Orange1

Jeeez... the FBI has told you what proof they have. You choose not to accept it. Why would it be any different if they tell you anything else? You would just react the same as you have, find some wild reason not to accept it. as for this puh-LEEZE... I can't actually believe you said that. Were you serious? how about, someone gets gunned down in a bank robbery that they could have prevented, but Larry (or whoever) was too busy running around looking for evidence in a 38-year crime where some lady claims the guy was her husband despite all leads so far not backing that up? That is what I might call a violation of rights adversely affecting someone's life. Not wasting further time on a case that is going nowhere or running around after delusionals. But I'm no expert in US constitutional law. Perhaps someone can point out to me where Jo's rights are being violated. In the meanwhile I need to duck out of here before i say something i regret. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

blah blah blah Hey, whatever happened to all the interesting stuff on Nam? Bruce, any more leads? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Jo, this argument is SO tired. First you wanted the FBI to prove Duane wasn't Cooper, and now Jerry. Why are you the only person who can't see how ridiculous it is? Wait - I have it. Seeing as you are so certain Duane was Cooper, why don't you show us solid proof that McCoy, Gossett, Christiansen and Guru132 are not Cooper? After that, we can work through the rest of the 1000 or so suspects on the FBI's list, as well as a couple of the ex-vets we've spoken about here. If you eliminate everyone else, we'll have to believe Duane was Cooper. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Not being blessed with natural salmon we have to fly it in from the N Hemisphere. mainly Norway, some Scottish. yum. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Not really on topic but I just came across this and thought some of you might like the quote. Absolute certainty is a privilege of uneducated minds and fanatics. (C.J. Keyser) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Georger - your historical point taken. But I think Bruce has shed light on it above as well. I wonder how many of the returning servicemen went on to finish high school or enter college - I assume there was some kind of 'mature student' exemption from a high school diploma at many colleges at the time? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

What is this, your personal detective agency to order everyone around? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

was it "normal" to have only 1-2 years of high school before enlisting, i mean even if you were underage it sounds too low? didn't one of Bruce's sources describe Braden as having some college education? Could that have been after WW2? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

what is "probable proof"? is that like being a bit pregnant? if you have proof, show us! you've been claiming things like this for 2 years or whatever it's been. would be nice to actually see something tangible. Of course, Duane in a chute is still not Duane as cooper, but it would go a long way towards making people think again. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

thanks snow... i.o.w. they would have been available commercially pretty easily presumably. someone already mentioned the possibility of fake tan. you mentioned the difficulty judging height from a seated position. (and this would not be the same for everyone of the same height standing up either: some people have long torsos and short legs and some have short torsos and long legs.) where is 377? he's gone awfully quiet. having fun with all those cheap jump tickets? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Sluggo, this is great although I am somewhat alarmed by the ease with which you appear to be able to obtain assault weapons Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Good stuff again Bruce, tho I assume the above was a typo Braden hasn't yet been described as a matchmaker?! How widely available were colored contact lenses in the early 70s? Although if he was already mixing it up in CIA circles not hard to come by. Or did I read too many spy stories in the old days? (An aside: I loved Cold War spy fiction. I'm glad the Cold War is over, but I really miss the spy novels. Although now lots of the stuff is unclassified a lot of the non-fiction works are just as good!) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

yes. welcome back, and hope the surgery was minor... Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Bruce, lots of interesting stuff... again, thanks! Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Actually, I think it's kind of cool, honourable even, that someone, having served for their country, undertakes to keep something secret and does so until he's told it's OK not to. (Of course we know that many don't. ) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

with respect Jo, many have continued to do it ever since. it's the point i've made here before when you have railed against the US govt - sure they have done bad things - but many of you have no clue as to what life can be like in a politically repressed country without democracy. i don't know if there is any govt anywhere with an unblemished record, but there are certainly different degrees. snow,. there are always 2 sides. if i was a cuban parent - anywhere parent - i would want what is best for my child. difficulty growing up might be part of it but at least these parents know that today their kids have food on the table, had a shot at a system with decent education, job opportunities etc. maybe my take is rather different, because africa is full of families who have been separated while someone tries to make a better life for them and their kids. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Fidel is rambling against the CIA because parents wanted their children to grow up somewhere with a better chance for a decent life? uh, ok. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Well, there's a leap of logic that would span the widest part of the Grand Canyon. Re castro, why don't you try fidel.castro@cuba.gov ? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

