FLYJACK

It isn't guessing, it is deductive reasoning.. that is the best you have without physical evidence. Tom said he looked for rubber band evidence and found nothing. I have always said TBAR won't be solved beyond theories, but you don't need TBAR to solve the case.

Huh,, no.. First, I just posted the area in the River that the money had to have landed to arrive on TBAR without sinking. That is the upstream lower left quadrant of that circle. Tom suggested the money was not exposed for months/seasons.. money landing in Columbia could have travelled along the bottom to TBAR within days or weeks. Not very long. Money has some buoyancy on the bottom of the river, it isn't as heavy as a rock so it has some suspension on the bottom. Current passing over it can lift it like a wing.. The current pushes it along the bottom and if the water level is above the money spot then that spot is essentially the bottom of the River. There was debris in the same layer as the money.. Rivers deposit debris all the time.. I read a paper that showed how the current accelerates up near the shore and pushed debris.. but the TBAR slope into the River is very gradual.. no problem. For your scenario the money had to be on land directly above TBAR where there is no real runoff.. the only way it could move down is during a receding high water event.. but you have to explain how the money got on the land above TBAR.. The most likely scenario is that the money went into the River, sank and within days or weeks was pushed along the bottom to its spot when the water level was above it.

No, I am not.. For this diagram.. I am assuming the money went into the River when the water level was at the money spot and floated on the surface to the money spot. Somebody could have tossed it in the River in Spring... or whatever.. IMO, It is far more likely the money went into the River further away and sank to the bottom.. but for the money not to sink it had to go into the River within that lower left quadrant. I am not suggesting this happened, it is a what if analysis.. beyond that circle the money would have sunk..

Just to check.. If the money floats for 7 minutes then it would travel 1/3 mile on the surface of the River before it sinks.. Using the TBAR money spot as the centre, this show a 1/3 mile circle.. for the money to arrive on TBAR before it sinks then it had to enter the River within the lower left quadrant of this circle.

Most lighter debris will be suspended on the bottom.. unlike rocks, the money would be easily moved. Here is a video starting at mile 98 moving downstream right past TBAR located at about mile 97.. The bottom is relatively smooth and sandy... suspended debris on the bottom could be easily moved along by current.. BTW.. at mile 97.3, for that entire 1 mile section on the map 200,000 cu yards of fill was dumped in 1976/77.. it is across and upstream of TBAR. The debris was clamshell dredged and barged from other areas of the Columbia River. That is a potential method to move the money upstream from the mouth of the Lewis River.. video..

If the water was well above the money find spot at the time, then the money can be pushed along the bottom to that spot.. when the money arrives the money spot is effectively the bottom of the river.

Himmelsbach was personally upset that Cooper was being viewed as some sort of hero so he pushed back with false character claims to discredit Cooper in the minds of the public.. He had no reason to present inaccurate info about the money.. but it only confirms the evidence we have..

Suction dredge was used to put material on TBAR... I don't see a suction dredge as a possibility,, a bundle of rubber banded money is too fragile.. However, there was clamshell dredging up and down the River and material was dumped upstream of TBAR,, that is a possibility for moving the money upstream from the Lewis R, but not my favourite theory. I don't like the Washougal theory either because you would need to move the flightpath/LZ East and South to reach the closest water for that basin,, but even then the route to the Columbia is a really tough one.. down a stream, across a lake, through a gate and down another stream,,, not feasible.

I know, but until recently I was the only one. I fought this for years.. Everybody believed that the rubber bands were on each packet and they arrived as three separate packets.. That is Ulis's premise for the narrative to claim the money had to be buried... and others claim it had to arrive in the money bag.. Once you realize that the money arrived as one bundle then the means by which it could have arrived opens up. I believe the money came from the River as one bundle of packets during a Spring when the water level was well above the money find spot.. the money sinks so it tumbled along the bottom to the spot.. The mystery is how, why and when did the money go into the River. I have a few theories for that but they are speculative and we will never have proof.

Larry was the one who screwed this up by conflating bundles and packets... I don't think Tom even knows about this.. actually I think I sent him info on it a while ago but he may not remember. The dominant long held belief was that the money arrived as three separate packets because it was found that way.. and that restricted how the money could have arrived.. For example,, how could three individual packets land in the river 5 miles upstream and end up together.. or go through a dredge.. But three separate packets doesn't fit the evidence... I caught this years ago and was rejected and even told to shut up about it.. Logically, it never made sense. If the money was randomized and the packets of 100 were not then they must have been in bundles. It is almost a certainty that the money arrived as one single rubber banded bundle of several packets but few people have come around to this. Not sure why, Himmelsbach confirmed it went to Cooper like that. People will still fight this... their loss.

