georger

One of the problems with the tie evidence is the question of how many people handled it between 1971 and when Kaye and his team were allowed to examine it. For now, I think I can go with the idea that any exotic metals present on it should be granted an exception: That they didn't end up there as a result of touching by someone in the FBI. You could go down that road all day and it would solve nothing. Might want to ask Kaye's opinion on whether at least some of the particles were embedded in such a way that might preclude simple touching as the reason for their presence. You could open a new column on Newsvine titled: DB Cooper Science ! Jump start the Inevitable.

Tom's pictures toss the Cooper tie question right out the window. Cooper's tie selection was not conclusive of his job or employment. Robert99 In the Jurassic period of this thread you mentioned and named a munitions test site just east of V23, between Ariel and BTG east, where people presumably made and tested munitions. I thought that was possibly interesting in terms of the particles found on the tie ?

QUIZ: Q: What was the silver nitrate bearing solution the FBI used to spray on some Cooper bills, to test for finger prints, using a silver nitrate solution ? A: silver nitrate. [This was all stated yesterday several times in case you missed it...] Q: Who released the news of the FBI having used silver nitrate solution to test for finger prints on the Cooper bills in 1980 ? A: (possible answers): a. Silver Nitrate b. Ckret c. Georger d. Tom Kaye e. Dichromate(VI) ions f. Jerry Thomas g. Brian Ingram h. Sluggo i. all of the above

I want you to examine my side for a moment. Consider these things: Regina Winkles puts up a little article on Wordpress about the case. Then 400 comments show up, some with your name attached to them, some with Farf's, in fact...most of the users who inhabit this thread. The comments were extremely filthy, making hints on everything from pedophilia to my parents in Phoenix. Post after post, each worse than the last. In the end, I have to make a PDF out of the whole thing and send it to Wordpress HQ in San Francisco as well as Mark Mullenberg, co-founder of Wordpress. Then the comments are removed. The day after I released the public version of the report on Christiansen, someone obviously from this thread posts the following review of the book by 'Max Gastineau': (Almost certainly a phony name chosen by someone who posts to this thread) I left it alone, I no longer respond to reviews. Blevins: what has Winkle's website and the rest of this nonsense got to do with ME ? Nothing. I am not remotely interested in any of this, your personal internet problems at websites with people here or there et cetera ... blah blah blah. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME OR THIS FORUM! Sorry, but what else am I supposed to say? That I empathize because there are crazy people in this world that you interact and have problems with? My advice is: change your fishing gear ... maybe you will catch different fish? Take off the Winkle's 12" Silver Spoon and put on a Mini Max Wiggler - change your line from 90lb test to 6lb mono filament, and drop the Tuna troll pole and rig to a Cabella's pond rig ? I Don't know what else to say! I'm not interested in what goes on On the Dark Side of the Moon! And I gave up my Gilbert "Listen to Signals from Space" crystal set at age eight - so I don't even have the gear to communicate with anymore!

Well ... we can discuss these things if EVER GIVEN THE CHANCE! The answers I would give are very specific, semi-technical, but easily explainable. This isn't rocket science'! Most of this was presented, discussed, and explained before, years ago ... I have to wonder if people even care now. Most people now are way beyond all of that. ??? I seriously doubt for example, that Aamazon and Farflung want to hear it again or think it even germane! (My crystal set is more tuned to their frequency these days and its a challenge in my mind; and the minute we go there a lot of people will be left behind, in the vaporous contrails ..... ) Its a vast span to have to bridge somehow ... is what I think about these days.

