georger

It was NEVER about the money. It's about the TRUTH. Are we right? I don't know for sure yet. I suspect we're on to something, but we still have no smoking gun. reply] I dont see that anything can change. It is what it is. I think your 25 reasons are not reasons at all but a collection of statements of bias on your part which only confirms in your mind, what you were going to conclude, anyway. You say that equals research and bonafide logic. Well, we just have different standards. I think you have taken a bunch of dysfunctional people and concluded their dysfunctionality adds up to one of the members being DB Cooper - without examining any other more likely outcomes, even in the face of other evidence you evidently give no credence to. Somewhere in this world is a story about Mr. Cooper and other people. I just dont happen to believe this is it or even the right set of variables. Maybe Katy Watson was Angel Udell!

well dont let me waste any more of your precious time Robert. 'Hello...(hello)...is there anybody IN there... Your fans await ... Very likely you will replace the FBI and Himmelsbach. You can charge $50,000 a crack for speeches and buy a large island with a castle. Letterman will call to interview you with your famous hat on. You will be bigger than Axe Men, Pawn Stars, and Swamp Guys all put together. Screw Kenny. Its your Karma that matters!

You are quite the promoter, as is Jo and JWT. trust me on this. Science has always played an inferior role throughout history ... until science goes on strike and stays silent. trust me on this. Remember Max Gunther and Myers and Dvorak ... ? (who does) You will be different or course. You may wind up more famous than Himmeslbach! Jo makes a lot of calls ... and some she shouldnt!

I told FBI Agent White that I knew why he was asking about Sheridan, looks just like the sketch, had olive skin color, and was very calm cool and collected. somebody please post a photo of the guy? They all are dead ringers - they cant all be Cooper - can they? Now we are asked to look at a guy we cant even see?

Me too. And I echo your response to Georger re the tie issue... come on Georger, pretend it's elementary school and not graduate school - spoonfeed us Ok. But later. Its busy right now. Im surprised Im having to do this ... much has already been said previously on this topic in this thread, but I can go over it again - no problem just a bit later. As to Geof: so far as I know he does not endorse any candidate and was more interested in the history of the investigation ... but that is just my reading and certainly NOT AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT. later.

Whew! Saved by the book fairy! A review a day: The Further Adventures of D. B. Cooper http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2010/09/24/a-review-a-day-james-heffrons-comics/

I loved to play with my kids when they were babies, always gave then a hug and kiss goodbye before I left for work. So I am in federal court, my case is called for a motion hearing. The judge, a kindly old woman, says "Counsel, do you have a young baby at home?" "Why yes, I do you honor", I replied. She said, "I am going to take a very brief recess as I have a call to make and you need to wipe your baby's little burp up mess off your tie." 377 precisely. swab the chutes and cut lines also. I am not going to say anything further about cigarette buts just to get Jo off my back. But swabs from other items of evidence might be in order to. Hell let's just do a full chemsitry workup on everything! That is my recommendation.

Georger, you teased about the tie and we will not just let that go. What do you know and when did you know it? Inquiring minds want to know. 377 You're a smart guy. Where did Cooper travel on that airplane with his tie on ? When did he take the tie off? Where did he place the tie? Where had he been with the tie on from the time he first appeared_at the airport? Whre had the tie been before that? And: What did he do in the bathroom with his tie on_or off? You people have been spinning your wheels for three years here . . . Do I really have to spell this out!? Why are you being so coy about what has been 100% obvious for 37+ years? In addition, you need to take what I said about FBI reporting protocols _very seriously. It took me some time to back up and come up to speed with this, until someone mentioned it. But, it is crucial to an historical understanding of this case, I think. People were managing this case and making decisions based on reports they were receiving. This goes straight into the evidentiary file in this case. You cannot build a vita of this case without coming to understand how (and why) the system worked as it did - early. And the "system" is people. People making decisions at many different levels in different places. That IS the historical record. . . Safecracking could have a field day with this!

I pay my taxes. I stay out of trouble. Why don't I get equal tie access? 377 Then activate your Science Team, your son, his phd wife, yourself and whoever else - Why complain for three more years. Just do it.

