georger

I think thats exactly right...

My impression is from what I recall, he was a serious person. Globe wanted their money back. He did a thorough search. Somebody seriously thought Cooper had dropped into Lake Merwin. That is where things fell apart ... no body, no parachute, no money. BTW Ive been reading up on how/when sand is actually deposited at Tena Bar. Daily high tides deliver 'nothing'! Its unlikely the money could have been covered by that. If the money was covered by the same event that brought it to TBar, what event is that and when if high tides do cover what they deliver ? The premise is 'the event that brought the money to TBar had to also cover it from sight' ?

Did he bill it ... ?

The guy with the private submarine. After technical problems he found and saw nothing ...

MaYBE 3.9 miles!

No. Provide one person who was actually involved in the packaging of the money who says paper straps were used.

works for me... congrats Ryan! I assume it meets Brian's test ....

The bands Chauc used may be too large. I think the bank bands were smaller-thinner. Good post. Jeez that a large 'bundle'-stack of bills. I have no problem believing that paper straps would break! Straps are flimsy at best and have no flexibility whatever!

Ask Brian about the actual chain of events. Brian has been forthcoming and participated in CC24 .... and I think he and Ryan have worked closely together. Ryan may know more about the actual chain of events etc.

Precisely what the Ingrams did ie washing and cleaning the money, is almost entirely 'rumor' and 'anecdotal' and only subject to speculation in the public domain! Only a few people talked to Pat or Harold Ingram about this. The official photo of 12 groups turned in by the Ingrams pretty much tells the story... what Im saying is: any criticism of the Ingrams is highly premature and probably pointless or untrue! Preservation and restoration was uppermost in their minds at the time. The Ingrams recovered wet mush and preserved it for posterity!

Interesting. I talked to Tom this afternoon. So far as I know, Tom has not changed his opinion. Tom does NOT believe 'the money rolled along the bottom of the River.' Tom has your email and may reply to you, but Tom is very busy preparing for a trip etc. Tom stressed today that the bills were not constrained or compressed in the middle - diatoms were able to enter the middle of the bundles - bundles were compressed near the ends probably due to rubber bands at those locations which constrained diatom entry. Has anyone done any tests with bank straps? Tom hasn't. Tom did not do any strap tests because at the time straps were not part of the money packaging scenario. I know one person who has started doing tests with tests in pond water but this is brand new. The straps have not dissolved and after a week dont appear to be dissolving.They have swelled very slightly. They have become opaque. I mentioned this to Tom today. I suggested to Tom today that if straps were part of the packaging perhaps by the time the Ingram encountered the money 'the straps or strap remains' might not have even been visible or identifiable! Tom laughed and remarked: 'that might be a distinct possibility'. Tom remarked that the Ingrams engaged in a serious cleaning effort and any remains of straps might have been washed away. I would invite anyone who wants to do some strap tests, since straps are now a part of the Cooper discussion. On a personal note I applaud Tom for making an effort to stay current and respond to people. Tom makes announcements and is staying current.

...

Good question. Tom knows _ see his website.

Nobody is trying to do anything to you! Never have been. Why all the paranoia ?

Have you talked top Carr about this? Didnt he interview a bank employee (or two)? Carr's issue at the time was paper straps vs bands. Carr called Brian and Pat about this but I thought he found a bank employee (security guard? who was there during the packaging) and was told 'bands only'. Does Carr have information you arent aware of? Talk to him - see what he says. Something is missing from this debate. Why is Larry not a part of this debate?

Thanks but I am not, never have been, wedded to ANY theory.

smile... Thank you Tom. And thank you Nick! Well done!! Happy Day for Bacteria !

Thanks. I remember that now.

Now that wasnt difficult after all !!!!! So its some reporters version vs Palmer;s own words. Things never turn out to be quite what you claim ? .............. its DB Cooper!

Shards at depth. In situ. Fairy dust. Flogging. It isnt 2010. Strawman. . . . . . Try "floccinaucinihilipilification" next. Very entertaining for wine sipping challenged readers.

Can you cite a Corps of Engineers report saying that? The Bechly report is all I have. "Mr. BECHLY added that the dredge works 24 hours a day and any objects such as money or bones would go unnoticed if deposited on the shore during the night." Likewise, where does it say: 'Palmer was asked about shards at depth and dismissed it as caused by excavating...' why cant I find that passage in any document? ?

I talked to an Agent today who clarified issues being discussed. The Palmer report, socalled, is a 302 issued by the Agent who interviewed Dr. Palmer at his office following the excavation at Tena Bar. Palmer never wrote a report and there never was an oral presentation by Palmer. What we are calling the 'Palmer Report' is simply a 302 by some Agent - who interviewed Palmer. This helps explain the style and content of the 'Palmer Report'. The Agent today says again, of the ten plus people working the dig at Tena Bar, the general consensus was the dredging was probably responsible for Cooper money being on Tena Bar. He says when shards were found at three feet that only reinforced the dredging theory, and pushed the timeline back beyond Palmer saying the money was a recent arrival. The Agent says there had to be a specific cause for the money being on Tena Bar. He thinks the arrival of money on Tena Bar must be associated with somebody depositing material on Tena, not too long after the hijacking. He says there must be a specific cause, as anything else is a 'crap shoot'.

Tom's test bill buried for 33 months had almost no deterioration. I have explained it many times.. the money does not have to come back up to the surface. If the River level is above the money spot it effectively becomes the bottom and the money rolls along the bottom to that spot. The money spot was frequently underwater. In June of 1972, for example, the money spot was about 5 feet underwater. Money still has buoyancy in water.. it is not like a rock and embeds in the bottom. Now this above has value. The Ingram bundles are essentially under moving water at the found location, without the money ever having been "in" the Columbia proper! There is interaction between the Ingram bills and moving water/sand at the found location without the bundles ever having been "in" the river proper. The forces are gentle. No tumbling end over end or sidewise required. The bundles could even spin or glide some distance vs tumble before being locked in by sand as the water recedes during each high water period. The forces involved are gentle. How the forces are applied to the geometry of the package is what is crucial. The direction of pressure is south to north with the flow. The Ingram bundles are never subject to any violent action in this scenario. The bundles can be eroded-rounded around all sides almost uniformly. The bundles never need to have been in the main river at all. I ran some calculations last night concerning the actual forces in the main river on a package with the dimensions of the Ingram bundles. The result was a surprise. The forces are surprisingly low! No more than the weight of a small apple! Given that the bundles are semi-boyant to begin with the river current may not supply destructive force at all! And, given the shape of the package, rolling is not even guaranteed! The package may glide! The devil is always in the details There are many options in the river borne model. The numbers suggest low energy forces were involved. I will post the actual math if anyone wants to see it. Anyone is free to run their own math on their own scenarios. Force on a bill bundle: ~0.77 newtons (about 79 grams-force, or roughly the weight of a small apple).

Your arrogance is amazing!

This may be pointless, but I left a message for Tom today asking him to give his current opinion on these matters. Who knows if he will respond. As Tom has said so many times: "This is DB Cooper". Meaning that any consensus on anything is unlikely. A fact of life.