Georger: It's funny that you now promote Citizen Sleuths, when I can go back and quote comments by you where you discount their findings, as well as Tom Kaye's credentials. Don't make me do this. There's enough problems here already. But you brought this on yourself. And now your credibility is in serious doubt. . I dont find any humor in this at all, as you do. Once again you make a straw man, a false report, of things I have said. I have never made any global statement of the kind you attribute to me, above. Why you engage in this Revisionism? So, go back and dredge my comments up and quote them! They dont add up to what you are now claiming and attributing to ME! "Dont make me do this", you say. WELL YES - DO IT! Specially, all Ive ever said was: _ I didnt agree with Toms propeller theory. I thought it was a longshot at best, and Tom's own data doesn't require a theory like that... because the theory requires that the money at Tina Bar came up river, from the Lewis River, etc etc etc. I have never seen anything in the data that requires or supports that happened.. _ I dont agree with Carol's linguistic theory about Cooper based on the report Cooper said "American currency", which may not even be a true account! Farflung etal commented about this also - _ I do not agree with Tom's 'bills in perfect alignment' statement. Since Tom himself seems to turn around and offer counter evidence in his graphic on actual bill alignment. Toms own graphic does not agree with his statement saying 'perfect alignment'. Or maybe there is something Tom is saying I don't understand? _ I made a number of statements regarding bill alignments and offered photographic proof. [Tom has always been free to come here and explain and defend his statements - he doesn't for some reason and that is his choice. _ I disagree with Tom when he says the only logical option left is 'hand burial'. I see other logical possibilities which I and others (Robt99 etc) have outlined numerous times ... So Mr. Blevins, stop attributing global statements to me I have never made. Stop throwing the baby out with the bath water! I have made both negative and positive (or positive and negative) statements regarding the team's work. Stop painting everyone and everything with your TAR BRUSH!

That was my understanding also - then there are individuals who claimed he had access to ALL of the records....very unlikely the FBI allowed him full access. Gray did tell me a little story about his ventures in the files. It was told to me in confidence and I try never to let the people down. Yes, Gray can be very conversant. Blevins' seems to have the idea Gray talks in one-liners, black or white; not the case at all. Can be disarming and likeable. I actually wondered at one point if we shouldn't have Gray on the team for a combined effort, but I explored that with several people who turned thumbs down on the idea. Later, I wondered if Tom might take Geoff on in a combined effort, but I guess that was not to be either. I mean it was no secret the FBI and people close to the case were giving Geoff special considerations. Himmelsbach for one. I wondered if we shouldn't all be working as a team of sorts but one person turned that idea down flat. The first hint of a problem was over 'two types of silver in the money' and I guess the problem had come from me talking to Geoff? What I had said was that there "might" be one type of silver in residue in between the bills, if the money had spent time in a silver bearing region like the Washougal, and the other form resulting from silver nitrate tests the FBI had performed on some of the money. And possibly even a third type, depending on sand types at Tina's Bar ... The word "might" became "is" somehow, and that is what I called Geoff to try and correct ... and things involving others and Gray unraveled after that. I guess 'two types of silver' never got corrected. The whole thing at the time was a little confusing with Geoff very difficult to get on the phone et cetera. This may have been a period where he took a vacation or something? There are posts about this in the archive. It's a little self-serving talking about it now, in my opinion. In the current climate, people are going to believe what they want to believe, in any event. I am thoroughly convinced of that and it serves no real purpose to bring this all back up now.

I will assure you ALL of the writers will say what they want and Gray is a very busy young man. You are such a PEST - he would tell you anything to MAKE you go away - he probably doesn't even remember what he said to Georger or You. He does not eat and sleep Cooper. Gray wrote a explorative FUN Book and if you read the last chapter - well, you should know he was going to stay neutral on the subject and he gave it a fun Kooky ending. He left all of his options out there so someday just encase - he did NOT want to bury Cooper...not just yet. . ... and from my layman's point of view, the reason the Cooper discussion settled at Dropzone was because of the technical issues involved in the case. Those needed exploring. And there were damned good people here to discuss such matters at the time. At the core of the Cooper case are some technical issues. Whether Cooper had a technical background himself, or not. ... in the same vein, it seems to me, anyone who takes on the challenge of writing about the Cooper case is going to have to deal with some technical issues, inevitably. Gray got into trouble quickly over something as simple as "two types of silver in the money", for example. I probably shouldnt say this but on the one hand I was laughing that this was happen- ing (Tom wont appreciate my saying that), but on the other hand Gray's lack of technical background had the potential to cause problems (for everyone). That was what got me to call him,to try and straighten Gray out on the facts and what they meant .. and it probably as a mistake that i called him at all trying to get this straightened out. The point being: anyone writing about the Cooper case in a serious way is going to have to have some serious background in technical matters, or a good advisor. Im not sure Gray has a technical background. Its not a criticism of Gray; its just a fact. And in a similar vein: anyone who comes to any website and posts about technical matters, runs the risk of being miss-interpreted, even on a website where technical people are like this. If there are people watching this thread 24/7 just looking and waiting for something to pounce on, then the risk of being misunderstood or 'redirected' is only increased. You are kind of between a rock and hard place, no matter what you do. And I hope Blevins and everyone else takes this to heart: One of the reasons I volunteered to help do some forensic work on the Cooper money was NOT because of my personal brilliance or expertise et cetera, but due to working connections I have. The issue was never just 'me', but a network of people who said they would try and help in an analysis project, with Tom Kaye then added. Two people who posted here at the time who have solid technical backgrounds were also on call and said they would help if needed. So when Geoffrey Gray describes me as just a "lab geek"?, that was inaccurate and missed who and what was really going on ... with the FBI fully aware of the actual facts. Gray saying what he said about me fully indicated to me that confidentiality had been preserved and remains so to this very day. It is also my understanding that Mr. Gray was admitted to the FBI at Seattle simply as an observer. He was not allowed FULL ACCESS to FBI files and all of the evidence as has been rumored. That in a nutshell is my understanding. I have posted this same info before here on this thread. I hope that will finally lay some of this to rest -

