georger

There are these River Theorists. You may be one of them, but the only evidence you have on that is that they found some of the money on the riverbank years later. Doesn't mean it came in from the river. Just means that's where it was found. That it came in from the river is so far - unproven. Other Note: I have attached a picture showing one possible reason the hijacker was seen tying paracord around his waist. You have a point in: That it came in from the river is so far - unproven. Are you sure that chord is tied around the guy's waste in that photo, and not somewhere else?

Hey 'Zon...whether it stayed with him or not ~ whatdaya wanna bet the the friction burn from a line around the waist during deployment - left a bit of a 'mark'?! Probably so... but I would not have tied it to myself... it would have been cinched up real nice like to the harness however. It may look like it was being tied to the waist... from someone not used to some of the god awful lashups I have seen... But I am betting I could tie it so no damage was done from any "friction" Im going to vote for Tina's testimony being accurate - around the waste - she had seen him try several other iterations, he ordered her forward (she was seeing too much?) - and she turned short of the curtain and watched _ he was now tying loops "around his waste". Before being told 'go forward' she had already seen him 'tying several loops "around the bag"'. If her testimony is accurate this can't be good? This testimony and her description plays heavily in the FBI decision to call him "dead", emphasis AFTER FBI SA's consulted with outside experts including those in the Boeing skydiving club ... who (believe it or not) did some actual force calculations! (a bunch of engineers who turn to calculations for everything, including how many scouts we can get into three observatories in 30 mins)... I know these ornery guys personally. We have weekly debates about which light switches should be left on where for how many minutes etc etc all within our budget. Dick P. in one report says, quote: "... and his shoes would have come off instantly ...." Concerning the reliability of the Boeing club analysis? I do not know. This a matter for you guys ... but 'shoes off and a high probability of other specific physical injuries was brought up and discussed'. Dick P. went on to work on the fix - thew Cooper vane.

I know exactly where you're coming from ... but she did a good job of describing the bomb from memory ... and Im told her testimony on him tying the bag around his waste was almost as detailed .. the words "having a lot of trouble doing it ... was struggling ... etc ... are in her description". Again there was a lengthy discussion about all of this here at the time.

Well we know he left the airplane... some of the money did make it to the ground as well I did not start jumping till a year later.. its not me BUT I could tie that shit on with no issues with the suspension lines he used... think sheet bend knot Tina's testimony is that 'he was having a lot of trouble tying (it) off around his waste'. This may go directly to Guru's point. Obviously he was not a good "scout" then... soooooooo not prepared. BUT. Tying the bag on is not real hard... and tying in the waist area in front poses no real challenge to keeping it there in place.. or in stability issues once it is tied to the harness. Ckret cited this as one of the reasons he thinks Cooper was an amateur. I can almost quote it: 'Just knew enough to get himself in real trouble'. All based on Tina's testimony. I am sure Guru remembers these discussions here - 377 likewise. OT: Do you know any of the guys in the Iowa Mountaineers? Chuck Huss or any of those guys ... ?

Without knowin' the how's & where's Cooper actually attached the bag, it's impossible to speculate with reasonable certainty if it landed with him or not. That being said, Tina's testimony is very specific: he was typing it off around his waste. Recall we spent weeks establishing there was nothing on his harness to tie anything to. 377 and Snowmman dug into that, at length. Guru may have chimed in on that too, if I recall this correctly - There were many posts made here about the possible scenarios all based on Tina's testimony, ie tying it off around his waste. (bag flying up and banging him in the head... issues of stability ... etc.)

Well we know he left the airplane... some of the money did make it to the ground as well I did not start jumping till a year later.. its not me BUT I could tie that shit on with no issues with the suspension lines he used... think sheet bend knot Tina's testimony is that 'he was having a lot of trouble tying (it) off around his waste'. This may go directly to Guru's point.

