Orange1

Of course, if he wasn't a skydiver he also may not have known how to use his reserve to get down and may have panicked before figuring out. Ckret - serious question - were all the searches on the ground, or were people checking to see if anyone had got stuck in a tree too...? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

My my, I know that theme song. Can't figure out whether it is you or me showing our ages by knowing that Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

We didn't get taught PC over the nose either, but that would have been because i went SL... of course I did then get a PC over the nose on my very first freefall ... Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I take your main point; however I think it's also probably true that most people make The Jump That Tells Them Not To Skydive Fatigued fairly early on, when they are doing things less complicated than a w/s jump. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Well well well... I'm impressed! (a stereotype being that that particular humour doesn't make it across the Atlantic ) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Sigh.. the youth of today. Even I am a "youth" in skydiving terms, and yet I have never made a single landing with radio (or done a tandem, for that matter, a fact I happen to be very proud of ). My understanding of rounds is that you just learnt to PLF. But, all that notwithstanding... another reason why a survivable jump (IF he managed to open) probably needed some experience - I believe broken ankles were pretty common on non-PLF'd jumps in those days... especially without boots. (thinks... broken ankles are pretty common these days too...but now I digress) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Suffocation - unless he jumped with his face wrapped in plastic, no. Unconsciousness - unless he had a medical condition, no. Firstly (refer a post a few days ago), if he jumped from 10K he didn't even have 60 seconds before he hit the ground. Second, as you fall you are falling into more oxygen-rich air - plenty of cases of skydivers who leave an aircraft with hypoxia and 'come to their senses' as they fall. "Air pressure on his face" just doesn't come into the equation - go jump out a plane (or even just into your nearest wind tunnel) and see! But a hard pull + odd set up + money bag flapping around + 50 seconds maximum time to reach a survivable pull altitude... tells me either this guy was an experienced jumper, or he bounced. I was very interested in the tidbit that he got offered instructions and turned them down. Why would a novice do that? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

The "presumably" meant "presumption"! From Jo's post that the FBI contacted her in 2002. Not that it matters much (I presume), as she said she only got the DNA to them sometime in 2003. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

3 things from the replies that caught my eye: Isn't this all connected with what you are taught on FJC (at that jump # level)? I remember being taught to check for "float, shape, spin" and if any of those weren't right to cut away (we were taught to flare twice for end cell closure or slider hangup). It's easy in hindsight to say something, but this is - i think - another example of where there is a big gap in what you learn in FJC and what you end up learning by osmosis or experience along the way, there being no "intermediate jump course". If the student had not been on radio and had cut away, I wouldn't be surprised if he had got some grief for doing so (I have seen similar reactions to that situation on dz.com in the past) - yet i think it would have been a perfectly understandable reaction, given what he had probably been taught so far. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Presumably because they finally managed to get some DNA evidence off the tie in 2002. The reference to closing the investigation in 1998 is in a number of sites and DNA testing was not standard in 1998 was it? Of course, you don't accept the DNA evidence anyway. The fact that they called for you DNA kind of argues against your theory of a whitewash doesn't it - rather to a logical person another indication that the FBI was actually trying to solve the case. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

What kind of tear gas cannisters were used at Waco? Would you care to explain how tear gas canisters at Waco have any relevance to the FBI's fingerprint master records? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I was about to point you to the websleuths theories about Agent H, but I see you got there already Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

