snowmman

He's walking down the street now doing some Christmas shopping, 37 years later. Everything's cool. Then some yahoo runs up to him and says "You're Duane Weber, aren't you?" If that happens, then Jo will have done her duty. (edit) The surest sign of lunacy, is the belief that there is any magic "truth" in any FBI files. There is no truth anywhere, why would you expect a taste of it in FBI files? There's more "truth" in gravity and that's in no FBI file.

Right. But if you're a hijacker, currency requirements are only interesting if there are rapid changes in available gear. At the period we're interested in, Cooper got gear that was not much different since the prior 12 years or so, right? Now if parachutes had turned into anti-gravity-wave-defractors, and Cooper wasn't current, then it would have mattered. The lack of dramatic change in the '62-'71 period, means we have to cover a lot more folks, if we think there's a minimum skill requirement. We've had a lot of debate on even whether there would be a skill requirement. Not worth reopening that discussion since lunacy is a base point that covers anything. (edit) It's interesting that Pioneer apparently demonstrated the Paracommander at the '63 nationals, but delayed it because they were "conservative". I don' t know the full details on that.

Thanks Orange1. There is nothing in the Cooper affair to say we should focus on regular active jumpers. I've always wondered why it appeared people created the dichotomy of "active jumpers" and everyone else including whuffos. It's also part of why I wondered why Cossey's opinion seemed to be the "official view" ...I think he represented the high end of the sport in '71. Precisely the wrong guy to talk to, if you're investigating hijacking by parachute? In terms of "regular active jumpers": In other risk sports, it's natural that people ebb and flow out of them. While they're "in", they may be at the extremes of the sport or not. Then they may go out. I think one of the "feels" I get about skydiving from DZ.com, right or wrong, is that somehow longetivity in the sport is coupled to something. I don't know what. But for the Cooper investigation, longevity shouldn't mean anything I think. I was curious about how stringent/worried people were about the insurance/issues and pilot liability, and if people went along with getting licenses in '62-'70 just for that reason. I'm also wondering if things were looser for non-US jump clubs, especially civilian clubs associated with USAF bases, say in Southeast Asia, during the same time period. (edit) It'd be nice to have annual numbers for PCA/USPA from '62-70. I just randomly found that one '62 number. Looking at current USPA memberships numbers, I've always wondered if there was a straight linear increase or did it peak at some points, like '71 and decrease etc. I don't know. (edit) current USPA 31,000 per http://www.uspa.org/AboutUSPA/tabid/76/Default.aspx

http://books.google.com/books?id=1jDqpK2HlxYC&pg=PA97&dq=seattle+skydivers#PPA97,M1 Poynter says PCA membership in 1962 was 6000 and growing. Parachute Club of America name dates to 1957...was predecessor to 1967 renaming to USPA, per FBI files. (edit) This 1960 insurance book implies that jumping without a PCA license in some states was illegal, that a pilot might be held liable? was that true? http://books.google.com/books?id=x5AyAAAAMAAJ&q=Parachute+Club+of+America&dq=Parachute+Club+of+America&pgis=1

"Winner of the $10,000 Formentor Novel Prize", this synopsis-resistant novel chronicles the active fantasy life of San Francisco hotel clerk J. Spenser Blight, "the fattest man in American literature," who spends his long nights "reading twenty-five-cent paperback erotic epics; cutting up old magazines; and, above all, reminiscing about his impossibly beautiful and equally corrupt wife Katy." Hey! I resemble that! (cover attached. published 1965) "No one has yet explained why a Nightclerk should go banging around in a dirty old airshaft ... and what the hell, it's Zoo Night at the Travelers Hotel!" http://books.google.com/books?id=EOkNAAAAIAAJ&q=night+clerk+schneck+travelers+hotel&dq=night+clerk+schneck+travelers+hotel&pgis=1 (edit) rivals "Ulysses" the review implies! http://www.kirkusreviews.com/kirkusreviews/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1563300

title says it all. Nice wizardry by Google. Provides an interesting overview of sorts for what areas in the US were "interesting" for the book, maybe for the sport? in 1971. NW looks a little light just in terms of stickpins. Issaquah apparently wasn't mentioned, which is odd, since it was there since '62, hosted the '63 nationals, etc.