Blevins is not going to stop. That is the advice of everyone I know who have had experience with him. He says he's only interested in "verification"! I have no control over any of this, from the moment he began. I am hanging on just like everyone else. WHY would I be any different than anyone else? Hell I barely post here any more. I wait days sometimes, then when I do come here I have to deal with something Blevins has said or done naming me, or something that has happened to someone else because of Blevins.! Check the record.

Troll.

Let things be. Grey was the one who made your real name known in the book - was he not! Of course that is different than putting it out on internet media souce. This is a test - now using a different browser and things working normally after talking to my isp. Ive been using a version of IE which evidently no longer works here at DZ? Yes. Gray is the one who violated our agreement and revealed my name. In the end he claimed I was the one who had called him on one occasion so he claimed with that call I have given up my right to privacy on the basis of Gray being a "reporter"! (I had called Gray to correct him about 'two types of silver in the money' he was advertising. It was a question of factual error on Gray's part and Gray didnt know what he was talking about.) Some time passed and then I was told about some problem Gray and Tom/Carol were having with regard to Gray releasing Tom's private data? At the end of it all I told Gray never to contact me again etc etc., and Gray explained later that was the point at which he decided to out my name ... in retaliation? Gray used the fact it was me who had called him earlier ("as a reporter"he says - about 'two types of silver') which gave him the justification and legal authority to print my name! Gray has never offered an apology. Blevins, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter! Blevins is just using my name to piss me off and cause me any grief he can, for his own personal reasons. Blevins' actions are just part of a tactical maneuver he started early on when arriving here at Dropzone, which we believe includes other personal invasions of my privacy. Gray actually warned me that this was how Blevins operated ... but I always knew you cant hide under a rock when people like this get started. That is the real "Cooper curse". There is no curse - it's just the natures of some of the people that attach themselves to this Cooper phenomenon, socalled Blevins is just feeding off of this whole thing, so far as I can tell. His whole case quoting from his report is just: "I understand … I offer you…I were able to … The single biggest reason why I decided …I interviewed… I interviewed... I interviewed… Interviewed in-person by Robert Blevins.. I interviewed… I admitted that I was actually investigating … I responded … I asked … I thought … I considered … I moved on to questioning " ... with no hard evidence of anything. His report is just a report on himself! If he wants a job with the FBI he should apply for one, and leave the investigating to others. Blevins says he sent his report out to news media and nobody Ive talked to has any evidence Blevins' report caught the attention of news media, whatever Blevins' expectations were. Blevins' broadcasting of the Marla affair has only lessened the chances anyone will have time or the patience go through Blevins' report on KC, in my opinion. People are sick of false reports and bad investigations which never had much merit to begin with! ... that's my opinion. In contrast to that I am aware of a few credible people in the background who 'were' doing work on evidence in the Cooper case, but none of them post here nor will they ever, most likely. The climate here is just not conducive to rational - anything. There is no "COOPER CURSE'! What there is or has ever been is just a few idiots who manage to get involved in this mess looking to make some kind of name for themselves, for some weird reason. As a practical matter, I always questioned just how far we would get, examining Cooper money. Tom's team was able to go ahead and examine evidence at Seattle which to my mind is the best basic work which has been done, which could prove useful down the road. But that kind of work is original work and fundamentally different than what goes on here at Dropzone. Maybe the writers should try and followup on that and give other things a rest, for a change. ps- I am now using Mozilla Firefox 6.0 here and it works well-normally. Georger