some good points in that post. Kind of loosely connected, below (and I apologise for the long post, but I very seldom do these so give me a break here ) a bunch of definitions and stuff... all from Wiki... ----- Confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret new information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions and avoids information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs. It is a type of cognitive bias and represents an error of inductive inference, or as a form of selection bias toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study or disconfirmation of an alternative hypothesis. Confirmation bias is of interest in the teaching of critical thinking, as the skill is misused if rigorous critical scrutiny is applied only to evidence challenging a preconceived idea but not to evidence supporting it. The term "myside bias" was coined by the geneticist, David Perkins, myside referring to "my" side of the issue under consideration. An important consequence of the myside bias is that many incorrect beliefs are slow to change and often become stronger even when evidence is presented which should weaken the belief. Generally, such irrational belief persistence results from according too much weight to evidence that accords with one's belief, and too little weight to evidence that does not. It can also result from the failure to search impartially for information. Jonathan Baron describes many instances where myside bias affects our lives. For example, students who perform poorly suffer from irrational belief persistence when they fail to criticize their own ideas and remain rigid in their mistaken beliefs. These students suffer from myside bias because they do not look for, or tend to ignore, evidence against their mistaken claims. Baron also mentions certain forms of psychopathology as good examples of myside bias. Delusional patients, for instance, might continually wrongly believe that a cough or sneeze means that they are dying, even when doctors insist that they are healthy. -- Particular accusations of conspiracy vary widely in their plausibility, but some common standards for assessing their likely truth value may be applied in each case: • Occam's razor - is the alternative story more complicated and therefore less probable than the mainstream story? • Logic - Do the proofs offered follow the rules of logic, or do they employ Fallacies of logic? • Methodology - are the proofs offered for the argument well constructed, i.e., using sound methodology? Is there any clear standard to determine what evidence would prove or disprove the theory? • Whistleblowers - how many people — and what kind — have to be loyal conspirators? • Falsifiability - Is it possible to demonstrate that specific claims of the theory are true, or are they "unfalseifiable"? --------- The psychiatrist and philosopher Karl Jaspers was the first to define the three main criteria for a belief to be considered delusional in his book General Psychopathology. These criteria are: • certainty (held with absolute conviction) • incorrigibility (not changeable by compelling counterargument or proof to the contrary) • impossibility or falsity of content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue) These criteria still continue in modern psychiatric diagnosis. In the most recent Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a delusion is defined as: A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everybody else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. In practice psychiatrists tend to diagnose a belief as delusional if it is either patently bizarre, causing significant distress, or excessively pre-occupies the patient, especially if the person is subsequently unswayed in belief by counter-evidence or reasonable arguments. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

And that entire answer is exactly why people get so frustrated with you. Except that on top of your usual impossible demands you now also want proof that the master prints are actually Duane's???? This despite the fact that the integrity of the system was clearly proved by the James Earl Ray story (a facet of the story you clearly just ignore because it doesn't support your theory). This beggars belief even more than it did before. Can you imagine the logjam in the US legal system if the FBI was supposed to "prove" its master prints in every criminal case? From some internet searching I did I discovered that the FBI originally stopped investigating Duane as a suspect in 1998 - well before ckret arrived on the scene - due to a lack of evidence against him. All the work ckret has done since, including the DNA and reopening files on him, has simply backed that up. "There are none so blind as those who will not see." Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

That would be a pretty strange response from someone who had never jumped surely? Is that one of the reasons that the FBI originally thought they were looking for an experienced jumper? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Our resident agent wrote the above at 11:11 on Friday the 13th. OMG, What does THAT mean??!! Relax, Guru, that was addressed to Jo. (Anyway, only if it had been written at 13:13 would you be allowed to get worried.) I like the way AggieDave put it - he is "our" FBI agent. We're not gonna let him go that easily Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Jo, apart from the fact that you are completely contradictory in your response to ltdiver (you veer between saying ckret ought to set things up and that he isn't 'qualified') -- your responses are very self serving. Casting doubt on the ability of an agent with almost 20 years' experience just because he doesn't tell you what you want to hear is pretty transparent (and believe me I am not the only one to think so. not all opinions about this thread are expressed in public posts). I'm pretty sure if ckret had been able to, for example, match a print to Duane you would have been going on about how brilliant he is. The past week or so has seen some really good posts here, I really believe you should do what ltdiver asked and let people pursue those avenues. And maybe, just maybe, when you do feel the need to interject you can do it without getting nasty about it (i for one have sometimes been surprised that you haven't been banned for PAs on occasion) - any case should be able to stand or fall on the merits of its own evidence/logic/facts without resorting to personal swipes at the people involved. Most of the counter-arguments against your theory have been based purely on inconsistencies and unexplained things, etc in your arguments and as for the one or two I've seen that seem to be a bit more personal, well it's harder to criticize those people when you do the same thing. Get it? (I'm sure the answer is no, but I thought I'd try anyway.....) Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Wonder what number Bill Dause and Ralph Hatley have? You know how jumpers love list numbers, like SCR numbers, POPS numbers, BASE numbers? Imagine how prestigious it would be to have an OFFICIAL FBI COOPER SUSPECT NUMBER? Ckret, PLEEEEASE PLEEEEASE put me on the list. I get no respect from the hotshots at the DZ and this would definitely solve that problem. ckret, what number suspect was Guru?? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Thanks