My guess is Agent Furhman never said what you are saying he said! It's total bullshit in any event, from a dozen different angles. Two buys in a bar. One guy says: "Did you see the two assholes on that camel that went by?" The other guy records months later: "The tail on the camel concealed two assholes". You would say something like that. Fuhrman and I weren't the only ones at the table, though. His daughter, Geoff Gray, among others. Better go check on your camel. Well to begin with, robo-poster of editorials, you have a long record here of making stuff up. And then the utter gall to deny and attack anyone who says you are making stuff up! That was the whole point of Farflung's whole dialogue with you, which you conveniently dismiss and forget waiting to wear Farflung down and leave. Nothing you have said since you came to Dropzone has turned out to be true or even germane and Im just guessing your dialogue with Furhrman is just one more instance of that. You claimed to have the Palmer Report and that melted away like the fabrication it was ... You claimed to have damaging email against me from Geoff Gray and Geoff and I talked at length on Monday and Geoff says he hasnt even emailed you in the last several months, has nothing to do with you, and he searched and said: ' the only email I have sent Blevins are a few quick five word replies so it sounds to me like Blevins is just making trouble'. There you have it! "Agent Furhman told me that yes...my thoughts on how approximately three bundles of the ransom ended up there, and nothing else...was not discussed in 1980. He said no one at that time who was investigating the money find thought of it, and he agreed with my point that it might be evidentiary.' What is this "it" you keeping yammering about claiming it is some new discovery dumb FBI agents and consultants galore, failed to think of? The only reason I can think of for an FBI agent telling you " He said no one at that time who was investigat- ing the money find thought of it, and he agreed with my point that it might be evidentiary.' ... was to say: "If you want to pretend you have discovered something new, well then yes, it whatever 'it' is, could be evidential." Furhman is telling you that your obtuse thoughts, were not thought of at the time, and if whatever it is you are claiming had been true (WHICH IT ISNT!) ... then yes, chocolate and cows flying in ufos would be "evidential" My guess is Furhman was just brushing you off. Because it isn't the first time you have put words in people's mouths including the FBI. Isn't this just about RobertMBlevins looking for meaning and purpose in Blevins' life, and nothing more, and is completely irrelevant to the actual DB Cooper case? Your whole history in this has been to claim insight and special evidence, only to have it vanish when pressed .. ! It's all mind games on the part of RobertMBlevins in what Geoff Gray describes as the "snakepit" of Dropzone. I will post more about my conversation with Geoff tonight -

Robert replies: Sure, they put thought into it. Later they said the money was probably a sign Cooper died in the jump. Agent Furhman told me that yes...my thoughts on how approximately three bundles of the ransom ended up there, and nothing else...was not discussed in 1980. He said no one at that time who was investigating the money find thought of it, and he agreed with my point that it might be evidentiary. If you don't believe me, you can contact him yourself and ask him. He also has a daughter and both of them live in the Seattle area. The Seattle FBI office will forward messages/mail to him if you ask. My guess is Agent Furhman never said what you are saying he said! It's total bullshit in any event, from a dozen different angles. Two buys in a bar. One guy says: "Did you see the two assholes on that camel that went by?" The other guy records months later: "The tail on the camel concealed two assholes".

Of course. Almost everything being "discussed" here is a non-point. What is being accomplished by all of this "discussion"? Really? I truly don't get it. I question my own rationality for even bothering to read this thread...and post once a month the way I do. Doing what DB did was almost trivial. Thousands -...tens of thousands...of jumpers could pull it off. With one exception: doing it alone without loss of the money bag. Tying the money bag to the harness/body without help is almost impossible. The found money pretty much confirms it, from my perspective. 550 cord (parachute line to you whuffos) is notoriously difficult to work with and tie... without some practice. The act of tying the bag to the harness or his body without another pair of hands to support the cumbersome weight and shape of the bag would be very difficult, IMO. Finding buried money, dredging, pressure bumps, rain, placards, airways etc etc,..all unimportant. He jumped and he lost the money. Maybe he died. Maybe he didn't. If I did he jump...I wouldn't tell anyone. I'd be too embarrassed... I am not D B Cooper. There is direct witness testimony to support your position - and I believe you stated almost exactly what you say tonight, years ago! I remember it well. No more Einsteinian ego fart palaver needed.

How intriguing. What's your theory as to why a wash down theory isn't realistic? Oddly.

How intriguing. What's your theory as to why a wash down theory isn't realistic? Oddly.

