CooperNWO305

I thought Barb Dayton was Clara? A bunch of people jumped on that one.

Or Ralph sent a copy to Max or Clara sent a copy.

Like going back to a 10 year old newspaper? Possible but is it probable? As for the love affair. Yes, it’s corny. Too corny to believe. But you’re using an all or nothing fallacy. All must be false or all must be true. Throwing the baby out with the bath water. So who writes the letter to Himmelsbach?

It’s discountable or doesn’t count? Two different things. Would you discount all the research on tie particles that has not been shared yet? How about Ryan’s book? What about Pat’s contact with Alice? What about William Smith’s daughter who says she has all this info that rules him out? (And don’t say it’s not the family’s job to defend. That’s a whole other issue). How about someone like Tom who waits to publish in a journal? What is the timeline to hold onto information? Is it a year? 5 years? Until it gets to production as a film, or in the newspaper?

I think you’re fairly new to the group, maybe not to the case. You may or may not know the history here. Fly really does not spend much time selling Hahneman. It really only happens as a result of Ryan’s comments. Fly is one of those guys who does not need the spotlight. He works independently and from what I’ve learned, he values the process and the analysis. He has quite an array of hobbies and life experiences. He found one guitar that was pretty cool and made on CNN, but the one he just found is even better. He doesn’t brag. He will sit on info for years, and does not need the community approval. Frankly no one does. If he gets what he needs, then it does not matter what this community says. At least that’s how I feel and operate. Plenty of well known researchers want nothing to do with this group. Who should Fly show his info to? Eric? Nicky? Ryan? He’s had info basically stolen already. You see how Ryan and Nicky tried to gang up on him. This has been going on for a while. You simply can not trust the group. It leaks like a sieve. If people don’t believe him then so be it. It’s just funny how people fell all over Eric’s particle analysis and then Vordhal and then Hall. So even if Fly showed a video of Hahnemann hijacking 305, the usual suspects would discount it. I don’t think he cares if the group believes him or not. I don’t.

There’s a lot to making a suspect be Cooper. But I can vouch. I’ve seen the pics and they are legit. He owes nothing to the broader community. As I remember there was a lot more witness views during Hahneman’s hijacking, and it happened after Cooper, so people were likely more primed up to look at someone like that.

Ryan. Are you saying that if Fly was not researching Hahneman that he would prefer sketch A?

I bought a lot of bits of it. Ryan you need a new partner. Nicky will only drag you down.

Nicky. It sounds like Ryan’s coaching you, but a good coach can only help so much. Do you stand by this statement? That no one in the military referred to them as fronts and backs?

Air crew very well could have said fronts and backs if they were asking for a complete set. I don’t know why they would ask for a complete set, but someone who used a front would say front. And then if he wanted a back, he’d say back because that’s what he would have called it. Fronts and backs.

Are you really that dumb? I just posted a few links. You’re not taking into account air crew. What about the guy who sent you pics of medals? Are those WW2 medals? Ask Ryan, he knows this stuff. If they aren’t then you are using that for your argument, and it’s not really relevant.

https://digitalcommons.csp.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=1045&context=oral-history_ww2&type=additional In the meantime. I'm thinking, it's not opening, and I didn't have a front chute as a backup. I just had the one in the back. But then, thinking yea

Another data point, he uses the term front, not belly, not chest, not main. https://alabamamosaic.org/vufind/Record/FLCPLwar171/Description?print=1 If all Fly has to do is find examples of someone saying front that was military then I’d say he wins this argument. I find it very hard to believe that of the 10s of thousands of aircrew through the years (non pilot) none used the term front. Their preferred term may have been chest or belly, but to say they never used front is pretty absolute. Ryan and Nicky have been talking about military jumpers and civilian jumpers, and did not take into account air crew who just wore the fronts. Nicky needs to take some lessons from Ryan on how to put together an argument.

Looks like Dr. Bob has outlined his new book. Should be a good one. And I guess Eric still owes people money. The Vortex is not a real healthy place.

“Yes there are two 1960’s chest pack containers on the shelf stuffed with rags for show. You can see in the other shots the same bungees meant to hold the chutes in place on the shelf until needed. Yes everyone used QAC chest pack harnesses and chutes.” Navy guy who flew on the Twin Beech, as World War II plane that he helped restore. It’s one data point, but he uses the term chest. If you’re only using one chute, as a pilot may use one or a bombardier one, then would you say yours is a main and his a reserve, or would you say back and front or back and chest? From my perspective as one who does not wade into all of these conversations, is that Fly does not usually speak in absolutes, but someone like Nicky finds one data point, but has no context (like what that guys shadow box of awards means) and he uses that as an attack on Fly, when Fly already said his argument was not exclusive. All Fly has to do is find someone from that era who used the term front and he wins this argument. Whether that leads him to infer that Cooper was a certain type of person, well that’s up to him. You guys would like to say all his commentary for years is only because of Hahneman, like Ryan said something that I don’t really have much case knowledge and I’m just on Smith. I find both of those to be short sighted comments.