Orange1

Actually Jo I am just wondering about something: do you have any independent verification that this guy actually is who he says he is? Did you track him down while looking for the night clerk, or did he find you? And if he found you, how - over the internet? Do you have anything other than his say-so that he is who he says he is? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I'm not so sure. The scene would have been a lot smaller in the 60s, and if I think of SA for example - everyone either knows everyone or knows someone who does, despite the distances between DZs. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Sorry I saw the map but I did NOT LATCH on to it as you put it. Snowmman said: It was NOT the beer cans nor the sunglasses. I didn't even see the head behind the ear the first time I looked. If I had not been reviewing some of the posts I might NEVER have noticed it. There had been a couple of other things that you inadvertly posted which connected BACK to information I had in the beginning of my search 12 yrs ago.

What he said. Is there some way we can program the above as a stock answer to the by-now-familiar broken record of "claims"? p.s. Have you seen my fish? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

It's the middle of the forum and time to find the fish. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Jo, I think you need to EXPLAIN yourself and your expertise when arguing that it makes perfect sense for Cooper to go back and retrieve a car, but to leave all that money behind. (And remember one of your original arguments why he left the money there was that he did not have a car... ) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Georger, not sure if I am missing something, but why is it automatic Cooper would have died when many other skydivers have successfully made jet jumps? Bozo, I don't see any attachment to your post? Jo, for the umpteenth time, you need to see the whole picture rather than grabbing at straws and beating them to death (excuse the mixed metaphor). Your newfound obsession with trying to show snowmman inadvertantly revealed something just underscores how tenuous all your arguments are. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Exactly. And why would I post another post after I just posted a bunch of other posts. Remember when I mentioned pulling a monkey out of my pocket and yelling "Look at the silly monkey". Look at the silly monkey. Hey I'm better at being Jo than Jo is at being Jo. I am now Jomman. lol snowmman is chucking slice after slice of bread into the toaster... and Jo is seeing Jesus in every single one. ps... i didn't read snow's post as "upset"...more exasperated... after he posts "there is no Jesus in the toast!" to find Jo answers "oh yes there is, and you told me it was there so it must be"! Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Yes, so have you yet managed to somehow make sense of the fact that Cooper would go back to retrieve a car but still leave all that money behind? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Not really - after a few days he could easily have taken a taxi to the airport and got his car. By then the dye was washed out his hair and he had on regular glasses and maybe casual clothes. Get out of a taxi - wait for the taxi to leave and go right for the parking lot. Ah - so he would go to all that trouble to get the car away... but leave the majority of the money in a bucket .. even though he now appears to actually have transport to fetch it? Can you not see that this makes absolutely no sense??? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Ckret: He may have taken the plane from Seattle to Portland and have left a car in Seattle - it would not have been abandoned. This would account for the SEA-TAC stub. It was a simple thing to have someone else go pick his car up at the airport - all you got was a stub and you paid as you go out - no one asked for Identification or registration. Did the FBI run a check on EVERY car in the SEA-TAC parking lot? Just because he parked there doesn't mean he abandoned the car...also the car may not have belonged to him, but register to another party. So we have the accomplica angle again. But ... look I don't know for sure but especially in pre computerized days - surely you normally had to hand in the ticket stub, otherwise how could they be sure that the takings they had matched what they should have been? In other words I still think that the ticket stub, if it existed, implies an abandoned car somewhere. On the other hand your argument about taking the plane from Seattle to Portland.. well extend that logic and any parking stub from anywhere in the US that is near an airport becomes a possibility. And, furthermore, IF he did indeed do that (fly from Seattle) - how does this square up with the hotel in Portland? Oh - it doesn't. More straws being clutched at? Which storyline exactly are we meant to go with? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Sure, but a parking lot still implies a car. Surely the FBI would have investigated parking lots that were usually used for the airport, even if they were private? What happened to the car? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Wait - wait (sorry I am a bit slow - must also claim non compis mentis a bit here - severe lack of sleep due to newborn baby

You've asked that question before Jo, and it has been answered before. As soon as Cook comes onto this site and starts posting - then we will. No-one is forcing you to post here either. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