People can chime in on what was in this book, if they know. I had wondered what books were available back in 1971. I first located this book as published in 1981. But in 1971 it was published under a different title.. "Parachutes and Parachuting" here: Sellick, Bud "Parachutes and Parachuting" subtitle: "A Modern Guide to the Sport" ISBN: 9780136485353 series vol. v. 6 ?? Prentice-Hall NJ 1971. Explains all the ins and outs of competition and sport jumping -style accuracy, night jumping ,Flares, and smoke bombs. vg/vg pp 223. Numerous photographs. searchable in Google Books at http://books.google.com/books?id=4OZtAAAAMAAJ&pgis=1 It says something about USPA licensing requiring one night jump with a delay of at least 20 seconds. What USPA level was that? Is it still required? here: http://books.google.com/books?id=4OZtAAAAMAAJ&q=%22night+jump%22&pgis=1#search Offered for US$ 14.38 by: Dustjacket Books and Treasures - Book number: 209 The 1981 version The Wild, Wonderful World of Parachutes and Parachuting By Bud Sellick Published by Prentice-Hall, 1981 ISBN 0139595775, 9780139595776 231 pages

I'll bite. He was familiar with the NW+CA, because of living in various states there, at various times. Oregon was the one NW area state Cooper had never been a local in. Seattle/Issaquah was the best place to get parachutes and money from. Cooper was a Seattle area local for a time. Whether Cooper thought that would confuse the issue or not, doesn't matter. He was familiar with jumping that area. It made night jumping that area feel a little less risky. (edit) If it was a Clancy novel, I'd add "He knew it would clusterfuck the two local FBI offices against each other ...portland vs seattle." But that wouldn't be possible because he wouldn't have enough inside knowledge. It would just be a good guess.

Interesting thoughts, georger. But Cooper had limited knobs to turn. One could theorize, that he saw how prior hijackers tried to create new knobs, say with guns, weapons etc and failed. So he knew not to try that. Sometimes the only knobs that work are very small ones, and time. The mistake is in judging Cooper by the knobs he used. It assumes other knobs could have been more successful. All we know, is that the knobs Cooper used, worked. Therefore, Cooper was right. We know hijackers who attempted to use/create other knobs failed. One could say we don't really know if Cooper succeeded. But unlike others, we're unsure if he failed. Is the experimental database broad enough to deduce anything from that? No. But that's life. So no use worrying about it. I posted before, that Google is showing that potentially we don't need models any more. Models are always right to a degree but always wrong to a degree. Sometimes I wonder if you worry more about the model, than the result. Things like Google are creating the opportunity to say: "no models, just correlations" No model can predict the future. If it could, people will change the future so it's not predictable. We only use models cause we didn't have anything else. It's getting close to the time to throw out models. They serve no purpose except to wrongly put a stamp of validation on bad thinking. So while your thought above sounds good, it's better just to say "Who knows, doesn't matter"

Hi Hurl, Thanks. I think you might be confirming what I said, but my expectaton is, like the opinionating on NB6 vs Pioneer providing black/white determination to whuffoness, is that we have no data on what percentage of jumpers used goggles, broken down by year '62-70, and experience level (#jumps, types of jumps), or US vs non-US. It's good providing the insight that "good" googles didn't appear until later. All I wanted to say, was that the goggles thing was thrown in here early in the thread, and not questioned by jumpers, as far as I can tell. But I think it's more a reflection, of like I said before, that the thread just doesn't have the experience base back to early '60s. So it's no foul. We just don't know stuff. Or didn't realize we didn't know. (edit) I don't know Zing, but I thought I saw a post saying he had a heart attack? Is that not true?

Because he didn't stay in the US afterwards?

"John Searle's 1980 paper Minds, Brains, and Programs proposed an argument against the Turing Test known as the "Chinese room" thought experiment. Searle argued that software (such as ELIZA) could pass the Turing Test simply by manipulating symbols of which they had no understanding. Without understanding, they could not be described as "thinking" in the same sense people do. Therefore—Searle concludes—the Turing Test cannot prove that a machine can think, contrary to Turing's original proposal." Google provides the vast database of symbols. By manipulating those symbols, even without understanding them, one can mimic intelligence. All you need are the simple rules for manipulating the symbols. What you interpret the result as, is up to you.

Ok, I'm just going to report the results of the analysis by the PH-D's (nod to Tom) here. All we know about the posters is what they post. Analyzing it, the only rational poster appears to be 377. Even Sluggo doesn't tip the scale the right way. In short, there is no evidence that Ckret is rational. We don't know his goals, but if you analyze his posts, they seem to be at cross-purposes with any goals one can imagine? Therefore -> not rational. And that's not saying anything negative. My posts are not rational. Many others aren't. 377 I think passes the Turing test.