Pick up the phone and call Geoffrey - you do know his number don't you. Instead of stomping around and blaming others - pick up the DAMN phone and all him. Have you EVER spoke to him on the phone or do you depend on others to do that for you? I didn't take YOUR word for the things you have claimed about others - I picked up the phone. Want ME to MAKE the call for YOU to Gray? Out-line EXACTLY the question you want to ask him in 2 lines. NOT a lot of gibberish! Priceless! You would be good at dodge ball, I think. LOL why should I call Geoff Gray? This is a lame suggestion on your part, mostly given because although you might have his cell number, he probably won't take your calls. If he does, I can just imagine the conversation: "Hey, this is Warner. How you doing?" "Fine. What's up?" "Yeah...I just wanted to say I'm sorry for saying that stuff at Dropzone." "Don't worry about it." "That Blevins...he just gets on my nerves sometimes." On a strange and happier note, the Seattle Seahawks were the beneficiaries tonight of a VERY BAD call in the end zone at the end of their Monday Night game with the Green Bay Packers. LOL...it was an interception by the Pack all the way, but the officials ruled it 'simoutaneous possession' and a touchdown for the Hawks. Ha ha. This call was so friggin' bad that it took the refs fifteen minutes to convince Green Bay to send out eleven guys for the now-meaningless extra point. The Pack sort of went on strike for a while, and refused to come out. Can't say I blame them. After the game, Packer coach Mike McCarthy refused to take questions about the officiating. If he had, they would have had to bleep him out all over the place. These replacement referees are SO bad it's become ridiculous. However, it's nice when they screw up for YOUR team. By tomorrow, the NFL main office is going to be flooded with phone calls and emails. Trust me, this was the most controversial Monday Night Football game on record. They will be showing replays on that last-play-of-the-game for years. NFL needs to end the lockout on the referees. Watch ESPN tonight and see if the main subject is the Seattle/Green Bay Monday Night game. This is GUARANTEED. 'Go Hawks'. He he...gotta love those replacement refs. \ Mr Blevins: Gray said exactly as I have reported. My name here is Georger, you troll. ABUSE COMPLAINT FILED on the troll! For the recprd, something is wrong with my connection to this website - cant get this forum to load - have no simialr problem anywhere on the internet - I will consult my isp tomorrow ... ps: If Gray denies now he said what he said that is HIS problem not mine. People have advised me Gray made similar expressions to others. If Gray denies that, then Gray has a credibility problem too. I have tried to call Mr Gray as per Blevins insistence. I have tried every number I have. Gray is either not taking my calls or is unavailable. Mr Gray can call me at any time, also. Telephones work two ways. But, I will not try any further. That is all I can say on the subject because that is literally all I know. If Blevins claims to have more recent better info then let Blevins (or Gray) explain it in detail. Is Blevins really worth all of this trouble? Is this forum where Blevins has run people off really worth all of this problem? Maybe no one here cares. Maybe people here are entertained by it - a lot of people are NOT entertained by these machinations here. It goes to the credibility of Dropzone. And if this is the level you people want here, then you definately have it, even without me - not even 377 can deny THAT! This forum has become a literal joke and disgusting. ... But, I am literally sitting here waiting for minutes waiting for this website to load so I can do anything here ... have no simialr problem anywhere else. I guess Dropzone is unlucky for me ... Congrats to troll Blevins. It works in his advantage, as usual... kind of a stacked deck with both my hands tied behind me! ...lets see if this will now load?

And if you believe any of Knoss' story, then I have some seafront property in Kansas you might be interested in...