Said to Robert99- IT WAS BACKWARDS! GET WITH THE PROGRAM AND COME ON IN FOR THE BIG WIN! YOU MUST LEARN TO CONFORM WITH MEDIOCRITY TO GET ALONG! THEY WANT IT THEIR WAY! ITS THEIR WEBSITE. THEY DID IT THEIR WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I'll bet you think this song is about YOU! Nice evaluation of yourself above and for the last four days of your personal hysteria on Dropzone. I guess we don't need Gray's analysis anymore! Do you believe in atoms or do we have to give that up too, as a personal attack against YOU !?

Blevins, Please note that if the stairs drop 2 or 3 feet under their own weight, then they will drop several more feet as Cooper descends the stairs. It doesn't make any difference if he faces forward, backwards, walks on his hands, or whatever. So there is no way Cooper is going out through a small opening between the stairs and tail cone. And once Cooper's weight is off those stairs, they are going to eventually go back to 2 or 3 feet after slamming into their closed position if they are opened into the airstream sufficiently for the dynamics to do that. Robert99 IT WAS BACKWARDS! GET WITH THE PROGRAM AND COME ON IN FOR THE BIG WIN! YOU MUST LEARN TO CONFORM WITH MEDIOCRITY TO GET ALONG! THEY WANT IT THEIR WAY! ITS THEIR WEBSITE. THEY DID IT THEIR WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!

Your name wasn't even mentioned, BIGSHOT! Why? Because he's constantly in our faces ... just like your 'comeback' to my post to Air and 377... now. Maybe you should mind your own business for a change if you have any business ? Why do you feel this need to comment and expand and clarify everybody's everything all the time? Mind your own business for a change if you have any! ps: Here BIGSHOT! Comment on this! http://www.selectscience.net/product-news/Integrated-DNA-Technologies-Inc/IDT-and-SGI-DNA-Broaden-Their-Collaboration-to-Provide-Synthetic-DNA-Products-up-to-2-Mbp/?&artID=27697 Do you think this will have ramifications for Next-Gen splicing and genetic testing at Quantico, which could have ramifications for testing in the DB Cooper case! ? Your expert opinion is being asked for! "Wager-earner sheeple" which includes me wanna know!

Why do you and 377 continue to 'poke the dog' and incite people? Got anything on the Cooper case, for a change? You keep 'talking' about 'responsibility for actions'; and I for one have yet to see you or 377 define just what "actions" and "responsibilities" you are talking about! Maybe there would be more "glory" in this for you and 377 if you hatched something concrete for a change beyond: "he backed down the stairs" ? Something concrete like: "He walked up the stairs to get into the plane" ? Or, "Tests show the Cooper money was only exposed to the atmosphere for three weeks between 11-24-71 and 2-11-1980" ? Or, "Tosaw and his salvage consultants identified only five places where Cooper and his loot could have been tied up on the bottom, between mile markers BBB and ZZZ, which means Cooper loot might have had to enter the Columbia to arrive at Tina Bar between mile markers 666 and 999 ..." ?

Tell us about Robert Ballard. I'm sure you know him well too. Can't say I've met him. I have met Merilee Rush, some of the Wailers, and others involved in what they once called the Northwest Sound. Bass, sometimes rhythm when they turned me loose with my Gibson SG. I was the young kid on the block, though. After some shows, I would wake up the next morning in a strange place and wonder who that woman was next to me. I was always polite, though.

This idea was popular long before the film. Oliver Stone. A no BS kind of guy, generally. He pegged the Vietnam War and The Doors pretty well. Why wouldn't he get it right on Kennedy?