I've been watching this video of guys skydiving in 1966 at youtube (must have been transferred from 8mm?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cvx4MLNqgM and I don't see any goggles. People are talking about goggles with knowledge of jet jumps. Cooper didn't have anyone's jet jump to reference at the time. So you'd expect he'd do what '60s era jumpers were doing. When Cooper jumped, no one was doing civilian jet jumps. I had understood that the lack of goggles was being used to label him whuffo. How does that make sense? It seems to me that a '60s era jumper wouldn't have goggles. I see jumpsuit and helmet. So we know Cooper didn't ask for jumpsuit or helmet. Hahneman did. I believe Cooper asked for chest and back chutes, and that Tina miswrote "front" as the opposite to back. All further notes and communications talked about "chest" chutes. I don't know if that came from ground comms or from Cooper. But I think the evidence is too weak to be confident Cooper asked for "front" chute. "chest" is written 3 times in the stew notes I'm looking for evidence that Cooper was whuffo. I know 377 acknowledged it's a secret flowchart, but I'm trying to figure it out. Tina's description of him had ankle shoes. So it's the suit and overcoat? But he knew enough to take his tie off. Cooper apparently knew he'd need fuel while he was in the air. Maybe because he knew 305 was on the last leg of a cross-country itinerary? He planned the timing for a twilight jump. close to half-moon? Where is the lack of planning? The flight path? is that it? 10,000', flaps and wheels down, apparently 15 degree flaps specified. There are about 25 individual elements to Cooper's plan/execution. The handful that could be argued "whuffo" could be argued either way. It could also be argued that Cooper guessed/hoped that the plane would not be a lot worse than a regular jump at the time. He might not have accurate plane speed estimates. Why do we think Cooper would know what speed the plane would be at, exactly?

Tonight I re-enact the crime. No not the hijack. The reading of the Gunther book by Jo so so many years ago. I just got a copy of the Gunter book in the mail. Hey Jo, you were on me to read "Ha-Ha-Ha". I did. Absolutely the worst writing I've ever read. Penthouse forum is a step up. Total trash. I must confess about 2/3rds of the way thru I skipped a number of pages. Although it might loosely be the basis for a porn flick? Debbie Does D.B.? I look forward to Gunther!

well then georger, all you're pointing out is that all crime is very simple. I could pick a dozen, seemingly complex skill crimes today, and execute them next week? What would prevent me? knowledge? skill? fear? Are you saying the only reason I don't do it, is because any financial gain is not sufficient motive to overcome the possible risks? That the actual execution, is nothing?

Also, we know that 727 apparently did flight test with something about the door open, right? So it's not that Cooper theorized something that had no possible proof before. So if someone uses a behavior that is known to a small group, do we assume he just looked at something and deduced the behavior, didn't care and was a lunatic or willing to roll the dice on it, or had access to that information, or was stupid and didn't realize there was a question to be asked? Which is the simplest explanation? (edit) what's odd georger, is that in the not too distant past, you were willing to theorize that Cooper must have known something about the timetables in order to plan his flight selection? You seem inconsistent in your thinking here? Is knowledge needed or are we just apes?

good points, georger. But: Most planes have doors in the back (or somewhere). Ventral or side? So you're saying 727 was special choice or not special choice? Just random? Was there any intelligence in side door exit vs ventral exit? Any theory is fine....although if such an exit was obvious to Cooper why not to others, earlier? (edit) The apparent Cooper+n-caused FAA FAR here from June 24, 1972 http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5CrgNPRM.nsf/0/666840BC661701298525692300644AB4?OpenDocument "AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 14 CFR Parts 25, 121 SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is considering rule making with respect to Parts 25 and 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to provide additional security on all large passenger-carrying turbojet powered airplanes operated under Part 121 by requiring that a means be provided to prevent the opening of central exits and tail cone exits during flight. DATES: All communications must be received on or before July 24, 1972." ... "In spite of concerted efforts made by the FAA and the air carriers, incidents continue to occur wherein the safety of the flight of aircraft engaged in passenger-carrying operations under Part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations has been jeopardized by persons intending to harm the crew or take command of the airplane. On a number of occasions in recent hijackings, the ventral exit of an airplane has been opened and a hijacker aboard has parachuted from the airplane through that exit. The agency recognizes that every possible step must be taken to deter persons from boarding aircraft for such a hijacking purpose. Accordingly, the FAA deems it appropriate to propose certain amendments to Parts 25 and 121." .. "However, it is to be noted that to achieve compliance with the proposed regulation both the ventral exit and tail cone exit would have to continue to meet all of the requirements applicable to their approval as emergency exits. Specifically, to achieve compliance, the conditions that would have to be met to obtain approval of modification to the locking mechanisms of these two exits are as follows: (1) The mechanism must be locked while the airplane is aloft; (2) Takeoff of the airplane cannot be started if either ventral or tail cone is not locked; and (3) The exit must be available for use in the event of an emergency." A little bit late, heh!

