georger

We finally find an area to compromise. You get radioes. I get gyros!

Maybe Cooper (Duane) had a gyro in his brown paper bag? (or Flux Capacitor). All divers in the CRASH (Disc) show went out the stairs head first vs ass-backwards - yes? That applies. Maybe Cooper was a relative of Baumgartners? !! Ja? Did Herr Baumgratner's ancestors have Cooper Comics on the wall. The possibilities are endless!

Cool! I once bought some modules labeled gyro at a DOD surplus auction. They were hermetically sealed square module cans with TIGHTLY wound powerful clocksprings in them for driving a rotating mass. A fuseable link allowed the spring to be released and the gyro rotor spun up. A short blast of 28 VDC aircraft power would melt the link and the gyro would spin up very very quickly and remain spinning fast for quite a few minutes. Gyro position outputs were taken from a potentiometer and output through a plug. Seems a lot simpler than a gas drive. I later was told that these were used in air to air missiles. They could stand ready for duty for centuries given their simplicity and dry nitrogen gas filled can environment. I heard you like spinners Farf, so I knew this would be of interest. 377 The pdf is interesting. This was designed to address stability issues for space workers in zero-gravity, ....eg. Hubble telescope work comes to mind. Not sure this has any applicability to skydivers or if that kind of device would even be allowed in terms of setting records? The weight (mass) of the device would be a consideration in terms of velocity - accepted velocity records - 210lbs of person/ 500 lbs of gyro! New record: mach 3! They could come up with a 'gyro assisted catagory' ? (weight limit 2000 lbs.)

I happen to agree with that policy - there are enough 'feuds' going on without the addition of politics, religion, etc. So I strongly back Quade's mandate on this. Some get sucked in not knowing the policy, after someone who knows better posts anyway. That is especially galling, to me (just my personal take). On a better note, Im interested in exactly when and how Baumgartner started the spin, based on yours and Farf's comments about this. But I have found no exact timeline anywhere. I note the photos showing Baum. head down arms out just prior to the spin, and a general timeline which reads like this: Not sure if any of this applies to Cooper (or the recent Cash skydive program on Discovery)? I wonder what you see and think ??? Time Altitude 0:00 (18.08 utc (39.045 kilometres (24.261 mi) Alt: 128k feet opens the door and jumps 00:40-42 approximately 30,000 metres (98,000 ft), reaches Mach 1.2 (834 mph) 0:42 reached maximum velocity of 1,342.8 k/h 1:15-2:00 (2:40?) entered an uncontrolled spin - altitude? 3:30 approx successfully righted the spin, denser air slows B. So was in the spin for approx 2+ minutes from altitude ? to altitude? The spin I saw (gif attached) is head over heels, not on a horizontal axis... ? Photos and spin gif attached.

QUADE HAS REQUESTED ALL POLITICAL STUFF BE KEPT OUT OF THE THREAD - DID YOU MISS THAT? WHY-OH-WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO VIOLATE THAT RULE !??? OVER AND OVER AGAIN ??? WHILE OTHERS HAVE THEIR POLITICAL POSTS TAKEN DOWN ? WHAT MAKES YOU SPECIAL! ? PLEASE REMOVE YOUR POLITICAL POST SO QUADE WONT HAVE TO DO IT TOMORROW - A COPY OF YOUR POST HAS BEEN SENT TO QUADE. ... but of course you wont until compelled to - because YOU are special.

Thats a good question. My guess is they chose not to for several reasons, if it even came up, as it might have with Kittinger's experience. My guess is they didnt want to introduce any type of spin as denser air was going to be encountered, fearing any spin might translate into destructive forces, vs. as vertical a drop as possible in order to maximize acceleration and minimize drag components. It still is a good question. I wonder if it was discussed? At 128k feet you are still in the 20% zone - the region where roughly 20% of the atmopshere is between 12-31 miles. Air density at 128k feet is 7.3x10-4 kg/m^3 vs. 1.2 kg/m^3 at sea level. Any spin at that alititude would produce some drag vs the vertical gravitational component. Gravity at 128k is virtually the same as on the surface of the earth - not weightless space where forces can be rather quickly balanced if need be.