suboptimization - yup, tragedy of the commons type stuff. it is very interesting stuff actually, but someone else can do it Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

is there a crawfish theory? as in..crawfish ate cooper and that's why no-one can find him? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I argued these same points endlessly as a student. My prof just laughed. I said: "people are not rats". He just laughed. It turned out on a statistical basis he was correct. People often are predictable... Law of large numbers. Predictable on the average, but no-one would go so far as to say you could predict every individual. Incidentally technical analysis is, at its basis, predicting human behaviour. I've seen someone use Elliot wave analysis to predict - correctly and right in front of me - the behaviour of people at a rock concert! free choice is limited in such a venue. It's easy to predict the behavior of prisoners in a prison also. Or people driving cars on a road. The problem is when you can convince large numbers to throw away the existing constraints. Just reject them. That's what causes unpredictable. The box gets thrown away and replaced by a different box. Predict the next revolution. Actually, that's more or less what it was... someone flashed the camera (which relayed to the screens) and then we went through a perfect EW cycle of women flashing for the camera. By wave 2 he said "that's the 2nd wave' then said what would happen in waves 3, 4 and 5 when it would end...and he was right. Hmm. interesting. But: you don't know much about the rate of flashing. What you know is the rate that the flashing was displayed on the video screen? So what you know more about is what the camera people thought the audience might like, and at what rates? Is the DJ reacting to the dancers? Or is the DJ controlling the dancers? Were people still flashing after the video stopped? Who knows. Wasn't a "DJ". The concert hadn't started yet and the video was panning the crowd when the first mover (a la wave 1) flashed ..and then they panned hoping for more, some responded... But you could hear from the audience reaction that by wave 5 they had clearly lost enthusiasm... go read an overview of EW and particularly what it says about volume in each wave. The last/wave 5 flasher (who looked rather embarrassed at the lack of applause) was i guess the equivalent of the man in the street who buys up the market right at the top. Hey, I don't think much of TA but it was pretty interesting - this guy has been trading using EW for years btw. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I argued these same points endlessly as a student. My prof just laughed. I said: "people are not rats". He just laughed. It turned out on a statistical basis he was correct. People often are predictable... Law of large numbers. Predictable on the average, but no-one would go so far as to say you could predict every individual. Incidentally technical analysis is, at its basis, predicting human behaviour. I've seen someone use Elliot wave analysis to predict - correctly and right in front of me - the behaviour of people at a rock concert! free choice is limited in such a venue. It's easy to predict the behavior of prisoners in a prison also. Or people driving cars on a road. The problem is when you can convince large numbers to throw away the existing constraints. Just reject them. That's what causes unpredictable. The box gets thrown away and replaced by a different box. Predict the next revolution. Actually, that's more or less what it was... someone flashed the camera (which relayed to the screens) and then we went through a perfect EW cycle of women flashing for the camera. By wave 2 he said "that's the 2nd wave' then said what would happen in waves 3, 4 and 5 when it would end...and he was right. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I argued these same points endlessly as a student. My prof just laughed. I said: "people are not rats". He just laughed. It turned out on a statistical basis he was correct. People often are predictable... Law of large numbers. Predictable on the average, but no-one would go so far as to say you could predict every individual. Incidentally technical analysis is, at its basis, predicting human behaviour. I've seen someone use Elliot wave analysis to predict - correctly and right in front of me - the behaviour of people at a rock concert! Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Georger, you can ask safe, but one of the reasons i didn't like micro much (apart from all the math )was because of the idea that you could express how people "should" behave in terms of a mathematical equation and assume all sorts of things on the basis of that.. so as you can gather i'd be sceptical that game theory (or any of construct) can tell us. After all this was part of what got Khaneman his Nobel - the fact that people don't always act in the way that theory predicts? (OK, so they created prospect theory to deal with it, but let's not go there...) In fact it may have depended entirely on the way Cooper himself perceived the risks, which may not be the same as what we perceive them to have been. If we ask the question the wrong way, we may get a different answer. see eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudocertainty_effect (btw, i'm one of those people who takes the data and sees what it tells me, rather than try make it fit a theory that i think "should" work

Microeconomics 101