Hastur was part of the Cuthulu mythology. At points, he is described as a benign shepherd. At other times, he is something that kills you in an ugly fashion. However, Hastur was called "He Who Shall Not Be Named" because when you spoke his name, he would appear to you, but not in a good mood. Summoning him was a bad idea. Since the Night Clerk is not going to be named, and seems to be another of the fairly mythical characters in this tale, the parallels are uncanny at this point. I vote that we start calling him Hastur. From now on, we can assign any unnamed, secret beings with the names of other characters from mythology to keep them straight. Reply> funny. And Sluggo can put up a page of pseudo-nyms. well Sluggo got mad when I suggested he track Facts + Myths. He wanted just Facts. If he needs to track Facts presented as Myths and Myths presented as Facts, along with Myths presented as Myths and Facts presented as Facts, I think he's going to want a pay raise? Maybe he can squeeze it in the margins of the web pages though, and it can be done on budget.

I think we're missing some key info about the FBI investigation in '71, that makes it not worth our time to even speculate about the questions you raise. The "interesting" times for 727 go back to 1959 when the design started. So the question is: what did the FBI investigate at Boeing? How far back? I'm not even sure the FBI understands when Boeing employees first got together to start jumping socially. The FBI might, but like I've said before, we really don't have any more facts today, than people did 10 years ago. We have an illusion of more facts today. I can believe that it's because the Cooper-related facts are almost zero. But there are plenty of FBI investigation facts, that I guess as a matter of course, we'll never know. Oh well! (edit) I'm not even sure Ckret can reel off the history of the USPA and their records, and what came before USPA, from the top of his head..Do we even know what percentage of jumpers from '62 to '70 would show up in any records? This goes to my claim that the "everyone knows everyone" theorem is baseless.

just FYI. I probably should have explained better.. that photo was from before we pulled out. It's not guys "claiming" stuff afterwards....It was South Vietnamese Air Force. I think a special ops group they had. VNAF is short for the South Vietnamese air force the US supported. The US shipped them a lot of stuff over the years. http://vnaf.net is a good reference (there are many!) with actual numbers of planes/helis shipped in certain years. Also has percentage lost. Wikipedia has good stuff too. 377 obviously knows all this history, I think I just didn't explain the timing of the photo.

"Gravity's Rainbow" My understanding of skydiving is that the primary interaction is with the field known as "gravity" I can't understand this fantasy that it's a primary interaction with air! :)

The sunglasses could mean nothing, much like the tie and clasp. But I always wondered if they meant Vietnam. Nice photo of VNAF crew with their H-34. Check out the belt buckles! (and sunglasses)

That has to be the worst military exit position that I have ever seen. Feet and knees should be together. Knees should be straight. Elbows should be locked against your side with your hands on the side of your reserve. I'd say that guy forgot all his training or he didn't have much to start with....What a mess! ! The whole document is a nice read. The Bay of Pigs deal is just one thing in it. Here's the url. Anyone interested in historical USAF special ops should check it out. Some nice pics in it. lots of pages (best to save to disk first, big pdf can hang up your pc, acroreader thing: 7.6 MB) http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/Books/Haas/Haas.pdf or if you want to copy the link http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/Books/Haas/Haas.pdf

from wikipedia. All hail the comic book! How many wannabe Pynchons existed in WA at Boeing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pynchon "Along with its emphasis on loftier themes such as racism, imperialism and religion, and its cognizance and appropriation of many elements of traditional high culture and literary form, Pynchon's work also demonstrates a strong affinity with the practitioners and artifacts of low culture, including comic books and cartoons, pulp fiction, popular films, television programs, cookery, urban myths, conspiracy theories, and folk art. This blurring of the conventional boundary between "High" and "low" culture, sometimes interpreted as a "deconstruction", is seen as one of the defining characteristics of postmodernism."