FLYJACK
-
Content
5,472 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
32 -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by FLYJACK
-
Part 42 p 290-294
-
People are asked later to estimate a subject's height, they are using recall and estimating based on an impression stored in memory. The bias is to be conservative and trend toward the mean... For Cooper, he was seated almost the entire time,, people get an impression based on other factors like weight, body shape, race etc....
-
I think I have the first code... Have been working on the second code 7698QA2753... The first code type matches the letter, the second one was typed on a different typewriter. Two typewriters?? The letter was typed out then copied and the codes were added, presumably 4 letters with distinct codes, we only have the two codes, the other two are unknown or not sent to the FBI. The code resembles a MGRS coordinate.. found one that matches a location in Laos.. ( Los Angeles) might just be a coincidence.,, any ideas for that second code..
-
Witness recall study... "under estimate the height of taller subjects and overestimate the height of shorter targets." "a regression to the mean" or witnesses recall tends toward average.. This didn't touch on a stressful situation...
-
This has been touched on before.. it is very interesting but frustrating because the redactions mean we can't follow up on it... It may be a hoax or unrelated,,, Washougal was the base for many logging companies.. "operating out of the Washougal, Washington area." but it isn't clear where the money was actually found. Quantity of old $20's.. It was just prior to the TBAR discovery.. The date of this report is the end of April.. (Spring/Summer diatoms timing) Follow up,, negative..
-
The FBI had a reputation for not recording interviews so they could let's say engineer 302's to fit their purpose,, several court cases later many States require the FBI to record interviews.. Lack of recording interviews was a feature not a bug..
-
True, probably had general aviation knowledge or from a C-130.. But, this is the Vortex nothing is easy,,,,
-
That was posted before,, I think Gregory got a look at the eye/brow shape or characteristics but not eye colour,,
-
January 1970... intelligence document
-
The DNA is the only way to get a 100% solution and Eric is risking that by not doing this properly.
-
Not exactly... 3 particles of over 100,000 is a small sample.. I found that Ti and Sb are particulates in jet engine exhaust and Diesel engine exhaust.. Ti and Sb was used in electronics... Trying to find a matching commercial alloy from the 60's is a red herring. It is not possible to pin down the source. You also have military and trade secret stuff.. The patent is a classic error in logic, the seen vs the unseen..
-
Doesn't look like a film artifact.. probably a smudge... time had passed, it might not even be the same towel.
-
Ryan, you are smarter than that.. There is no evidence in that patent that TiSb was actually produced in the 18% or any % for that patent. Patents are written that way to capture possibilities,, You guys have misrepresented the information in the patent.
-
The towel for Cooper's seat was extremely dirty/soiled/stained.. vs the next one. I can't imagine anything the FBI doing anything.. is there any test that would produce that. Was it dye from Cooper's hair??... ala Mitchell
-
It is not personal, that patent has been one of the biggest red herrings in the Vortex... surpassing all the previous ones Eric has conjured up...
-
This TiSb patent is a disaster... there is ZERO evidence TiSb was ever produced in any percentage. This Antimony statement is not integral to the patent, it is a general statement to cover possibilities.. besides 18% as an upper bound it also states normally 2-3%... I have read the entire document and there is NO EVIDENCE a TiSb alloy was ever produced in any % related to this patent..
-
You keep defaulting to the percentage,,, The composition DOES NOT MATCH.
-
It seems you don't understand the patent process and requirements.. process was never mentioned until I brought it up. The patent is not for any new alloy. The full particle composition (if they are an alloy) not just the percentages, DOES NOT actually match the patent.. only a partial composition match to a reference to vague percentages of Ti and Sb. Patents require precision. You are claiming that the particles are close so by inference it must be related.. that isn't true, it needs to be exact to make that claim. I am just stating, based on the facts that the patent is not evidence of anything... it still may be possible that the particles came from a metallurgy environment but that patent is not evidence.. the fact that the particles do not fully match it indicates that the patent is NOT related.
-
You are correct,, it was Ulis that claimed the only source of those particles was that patent. But, you guys have also overplayed the patent somewhat.. more-so NickyB,, patents are NOT a comprehensive proxy for the existence of that alloy, (if it is an alloy), they don't actually match the patent, the patent doesn't even claim a new alloy. It is purely a process patent. IMO, those particles can be eliminated from that patent because they do not match and there was so little. Yet, we are told the reverse, mostly by Ulis.. The particles could be from a metallurgy environment but that patent is not evidence of that in any way. They might not be from a metallurgical environment at all. That alloy could be a "Trade Secret" or military... It could be trace material picked up on the plane or even later.. Whether Cooper was the one wearing the tie during exposure to those particles is a separate issue. My point is that based on the facts, that patent has been overplayed as evidence.
-
I was very skeptical about the RemCru patent actually matching the TiSb particles... After doing some research, it doesn't.. To patent a new alloy it requires very specific elements and percentages,, the RemCru patent uses vague percentages and doesn't actually match all the elements in the particle,, and that is if it is actually an alloy. Most of these alloy patents are for the process... and a patent isn't always used for a new alloy, an inventor can use a trade secret... The Titanium Antimony (alloy) part of the patent isn't patentable.. The patent is for a new process and it is written right there. The claim that this is the only source for those tie particles is completely false and further the patent does not match those particles and it is not for for a new alloy, it is for a process. It does NOT say anywhere that the patent is for a new alloy. The TiSb particle/patent is another Cooper Vortex red herring.
-
Can you name those that think otherwise.. I agree patents can give you a lead, I check them myself but the universal lack of comprehensiveness and vagueness renders a common sleuth with a falsely heightened illusion of confidence. An new alloy patent must be very specific, most are the process or too vague.. an alternative is a legal trade secret which many choose.. then there is non Commercial or military stuff.. A patent search just doesn't capture the universe of possibilities for a specific alloy.. they are a poor proxy.
-
I don't think patents are a comprehensive proxy..
-
Silver Chloride,, used for electrodes and photochromic lenses, antimicrobial, pigments.. (fingerprint powder)
-
Aft lights remained out entire time...
-
Lots of MG(35%) Si(30%) Al(20%) and Fe(5%) on the tie.. Anybody identify a corresponding alloy..
