the case and participants.. he has led people over the cliff again. People keep falling for it and still praise Ulis... crazy. It only takes a few minutes to figure out the patent does not actually match the tie particles. Facts never stop an Ulis narrative, he will deny, obfuscate and keep going... and I hope he does. Nicky will stick to Vordahl to the bitter end... is already hedging and will look for a complete exit opportunity at some point. He was brought forward prematurely before a full investigation was completed.

I am not the ignorant one. You guys have pumped a false narrative. Never trust Ulis. The early 1953 patent breaks down the compositions, the table for TiSb has various %'s of SB including 17.. remainder Ti... there is zero mention of the 6-8% Ni in the tie particles.. or the other different trace elements. That patent isn't even close. 6-8% Ni is a significant amount and would be mentioned. In other alloys listed they mention Sb as low as 1% and it notes other trace elements with far less. To not mention 6-8% of Ni confirms that alloy is not the same as the tie particles and you know it is very difficult to prove a negative but we can here. Then you shift the argument and throw spaghetti at the wall admitting I am right.. all that matters is they were alloying TiSb in the 60's.. it is really difficult and nobody else we know of did.. etc.... the patent was filed 1953, 12-20 years before the tie existed. Then you walk it all back,, who the hell knows if it came from RemCru.. sure maybe it did, maybe it didn't, nobody knows, you say.. You start out insulting me then end up essentially saying that it doesn't matter anyway.. well it does. Well, we don't know where those particles came from but we know it is unrelated to those patents and that is the premise for linking Petersen and Vordahl to Cooper.. without that you have nothing, just a random guy that ticks a few boxes. Your argument has been to rule in a metallurgy environment specifically RemCru,, all I can say and have said is that patent is unrelated to those particles based on the facts. Could they have come from a metallurgy environment, maybe, we don't know and will probably never know.

Not that I know of.. but it doesn't matter the tie particles don't match the patents. the 1953 patent TiSb alloy doesn't include the 6-8% Ni on the particles...

Both Vince Petersen and Milton Vordahl advocates use the TiSb patent and Crucible/RemCru connection as the foundation for the argument they were Cooper.. Neither patent proves or matches the few TiSb particles found on the tie.. it does not include 6-8% Ni.. it only has a similar Sb%... a random coincidence. It actually proves that there is no match and these tie particles have ZERO connection to the patent and ZERO connection to RemCru therefore these suspects have ZERO connection to Cooper. NONE Completely busted... Ulis and the Vordahl guys have falsely accused people and undermined the credibility of the Cooper case.... a complete waste of time. and I warned people about following Ulis, he has a track record of elevating assumptions and conjecture to fact... triple check anything he claims.. and his claims about the patent are 100% false..

Larry Finegold 1980... "It's difficult now to separate fact from fantasy," "I'm no longer sure what I saw - and I was trained by the FBI. I think I got a good, solid look at Cooper's face. Now I don't know."

Story about an author with Cooper FOIA's in 1980.. That has to be either Gunther or HA HA HA.. If it was Gunther that would be how he got much of the case info for the book..

This data from the patent filed in 1953 about 12 years before the tie existed does not match the TiSb tie particles.. The particles had 6 - 8% Ni... these do not. In fact, I went through all of the data and there is no match anywhere,, that patent has nothing to do with the TiSb particles on the tie. Instead of including it excludes the tie particles. It is just a random coincidence that the Sb is around 17%. This has been a red herring, the tie particles have no relationship to this 1953 filed patent or the later patent which has no related data.

IMO, Cameron was embellishing the entire thing for PR.. Even his walk back was embellished..

The argument is that Ti was rare,, I don't think it was as rare as people think.. The tie was sold circa1964-65... it had 7 years to accumulate those particles from many environments.. There are so many particles it is impossible to sort them out. Some could be from a shop, from the plane, after the plane, from finger print powder, from dentistry, from explosives exposure, from electronics, military etc... All I know is the patent being the only source for the TISb is bogus.. it is like finding fried chicken on the tie and claiming it was worn by Colonel Sanders.. I have also looked at a broken sodium lamp,,, or fireworks.. It is impossible to sort out, too many possibilities and environments. Then, we don't know if Cooper was the person wearing it when the particles were deposited...

.. CoolLavishAlabamamapturtle-mobile.mp4

yes, I found something on that when I was looking into Ti and Antimony.. I have to look for it again. The engine blades are Ti...

That is a mic drop... Good one Georger, I always suspected contamination from the engine contributed to some of the particles...