Yoohoooo Ckret! CKRET! Hello! (jumps up and down to try attract Special Agent Lawrence D Carr's attention): Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Freefall time - rule of thumb is 10' for the first 1000ft and 5' for every 1000ft thereafter. So 10K with no pull gives you 55 seconds till impact, 50 till you win the "low pull" contest and manage to survive it. No way you would have time to "get rid" of the bag, presuming you had tied it tight enough to begin with. Re tying around the waist - ckret has said he had the harness on before the plane took off, if i recall correctly, and it was later he was seen tying a bag around his waist - so it makes sense he would have tried to tie it onto (rather than over) the harness. Any of you NB6 alumni have a picture of a jumper in one of those rigs? And where was the ripcord on those rigs - hip? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

I believe this is the normal inertia concept (the same reason your body keeps moving forward if the car slams on brakes). There's a cute little freefall sim on Kallend's website which you might like to look at - just plug in some numbers for windspeed and look at the trajectory: http://lensmoor.org/cgi-bin/chute.cgi (btw the reason the forward throw is the opposite direction to the drift is because planes usually drop jumpers flying into the wind) I don't believe I've seen anything about him originally requesting below 10K, but it could make sense either from a cloud cover perspective, or from a spotting perspective - IF he had a particular position in mind, the lower you go out the less you are affected (either in freefall or under canopy) by wind drift from the uppers. Ckret of course is of the opinion he didn't know where he was going to jumo anyway, so this would be a moot point. Ckret, on another tack, was Mayfield ever formally identified as a suspect? Were his prints ever compared? He has a criminal record so presumably you (FBI) have them on file. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

ok, my answers fwiw - as i have v low jump #s: 1. Dunno, but maybe 10K is because most jump planes were cessnas in those days and 10K was kind of the norm? If Cooper was an experienced skydiver from the area, of course, he might be fairly familiar with how landmarks looked from 10K and that may have been a factor. 2. AGL, because that's how it's always stated. 3. Depends what you wanna do. If you think you can get your spot pretty well, it would make more sense to freefall a good part of the way, though you'd probably want to open a bit higher than usual just in case something was odd with the canopy the FBI gave you. If you weren't sure where you were going to end up you'd want to open fairly high to give yourself enough time to find a decent landing spot.... hmmmmm though that would depend how steerable those rounds were. But in any case I can't imagin doing a clear and pull from a 727 at night in that weather would be first choice for anyone. 4. Quite the contrary. 10K sounds like a perfectly normal altitude - for a skydiver. In fact until you posted your questions, I'd never even thought twice about the altitude. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Hey, Johnny Utah at least jumped out a plane. When you gonna take these guys up on their offer and go do a tandem... or better still a first jump course?? Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Jo, Jo, Jo... (sigh) ... ckret is spending an awful lot of time on something that the FBI could just have kept on ignoring. No need to "whitewash" it at all, they could just have left it alone. You really are relying on the last refuge of the conspiracy theorist here. In most instances, no evidence is found because no evidence is there, not because of a "whitewash". I know you have spent many years trying to prove this, and I can see how important this is to you, but don't you think the fact that you have turned up no proper evidence in all that time should be telling you something? Maybe it's time to cut your losses and get on with your life. Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.