My confusion is only in understanding the details of your story. Sorry about that. It's interesting to me that you saw the year on the ticket. You say 1971. How big was the font for the year, compared to the font for the Northwest xxx line? Where on the ticket was the year 1971 printed? (top, bottom, right, left, middle?) Do you remember if it said Northwest Airlines or Northwest Orient? If you saw the 1971, did you see the exact month and day? if not, why not? This is the first time I've seen you claim it was a 1971 ticket, so I'm interested in the details. Did you see the ticket price, for instance, or the passenger name on the ticket? I would think if you read "1971" you must have noticed the name. If it wasn't "Duane Weber" wouldn't you have remembered that, like you remembered "Sea-Tac" on the parking stub? It's also interesting that the parking stub has no connection to the ticket. You found them in different places at different times, so could be unrelated. Was there any date info on the parking stub? You didn't mention the departure/destination on the airline ticket you found. You just mentioned the year on it. Can you say what departure/destination it had? (edit) If you've described all this before, you can just point me to it, if you prefer. I've not found any of this detail anywhere. (edit) I ask the detailed questions because I know your memory is good. The answers can only help. (edit) Just found some more details on the parking stub. This makes me think Jo has good detailed memory on the passenger ticket also. Jo said, on Nov 28, 2007, 9:21 PM "There was a Sea-Tac stub (like a movie stub) it was a blue/grey color. I have thought that might have been a parking sub. Cannot remember the color of the print on it - seems like the numbers were red" Does anyone know when or even if it ever became practise to put years on airline tickets? I seem to recall in the old days especially (you could not book more than a year in advance, many airlines still have this) it was only month and day and not year that is on the tickets. and re the name, i clearly remember those old tickets that the travel agents used to write out and indeed they DID always have the passenger's name on. add to snowman's comments on the changed name of the airline... do we have false memory surfacing here i wonder...?? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I've been quite surprised by this thread. I did AFF at a small(ish) cessna DZ, albeit one that has a healthy tandem business, where the TIs are often also the AFFIs and indeed 2 of them were pilots too. Despite all that, my experience and what I have seen since is that AFF students get at least as much priority as tandems when it comes to getting them on loads, despite the time involved in briefing and debriefing. Some of the comments here seem to imply that for instructors who can do either tandem or AFF, that they choose to do tandem to make more money...I do think that's a bit sad, but surely it is up to manifest to manifest the loads and then allocate the instructors, camera etc to fit in with that? (That's the way it works at my DZ anyway.) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