Also, from what I could see of Felix's spinning, it started about 55 or 60 seconds into the free fall. According to Red Bull's estimate, that would be about 15 or 20 seconds after Felix went supersonic. I hope Red Bull releases all the detailed data about how they determined when Felix went supersonic and how they did their calculations. It is just a case of showing your work. Robert99 Not sure of your link but I found this last night - the links in the bibli are good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos That is the correct link. Was going to post several others but lost isp, now back - try this: some nice tech links http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml and another at Wierd Science.com http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/stratos- space-jump-can-you-fall-faster-than-the-speed-of- sound/

Not sure of your link but I found this last night - the links in the bibli are good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos

Excellent. And I'll bet Kitty landed on all four feet. Robert99 Priceless! This is worth sharing. I wonder if Baumgartner has seen this ?

Already did my practicing for the day...yesterday. Most of those 'arguments' you cite don't address the issues I raised, but either play word games with them or somehow try to compare them to Christiansen. There is a difference between offering evidence and actual proof of a crime. I think regarding the former we did quite well. There is a lot of evidence and witness testimony out there against Christiansen. Some of it has to do with Bernie Geestman's lies at key moments. Comparing the case between KC and Weber is actually pretty simple. The only real evidence, if any, against Weber is the word of one woman. When I said 'physical evidence' I didn't mean fingerprints or DNA. I meant for example, a missing airline ticket stub, which cannot be produced. In the case of Weber, there ARE no witnesses. Just Jo. Even Gossett, if you believe his son(s) has a better case, since there is their testimony about certain quotes and incidents. There are things which have been proven in the case of Christiansen. For example, we can prove he lent the alleged accomplice's sister five thousand in cash less than six months after the hijacking. We can prove he spent 16k in cash on a house less than eight months after the hijacking. And we can prove that Bernie Geestman, despite his denials, was involved in both these transactions. We can also prove that KC and Bernie were together, and missing, over the week of the hijacking. We can prove Kenny had parachute experience, although he hadn't jumped in some years. We can prove that without any visible means of how he acquired it, that Kenny died with a much larger estate than someone in his position could be expected to have. We can prove that Geestman told lies that directly relate to an effort to distance himself from any possible involvement in the hijacking. For example, when he said he couldn't have been involved because he was gone to sea with Foss Tugs ten to eleven months of the year in 1971. Foss says that is not true. Or when he said he didn't know the details on how his own sister got the loan from Kenny...but it was HE who delivered the money. Or when he said he didn't know how Kenny got his house for cash...when Kenny bought it from a couple where Bernie served as their Best Man at their wedding only three years previously. None of that is proof Christiansen hijacked Flight 305, of course. But it IS evidence. And there is a lot more of that in KC's case than anything you'll find regarding Weber...

If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe Alleged news conference. Probably never happened. You have provided no proof. Without proof its just your word. Got a link?

agree. any idea if the chute opened automatically at some altitude? at what velocity?

Georger: Go whine to Red Bull. They're the ones who put up those speed numbers. HUH!? Speed numbers?

Here's another "articule" for Newsvine - 4 clydesdale abreast at mach 4 descending from spacey wavey Red Minitruck Baloon. Natsure can do anything, on Newsvine!

you need to understand that some things that happened to Duane were not as strange as you think they are! and there "it" is, in a nutshell. Ordinary vs. Extra-ordinary. The Cooper case (or people involved in it) wobble back and forth between these extremes regularly. Ive never seen anything like, except in cults - and that alone may define the situation. I sometimes think the only thing that separates finding Cooper from all the other candidates is something quite ordinary (a couple of items of ordinary evidence). Problem is those missing links seem to encompass a whole universe! But the math has always said otherwise. We argued this central point endlessly while Carr was here, everything revolved around it, andit still is the hub of all discussions. Amazing! We know all candidates to date are extra-ordianry. That alone segregates them to the bottom of the list?

YOU want to give CUDOS to an agent who made an ASS out of himself by stating on the FBI Official Page the DAN COOPER Comics where involved and also taking credit for this discovery without ever mentioning he obtained this false information from a bunch of people posting on a thread! It was removed only AFTER I made a complaint to the FBI on it Web site...I TOLD them exactly where this Cooper Comic thing came from - a poster by the name of SNOWMMAN! THis is the kind of CRAP Carr put out about the case - he was only trying to make himself sound important. The way he handled himself on every clip I saw - was to impress the public -it was ALL about HIM and not about investigating Cooper. The above are your perceptions; not reality. Agent Carr and the FBI had every right to publish info about the Cooper Comic, since it theoretically linked with the known signatory on the flight ticket: Dan Cooper, and more. Everyone including Carr acknowledged Snowmman who discovered the Cooper Comic. I thought Larry was very fair with you, both professionally and personally. I thought your actions were completely selfish and uncalled for, and counterproductive to you personally. This is all old ground and hindsight now, in any event.