Be careful Kate/Marilyn/Bill you could get labeled as a cult leader with egotistical venom like that! Here's the url ... the proof you demand! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult Seen any more ufo's or liars on broomsticks today? Have any response yet from the major news outlets you sent your 'FBI Pdf' to ? Have they shown interest or run any news stories? ... whoever you are posting here!

I'm just curious, Robert. In the article you write: "There are three basic types of people in this cult. The first are the people who celebrate Cooper's life because he was the guy who 'stuck it to the man' for two hundred grand (just over a million in today's dollars) and never got caught..... "The second group are the unbiased civilian investigators, or writers with an interest in the case..... "The third group are the most dangerous type in this cult. They are the folks who either don't want to know who the hijacker was because they live solely for the discussion, or the people who push one suspect to the exclusion of all others." You know most of us put you in the third group. Which group do you consider yourself in? Well, it was tricky for me to use the word 'cult' to refer to Cooper fans and investigators in the article. The word generally has a negative connotation. But I think in some ways it's the best way to describe the core group of folks with a stronger-than-normal interest in the case. I thought the word 'groupies' was a bit too lightweight, and it is true that some people are obsessive about the case. Geoff Gray alluded to this quite a bit in his book. I don't consider folks like the Citizen Sleuths or Geoff Gray 'cultists,' but more like the Voices of Reason and Sensibility on the fringes of it. I thought the article was a pretty honest look at what Cooperland is really about. Since you are asking, no...I don't consider myself a Cooper Nut. For one thing, I don't hunt down outside articles and make phony comments using other peoples' names. I don't make ridiculously wild claims on Christiansen, (meaning: been wrong, but I don't lie to people) and most importantly, I don't claim to know that KC was the hijacker. It's hard to ignore the available evidence, but just as hard to ignore some of the negative evidence. I've always maintained it won't be DNA that solves the case, but verifiable witness testimony. Prints could do it, but no one really knows if any of the 66 prints are a match to the hijacker. So...even if they had a good suspect and got his prints, they still might not match. I figure I'm in the second group, but a few rungs down from people like Gray or the Citizen Sleuths. 'The stupid things you do, you regret if you have any sense, and if you don't regret them, maybe you're stupid...' Katherine Hepburn Hi Marilyn, I mean Kate. I guess its Kate now! Maybe you just suffer from not knowing what the word "cult" means. I mean, you really are not entitled to make up your own definition, Kate. Quoting: "The word cult in current popular usage usually refers to a new religious movement or other group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre.[1] The word originally denoted a system of ritual practices. The word was first used in the early 17th century denoting homage paid to a divinity and borrowed via the French culte from Latin cultus "worship", from the adjective cultus meaning "inhabited, worshipped", derived from the verb colere "care, cultivate."[2] In the 1930s cults became the object of sociological study in the context of the study of religious behavior. They have been criticized by mainstream Christians for their unorthodox beliefs. In the 1970s the anticult movement arose, partly motivated by acts of violence and other crimes committed by members of some cults (notably the Manson Family and People's Temple). Some of the claims of the anti-cult movement have been disputed by other scholars, leading to further controversies." While most scholars no longer refer to any new religious movements as cults, some sociologists still favor retaining the word as it was used in church-sect typologies. For this value-neutral use of the word, please refer to new religious movements. Other scholars and non-academic researchers who use the word do so from explicitly critical perspectives which focus on the relationship between cult groups and the individual people who join them. These perspectives share the assumption that some form of 'coercive' persuasion or mind control is used to recruit and maintain members by suppressing their ability to reason, think critically, and make choices in their own best interest. However, most social scientists believe that mind control theories have no scientific merit in relation to religious movements ..." Now you know what the word "cult" means, or maybe you don't care what it means, which may be the salient point of your butchering the use of the word!?

You ought to try it ... rather than talking about it! ? I'm game for it.. how about you??? Naw just had my 50th class reunion. Its all I can handle just coming here.

You ought to try it ... rather than talking about it! ?