This is beginning to sound like the infamous Janet Fable. I think everyone should see the source of what you support. You can't have it both ways. You can't knock on me about questioning the Janet Story and then say you don't believe it, either. You said nothing about "questioning". You said "the infamous Janet FABLE". You labled it: "This is begin- ning to sound like the infamous Janet Fable.". No confusion here. You label things ... you actually know nothing about. Then you take your labels and apply them as truth. That is your method. In reality of course you actually know literally nothing about Janet, what she saw, if she saw, her husband who also saw or did not see, what was seen, the circle of people Janet and her family connected with, how the story got out, who investigated or did not invest- igate, who the 'black suits' at her door were, etc etc etc. So, knowing nothing literally you literally use one newspaper article and then LABEL JANET! I and others tried years ago to convey some information to this group about this matter - you would not allow it! Now you ask: "I think everyone should see the source of what you support." Are you now ready to allow it, or shall we wait another three years? Or, you could just save yourself and others the wear and tear and just go back and READ THE THREAD - Let's just do your moral equivalency test and ask: "Is Janet and her God fearing family as credible and morally upright, as you are" ? Or are they, what did you call it? "Wage earner sheeple", to be dispensed with due to Moral Inferiority? Americans wanna know! (your words) My feeling is this story will remain in gridlock for some time to come, until the sequester has played out, or Geoff Gray gets there first! Isnt that a kicker!

I think Rataczak said: "cubits and stadia per watch" ! Its in a newspaper article in the Tea Party Bible Tomes. Writers know! I believe a better translation would be, "Writers THINK they know!".

Blevins, Let me repeat once again. You need to read the radio transcripts of the chatter between the airliner and Seattle ATC. That is the hub of the problem. Reading vs understanding. Its no criticism, until somebody starts acting/writing like he does understand technical terms. Isn't there a common denominator in moral equivalency here we could resort to: 1 knot equals 3 hens on a bush? 1 mph equals a guy with a royal flush? 175 knots equals 'I swam the Puget Sound" ? Now, if we apply this conversion and interpret the Cooperphelia in 'moral equivalency' ... only one party can be right! There it is. That proves Janet was a liar! See how simple this is when the right ruler is applied? When the ruler has thumbscrews and the rack, and that steely helmet thing that slams down with blood spikes into your brain .... just to cleans impure thoughts away! Works every time!

Rataczak would not call an airspeed MPH if it was actually Knots. Since MPH is 1.15 times higher than Knots, that would be a significant difference. If Rataczak meant 170 Knots, but wanted to put it in MPH, he would say something like "about 190 MPH to 200 MPH". Or he could do the actual and mentally easy calculation and say "195 MPH". And you must remember that Knots is an International Convention mandated system for commercial aircraft airspeeds. Robert99 I think Rataczak said: "cubits and stadia per watch" ! Its in a newspaper article in the Tea Party Bible Tomes. Writers know!

Janet says she saw something 'that looked like a man' standing on the airstairs. Come on... You are a broken record of incompetence and too lazy to consider much less allow, anything other than what you select to promote to further your juvenile little agenda! Play it again, Sam.

This is beginning to sound like the infamous Janet Fable. Or the "infamous RobertMBlevins KC fable" - eh? Can we look forward to a sequester of your throwing barbs and mindless accusations at innocent people. whose story you are simply jealous of, know nothing about, and can only whine about in envy? Give it up Blevins - you are out of their league!

and I've camped in the wilderness. The training I received always stressed preparation and planning. Yep! We teach our kids how to manage things, or try to. We shoot for a good healthy middle. That's just the way Iowans are. But some kids catch their 'thing' in the zipper. Some of those are heroes and survive by their own wits. Others need surgery and are dwarfed by the exper- ience. Still others, the broad majority, have a few close shaves but generally avoid the problem, in the first place. The line between comedy and tragedy is very close. And too many dwarfs become our socalled 'leaders'. It's the subatomic homesick blues!

Airtwardo wrote Quote Almost EVERYTHING is avoidable if ya stay on the couch... Umm, not everything is avoidable by staying on the couch. I bet you know some jumpers who are paying 18 years of child support for something that got started on a couch. I think Blevins ought to carry one of these. Too many close calls. http://m.rei.com/...locator-beacons.html The venom against Blevins seems to come primarily (but not exclusively) from non jumpers. Why is that Airtwardo? Are we jumpers just more tolerant? 377 +2 primarily (but not exclusively) People round heor need to stop shooting messengers! After so many claims and false messages - ? Whose to believe? Vested interest might be a guideline! Didnt this happen in highschool a lot? Lots of hysteria in the parking lot. Sub atomic homesick blues.