You yourself have many times made remarks and suggested things regarding the money and and its conditions and surmised about flooding and how the money came to be at Tina's Bar.. Why is it that I should not explore possibllities? I have been asked to keep an open-mind and when I do I am jumping to conclusion. Somethings are from having known Duane better than others and some are my exploring with the information that has been put out there to me over the yrs and information I find on my own. This is called "BRAIN STORMING" and you have done your share of it along with others in the forum. Snowmman was brainstorming or whatever you call it and he provided a fact I did not know. A fact that made a link - how do you think old crimes are solved...there is usually little if any at all physical evidence. The new facts that surface are then combined with the old facts - or there would be no need to investigate cold cases. How do you connect the dots - brainstorm or as you call it jump to conclusions. You evaluate and re-evaluate information as you receive it - I do this in the forum. Call it thinking out-loud - but if one doesn't share these things with someone else, how does one evaluate it? errr... Jo? When you get off your high horse, maybe you should actually read things in context. The original bit you quote (from me) is simply pointing out that you said that the new evidence is related to the money find, when Ckret actually said no such thing. This is simply reading and understanding. You can brainstorm all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that Ckret said "since" Feb 80 and not "related to" Feb 80. THAT is where you leaped to conclusions. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Jo, you are leaping to conclusions again. Ckret did not say the new info is related to the evidence found in Feb 1980; he said: (my bold added) The new info may of course be related to the money, especially as we have been told there is further investigation into that going on; but you can NOT conclude that from what Ckret said. It may be something entirely different, for example, the first concrete piece of evidence they have found since they found the money. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but in the meantime better not to jump to conclusions, because it makes people wonder how many other times you have done so. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Er... OK. According to your first ever post here (in the 1st thread) you had already done everything for the FBI except put Duane in a parachute (which still hasn't been done, let's not forget). So you are now saying... what? That you actually did NOT do "everything" for the FBI? Or that what must be a tiny amount compared to the time and effort you've spent on this, for one thing which may actually for once verify something of what you say, is not worth the bother for you? Or some matter of "principle"? Or is it just so you can keep on blaming the FBI for your own lack of anything substantial? Or are you just scared your own paid expert will not tell you what you want to hear, and that will not so easily be explained away by conspiracy theories and claims of incompetence? I still fail to see why it is the FBI's job to check out every fanciful claim made by anyone who feels like it. I mean, if they do it for you they will have to do it for every Tom, Dick and Harry claiming something or other... Or is this a special case deserving of attention that others don't? And let's not forget that the FBI HAS checked stuff of yours out ...and clearly what they found was not enough to make them bother checking other stuff out. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Nope - from what I understand, if a person believes they are telling the truth it will come across as such on a polygraph - even if they are totally delusional and spouting absolute rubbish - maybe 377 or AggieDave can comment, they probably have experience in this. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7649011.stm A group of skydivers has completed the first parachute jump over the world's highest peak, Mount Everest. The three adventurers, from the UK, New Zealand and Canada, enjoyed a minute-long freefall after jumping from about 9,000m (29,500ft). The trip took 15 years to plan and cost each jumper about $24,000 (£13,500). After doing the jump, Briton Holly Budge said it was worth the money. There are now 29 other members of the group waiting to do the leap. "It was amazing, just spectacular," Ms Budge told the AFP news agency by telephone after making a safe landing. "We had one minute of freefall and while we were above the clouds you could see Everest and the other high mountains popping out of the top." The skydives were originally scheduled to be carried out on Friday but were delayed by thick cloud. The jumpers had to use breathing equipment, extra-thick parachutes and special suits to deal with the thin air and sub-zero temperatures. They also trekked in the region before the jump to get used to high altitudes. Expedition leader Nigel Gifford says the people of the Everest region have got used to the idea, and that they are relating it to a Buddhist holy man said to have jumped over the Himalayas. "It came about because I have been a Himalayan mountaineer and took up skydiving. I love doing both and I thought it would be good to marry the two," he said. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Unless I misunderstood the OP, the point of his PG experience being mentioned wasn't that it helped him fly better (though I'm sure it did), but that he didn't have the same fear of outlandings that many newer jumpers do. Which is exactly why he has received so many compliments from older jumpers here - to look for a safe LZ rather than just try get back home. I do think though a big advantage of PG experience w.r.t. outlandings, is that you are really taught to gauge wind direction by looking at trees, water etc whereas for newer jumpers especially we are taught to look at the windsock, and wind direction can and does change from when you take off so just remembering which way the wind was doesn't always help. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Or the simple possibility that someone else with handwriting similar to Duane's (no idea what the writing looks like) and, as you say, did what people often do - annotate in the margins of something they are interested in. (For the record, my opinion is that it is extremely bad behaviour to write in a book that doesn't belong to you, even if it is in pencil.) Looking at it from an evidentiary perspective - I doubt that any court would accept "hearsay" evidence that someone "knows" whose handwriting it is. Wouldn't the courts want a handwriting expert at the very least? And this really is something that Jo could organise very easily and without much expense - I agree that it is still nothing conclusive (like you say, Duane may simply have been interested) but at least there would finally be something in Jo's story that stood up to minor scrutiny. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

The FBI is more than welcome to make copies of those pages and they were sent copies of those pages in 1996. REPLY> You say above, you sent copies of Duane's BOOK notes to the FBI in 1996. That was 12 years ago. Scan the copies and show them here now. Show me yours, and I will show you mine! Georger On this subject, Jo, did the handwriting just "look" like Duane's, or did you ever actually get a handwriting expert to compare the two? Again, my immediate response is: if the FBI were sent something and didn't bother to do anything about it, well, maybe that's because they didn't think the so-called "evidence" was worth anything. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Oh Ckret, you have made my day