2. 3. Georger: In the last few posts you have said some very profound things which I have quoted above. What do you know about the tie that would impact any tie genetics conclusion? How is Thomas able to block you from doing anything you need to do? He has NOTHING to do with the FBI! Why aren't you convinced the FBI lost the cigarette Butts? Please explain your statements because I have a feeling I am not the only one looking for answers...as to WHY you even made such statements. I now think I know what was in the paper bag Cooper carried aboard - I have always wondered why they could not have gotten prints from that bag - or did he toss it out the window after he used whatever was in it. Georger did the forestry trainees have a special pin they wore - looks like a small woodman with his pic...which I now know is a Pulaski? Could, I guess, be used a hat tac, tie tac or lapel pin.

... and the genetics issue could be just such an issue. Slowly the issue is gaining traction as people begin to inform themselves, but it could all be for naught. I know things about the tie which could impact any tie-genetics conclusions. I like 377's approach. Ask for Snowmman back and get his son to do it all. Means more time for me elsewhere, which is where I was always headed anyway. I told my family that back in '71! I sometimes wish they had listened!! Thomas is blocking my path anyway ... but that's another Coopertino moment. Outlines is all it is.

Funny Georger, but you would get a zygote and then a baby Cooper. Who would raise him? What if he turned out to be a Barb Dayton clone? How would that play in your home? Yeah, I plead guity to "candidate pushing". I've chaged horses a few times too. At least I recognize my bias. Its so easy to incorporate outcome bias into your analysis of DBC evidence. You cant be neutral no matter how hard you try. Effort can reduce bias but not eliminate it. I even went so far as subject matter bias. I love radio and I searched deperately for some evidence that Cooper used two way radios to rendevous with an accomplice. I even made radio jumps proving it was feasible tio use a walkie talkie. I got 75 mile comms from an open canopy at about 10,000 ft. Got close to 100 miles at 16,000 ft. All for naught since there is zero evidence that Cooper was radio equipped. Havent heard from Safe in a while. I've always wondered if he did the Skunk Cam Scam? I liked his video series on the money find, even though I disagreed with some of it. Safe put a lot of thought and work into those videos. I know nothing about genetics but my kid does. He is a synthetic bio major with a job in a top research lab with all the very latest toys. His wife is a PhD candidate in genetics. He can run some PCR stuff in his lab if someone can get me some tie samples. How come Tom gets tie stuff and we don't? I know there is only so much to go arond, but he didnt do genetic analysis as far as I know and we can do those tests. Come on Ckret, send me a sample. Its no skin off your neck, just Cooper's. 377 I tend to believe (for a number of reasons until proven wrong) the FBI or whoever, stuck to basic tests - nothing fancy or innovative. To whatever extent that is true then their results may in fact be 'minimal'. More could be done? That is my hope. I am still not convinced the cigarette butts were tossed out. And that other dna yielding evidence may also exist. I thought Hangdiver did some very good digging and asked some very good questions. I thought I stated that. Especially if he has no background in biochem or genetics. He seems to have a good nose for digging and asking meaningful questions ... I hope he asks more! But alas, we are still dealing with "outlines", just as Labyrs observed. I wonder if he still reads this forum - if so I hope he still has his good humor. Labrys still has my attention - My opinion is we have to take 'partial' and 'exclusionary' very seriously, as gospel, which also then reflects the type and level of testing that was done but also stipulates in a general manner the quality of materials that were present on the tie. If my opinion is true, I think that is optimistic. Because, my bias is the evidence itself in the hope there was and still is viable evidence, for its own sake. Otherwise it would not have passed the FBI's protocol test to be mentioned very cyrptically in one short paragraph, at all? That's my guess based on what sources have stated. When I read "epithelial" last night I laughed. Why? That is the sure sign of someone trying to be specific-accurate about a subject matter that requires more just because of its very nature, without being specific or accurate! To me its still funny when I roll it over on my tongue - epi- thelial! Very funny stuff when you know what was left out. So I will be "epithelial" and cover the exposed filament of this post, before a mutation can occur and grow because, I fully expect a candidate pusher take-over of the whole topic.