The idea was that randomized bundles would look hastily prepared vs uniform bundles,,, I don't know the variation,, 3 packets to 6 packets per bundle? A hijacker would be given a degree of false confidence that the money wasn't marked/recorded and try to pass the money.. That was the thinking behind it..

When the money was found, the FBI stated that the money was found in the same condition and order as given to Cooper and they said that only the hijacker would know what that is... So, the packaging was hold back information. As for the 302's, remember we only have a small fraction of the documents.

See, you don't know everything.. There were reports that the Cooper ransom money was randomized to make it look hastily prepared and Carr talked to a guy at the bank who said he rebanded the bundles.. Carr screwed that up and thought he meant the packets of 100.. << that is a source of the confusion. So, the evidence is that the Cooper money was randomized, we know that the packets were not. Therefore, the randomization could only be the number of packets in a bundle and those are only held together with rubber bands. Simple, and it is confirmed by Himmelsbach's statement. We don't know what Cooper did with the money on the plane, he could have pulled packets from a bundle to stuff in his pockets or hand to stews..

I said we don't have explicit evidence probably because the FBI was holding that back.. This is simple logic,, if they randomized the bundles and the individual packets were not randomized then they were rubber banded into bundles. Why is this so hard..

I posted that before I saw your post but use of the term bundles has been conflated by most people in the Cooper case including Larry Carr,, people have confused a packet of 100 bills with a group of packets, a bundle.. That conflation is the source of most of the problems.. Carr screwed everything up when he claimed the bundles were randomized and he thought it was the individual packets.. IMO, that image is how the money went to Cooper and landed on TBAR.. The evidence is by inference, the "bundles" were made random,, we know that wasn't the packets of 100. So, it could only have been the group of packets which could only be secured by rubber bands.

We have gone over this ad nauseam.. The evidence does not explicitly describe the packaging of the money but using basic logic we can figure it out. The 302 evidence shows bank bands for the packets of 100. There were rubber band frags found on the money. (If it didn't go to Cooper like that somebody would have to have added them, not likely) The FBI stated that money was found in the same order and packaging as it was given to Cooper. The FBI stated the money was from one bundle. The FBI stated that the money was made into random sized bundles, the packets of 100's were not random sized (it makes no sense that each packet would be randomized by count) so the bundles made random had to be the groups of packets, those are only contained by rubber bands. There is no other possibility. This is confirmed by Himmelsbach statement in that video. Packet's were strapped with bank bands and those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. That is how the money went to Cooper. So, if the money arrived on TBAR as one rubber banded bundle of several packets that opens up the means of arrival.. The notion that the three packets arrived separately and be together means they were human buried is based on a false premise.

Pro tip... The rubber bands were holding the individual packets together in a single bundle. The money was given to Cooper in strapped (bank banded) 100's which were then rubber banded into random sized bundles.. Ergo,, the TBAR money most likely landed as one single bundle of several packets of 100 bills as it went to Cooper..

Catalano was first suggested as a suspect by Los Angeles in 1972 from Eugene, later he lived in Egg Harbor.. then another guy popped up around 1975 with a connection to Egg Harbor and was eliminated. Then Catalano was suggested for DNA testing in 2004.. The mix up wasn't the FBI,, it was the Cooper community We need to look back in the 302's for a suspect from Eugene suggested by Los Angeles before June 1972.. that was Catalano.

Yes,, Cooper had acquired aviation knowledge/experience somewhere, not necessarily as a pilot but most likely in the military..

Bingo,, look into military base IFR procedures in Vietnam.

Cooper told Tina: 'I have a grudge, but not with your airlines' Does this imply 'some other airline' ? Maybe people should shift from tie particles Ti alloys, to pilots with a grudge against some airline in 1971 ? Who else other than pilots knows about IFR clearance... there is your clue..

CIA training facilities...

Cossey got his Master Rigger certificate 5 weeks before packing Hayden's chutes..

Tina's camp released a distorted narrative right before the massive ground search in March '72,, nothing was found. Why, because they were worried about what might be found.. They needed to get in front of the search in case something was found that would affect Tina.. The timing and information is extremely suspicious.. and as far as I know they have never done this before or after.. and for the record, there are no White House documents marked "secret" in my home..

No, they did not conduct a search..