What in the name of Johnny Appleseed are you talking about? 'Kenny never actually said...' I never quoted Kenny Christiansen there. Geestman stated on Decoded he thought Kenny could be the hijacker. Since there are witnesses who place Geestman with Kenny over the week of the crime, I asked why Geestman would volunteer that. Everything else about it you can read in my previous post. "If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe I can read. Your previous post literally says: "He says Kenny could be the hijacker. But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that? " You are saying Geestman SAID it. Dont jump down my throat. They are your words. I guess you didnt say what you meant! Or you miss spoke ... Or this is all Blevins-speak ? I can only go by what you say and do not say. Its not splitting hairs. Its reading the English language. If you dont say what you mean ... whose fault is that? Never mind. I understand you are now saying Geestmanw as not aware that others had placed him with Kenny. But you said in your post quote: Why did he say that? After you had just said: He says Kenny could be the hijacker. Bottom line is, you need to say things more clearly to eliminate any possible confusion. You probably thought you did. You probably think we are all mind readers too. I think I now understand what you tried to say but didnt say clearly. Maybe you should forget about Marilyn Monroe and concentrate on writing?

So now you are saying you statement below was wrong? Kenny never actually said (your words): "But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that?" Quote: "I always point to the only important thing that came out of his appearance: He says Kenny could be the hijacker. But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that?" Either he said he was with Kenny or he didn;t! Its not splitting hairs. He either said it or not, as you say it above ?

WRONG. At the time Geestman was interviewed, he did not know that Helen Jones and her daughter placed Kenny and Geestman together over the week of the hijacking. And where did you see that Geestman admitted he was with Christiansen? . Where? From you last night, you said quote: "I always point to the only important thing that came out of his appearance: He says Kenny could be the hijacker. But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that? If Kenny wasn't the hijacker, he would KNOW that...because he was WITH Kenny. It's a simple point, but I think it's important." Re-read my post. Geestman may separating 'could be' from 'was'. The abstract possibility from the fact of being. In other words: 'had skills, worked for the airlines, knew 727's, had parachuting in his background, and had guts enough to do something like the Cooper hijacking'. Versus: 'But I was with him'. And the unsaid part: 'So you figure it out!' In other words, he is showing contempt for you. It's only a theory. But when you ask: "where did you see that Geestman admitted he was with Christiansen?" The answer is: from you. Your words last night and now above ... that's where.

Sure. If he HAD any explanations. The crew thought the whole scene was bizarre. He just SITS THERE and says nothing. And he drove all the way down from Port Angeles. Both parties (History Channel and Geestman) already knew he had been caught in a few lies. And about the phone call to his sister. I always point to the only important thing that came out of his appearance: He says Kenny could be the hijacker. But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that? If Kenny wasn't the hijacker, he would KNOW that...because he was WITH Kenny. It's a simple point, but I think it's important. I agree. It may be important. "He says Kenny could be the hijacker. But he was WITH Kenny at the time of the hijacking. Why did he say that?" Maybe he said that because it's true? I see no contradiction. He's saying Kenny could have been the hijacker, maybe referring to skills and KC's background (or who knows what). Then he's saying: 'But I was with him' (so he isnt the hijacker). And he leaves it for geniuses to figure out? Some crusty old men would do that. Have you ever dealt with old farmers, or retired Navy salts, or barge guys, old river rats, old mountain men or school teachers, retired ministers and rabis, ... not to mention "that woman!". Some people will just let you hang and stew in your juices until you are worked up enough to throw yourself off a cliff! Happens to insurance salesmen all the time - In other words, a lot of people would just let you stand without an answer until your legs buckle, since its you making the allegations and are all worked up (about nothing) - a nobody coming out of nowhere with a book, to suddenly challenge their lives! So Geestman may be saying: 'Sure, Kenny could have done it. But he didn't. I was with him.' And three hours later with nothing added he's saying: 'Go fuck yourselves. Smart-asses'. Keep track of the fact that if anything definitive ever does surface to "prove" Kenny was not DB Cooper, then everything you and Decoded did and said goes up like a puff of hot air. Good works are no protection in a random universe. And some people just have more 'random' in their lives than others. Geestman has made it this far. It is you who are struggling and pounding every day for attention! Why do you think Geestman owed you or Decoded an EXPLANTION about anything? It's a NO SALE. Move on ...