Georger: Well I see you have taken yet another "cheapshot" at me, this time at Newssvine! Robert: I will answer your concerns and questions here. Robert: NO. I said a sort-of fan cult has built up around Cooper in the last forty-plus years. To deny that is to ignore the facts. I never named Gray or the Citizens Sleuths in the Cooper Nut category. In fact, I was quite specific about it. I said sometimes you were polite and sometimes maybe not. The reference to your number of posts just means you're prolific. The exact number is anybody's business. It's listed next to every post, right? Robert: I said in the article that I had made nearly 3,000 posts. It was a small point all around. There are long-term Cooper fans. You are one of them. No big deal. It wasn't personal. That was good number-crunching on your part, I'll admit. Robert: Leave them alone.

Well I see you have taken yet another "cheapshot" at me, this time at Newssvine! And you call everyone here or involved with the DB Cooper case, a "cult". Including the science team, Geoff Gray, etc. Your venom just never stops. On Newsvine, you once again bring up the number of my posts here at Dropzone, which quite frankly is none of your damned business! What exactly do you wish me to do about this fact you characterise as some kind of character flaw in me? Do you want me to ask Quade to delete half of my posts, so you would have more than me? The facts you ignore are clear and already pointed out to you. You have nearly 3000 post in only 2.3 years while I have 5900 posts in over 4 years, and a sizeable majority of my posts were accumulated in addressing Jo Weber who follows with ~5300 posts, and you with your ~3000 posts in less than 2.5 years. What exactly do you wish me to do about all of my posts since more than half of them were accumulated before you even arrived here? What is the flaw in my character you are raising on Newsvine and here? I will also now PM Quade and address this problem head on. I will also address your comment at Newsvine about my character with MSNBC and others tomorrow. As for your claim that you are "above" the CULT of DB Cooper which you state as being named people in your socalled article, Geoff Gray, Tom Kaye, and everyone at Dropzone ... I wish you luck defending that statement of yours also!

The FBI can do this whenever they choose. I'll try to pull everything together for an illustrated article this weekend on my column at Newsvine. Links to all available information regarding KC will be at the article. 'The stupid things you do, you regret if you have any sense, and if you don't regret them, maybe you're stupid...' Katherine Hepburn Lyle must have really "hated" Kenny, in order to allow writers-inventors like you to besmirch Kenny's whole life! Quite obviously, brother Lyle felt Kenny 'owed' him in some big way, but of course you arent interested in Kenny's real life story. When you do your Newsvine POS 'article', as you call them, on Kenny's finger prints,,, be sure to include the prints of a unicorn and a heliotrope, to compare with. The issues are: accuracy in jurinalism, and using a few socalled meaningless facts in order to jusitify not having to pay the hotel bill! Are you satisfied with the service being provided here?

"Burning fossil fuels just for fun." Or something like that. What ever happened to her? I found her insightful, interesting and quite intelligent. She probably got fed up with the nonsense in this thread just like the other 99% of us. Probably. I've already put three people who post here regularly on my 'ignore' list. This means I'll read what they have to say, but I'm no longer addressing any of their possible questions, or responding to their comments. And if they don't have any comments or questions for me, I'm okay with that too.

yes, always a complication. Longest running soap opera in American History! ?

Matt, just to be clear about this: one of Jo's complaints has been she could not get all of Duane's "records", whatever "all" means. As a former spouse, can she get "all of" Duane's military records? Maybe you could clarify that for her ... Jo needs to try again under the Archival Records clause. Since Duane was booted out of the Army in 1944, the 62 year period would have expired in 2006. So Jo needs to get a Standard Form 180, fill in all the blanks possible, include a check for the appropriate amount, and get it in the mail. And she should send in a SF180 for both the Army and Navy records to the appropriate addresses. Jo can't lose anything but a few dollars at most. Robert99 Thats clear enough - Jo hope you read this!

Matt, just to be clear about this: one of Jo's complaints has been she could not get all of Duane's "records", whatever "all" means. As a former spouse, can she get "all of" Duane's military records? Maybe you could clarify that for her ...

Not so fast on doomsday calls Robert. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weather/research/2010-06-10-cloud-whitening_N.htm Just give us some cloudless weekends for skydiving. 377 Yeah. That was a bit of parody back there. I'm just glad I lived in the time where everyone in the future will hate us. You know...the good old days of having fun burning up all the cheap fossil fuels on fast Chevys and yes...aircraft.