This went on for a total of about three hours. They got about five minutes of film they could actually use. Kagan said later that Geestman didn't realize until he arrived that the cast had already discussed the best questions to ask. (Yes, I suggested a few of those questions) Geestman seemed surprised by most of them. "If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe Maybe Geestman was surprised at the questions, because it was the craziest damned thing he'd ever heard ? Sometimes ordinary explanations are the truth ? As opposed to extra-ordinary explanations not even Einstein could think up? Yes. You've told us how your mother compared you to Einstein - please don't go over that again! You see, youve detailed numerous times your process or the Decoded staff's process in all of this, from your point of view, the interview, transportation, ammenities, et cetera. Your conclusions/bias from the interviews conducted with Geestman. What you haven;t said "one word" about, is anything from Geestman's point of view. Do you have any insight into that ? You have said Geestman basically sat silent for three hours. Did he ask for a drink or take out a 'chaw' and slipped it between his lips, ask to go to the bathroom ? Ask for a cigar? A better chair? Ask to get up and walk around? Talk about the weather? Talk about "that woman"? Surely he did and said something ??? What did he say later, if anything?

Jo you have mail - sorry for the late reply. G

It's 'backyard psychology' on my part, but, I think he has found his 'magic lamp(s)'. They are: (a) Housecleaning gig. (b) Adventure Books Publishing of Seattle. (c) Newsvine and the Internet. (d) DB Cooper and the Internet. (e) a few personal relationships. and he's rubbing them for all they are worth, as much as he can. "That's just the way I am", he says. It's a pretty good gig, as gigs go. It supplies the minimal requirements for survival, with a little fun and recognition along the way. A lot of people do far worse! Some people are the lamps getting rubbed? It all depends of whose ox is getting gored and eaten. And most people don't find any of this interesting! Only a few people want to know what the three armed hairy woman at the carnival is really like - and how many languages she speaks. Mr. Blevins is fascinating in that respect, to some. Other than that, he's probbaly just as normal as the next person. Except the hairy woman at the circus isn't writing books titled: Into the Blast: The TRUE story of DB Cooper. The hairy woman is probably practicing her viola, to play her part in her community Christmas performance of Bach. I may go to hear her! I may not shave for a month or comb my hair to fit in ... Blevins will probably write an 'article' about this - !

You didnt know Marilyn Monroe. You may have read a little about her, but you did not know her. But as you say, that's just you. "Into The Blast: The TRUE Story of D. B. Cooper by Robert M Blevins" Marilyn Monroe ~ DB Cooper ~ next icon

Fact Check: Yes, I was probably responsible for the idea behind that episode of Decoded. Because of the book. Like it's my fault the show was made. They called me, not the other way around. You are too funny, I swear. Do you realize how silly that sounds? LOL. Okay...I never should have investigated KC or done the book with Porteous so YOU wouldn't be burdened with watching the program. I mean that is the funniest thing ever. "If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." Marilyn Monroe Quote Yes, lets do the fact checking. You are the one who has been stirring the waters for years on KC, filling every possible niche with it, ad nauseum. Trying to convince and pressure everyone (anyone) to accept KC as DB Cooper, then when it all failed turning Fence Rider saying ... "I cant prove ....". Just like your recent bold headline at Newsvine: "Who Will Win the Presidential Debates - Romney or Obama?". And your conclusion after wordy prose - " It could go either way. " That is news? For Newsvine? You have turned being a fence rider with nothing into a loud-boisterous low art ... you think fit for public consumption. Always ending here with: ""If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." ... which adds further confidence in your mission for Humanity and yourself. And if that doesnt work then just insult someone and threaten retaliation - That's inspiring. That's my conclusion. You are just milking empty space, which nature allows, like some temporary vortex in water. And apparently after all of these months that is all you have to show for your efforts.. along with a sagging popularity and reputation. "If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..." is your claim to meaninglessness. Citing Marilyn Monroe a trageic figure, as if you have permission, since you apparently see yourself in her life. Dont you see this is presumptuous and sick? Or is it simply for affect trying to score with the weak minded ?