I am self taught and have so far educated myself into a chronic depression. You admit you don't know some things: So how do you know that tie was actually Cooper's? How do you know the cells that the FBI have contains mitochondrial DNA? I realize Keratinized cells can contain some mitochondrial DNA but you assume, I guess, that the sample the FBI has is Cooper's and contains some mitochondrial DNA. My question to you is...how are you so sure of this? respectfully, hangdiver I am as calm as a swan in a pond. The FBI went through extensive questioning to establish there is a high probability the tie is Cooper's. The people who worked this problem were not guessers. Moreover if genetic tests tend to confirm a prior physical description (including age) that reflects back on the status of the tie's owner. One examination of the tie tended to suggest the tie had not spent much time in the State of Washington? The tie lacked the forensic traits commensurate with the seasonal cycle in WA ? The first issue is cells and PCR. Included in that is some estimate of viability in those cells. The next issue is str's. What loci are available and which loci do you examine, in how many independent runs? Do you look fr other genetic products and highly variable loci in those, sufficient to give the examiner a statistical edge toward a useful result. I have no idea how deep the examiners went - that is the main issue for me. However, I take it on faith the FBI has (at least one possible more!) partials, which they say has exclusionary statistical reliability ........ that says a lot if its true. But knowing we are dealing with a spefcific haplotype to begin with which presumably has yielded a 'partial' with which exclusions can be made ... that goes a long way especially in the context of a rather firm general physical description in the first place? Keep one thing in mind. The FBI tends to only report (write reports) about POSITIVE FINDINGS and often says nothing when lab reports are negative. Given that rather stringent protocol then a positive report should be taken seriously, in my experience. Seriously means "seriously" and that is where I think most people are failing on this issue. It could be the FBI has very solid results, of the results it did obtain and if that is the case then further testing with modern technique is very much warranted and .... will continue ... probably is already in progress. My opinions are shared by others in this matter. I am expressing a consensus, I think. Keratinised is speculation and highly variable in individuals. Its not some light switch between ON vs OFF! Epithelial can mean many things, and I would not take Blevin's report as authoritative, complete, or final. Candidate-pushers have a vested interest in hearing what they want to hear and interpreting everything as they think serves their purpose ... I have no candidate in this race except for Cooper himself! I would like to clone him! I realise all of this is speculation. I have never had the tie to have people exmaine it and very likely I never will ... beyond what Tom Kaye did. My only advice is to continue looking at the tie for forensic evidence.

So, whose dead skin cells does the FBI have?...that's anyone's guess... Not really. One can make some intelligent guesses. We know Cooper was not a dog. We know Cooper was (biologically) one of a finite number of other biological possibilities. ANY genetic info born in his cells from the tie go a long way to excluding possibilities. Moreover: your assertion that keratinised cells do not contain dna products useful is just plain wrong. ... or there could not even be a partial with exclusionary properties ( now could there be?) Read this discussion from a genetics forum at: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=170843 Do you know, for example, Melanin protects skin cells from DNA damage ie. keratinisation, caused by UV radiation. ... and melanin varies by haplotype? What does that tell you or suggest? Cooper cannot have been Weber, KC, or others all! He had a specific genetic heritage ... whoever he was. Any genetic information about Cooper will be exclusionary to others... potentially. And screw snowman@ for the moment. Can we not have a discussion without Snowman's ghost impeding progress .... snowman knows nothing about genetics so far as I know, 377 either, and Blevins is totally lost .... or if you want to discuss snowmman then have at it, and forget the rest. ?

Yep, I think the same about snow but who knows what pm's he sent to quade...you know, while pulling too many silver tabs and posting. I try to not post impulsively especially when drinking late nights. I know Snow and I very much doubt that alcohol had anything to do with it. I've never seen him have a drink actually. I'd bet it's just organic anti authoritarianism, probably a genetic component if you dig deep enough. Don't know what his PMs were, but posting an FU Q on the forum didnt exactly help the Snowmman-Quade bonding process. Still, a life sentence is a bit extreme for a few bad words or what Q perceives as anti-social forum behavior. If you look at risk versus reward I think it's worth letting Snow back. He finds stuff that nobody else does, time after time. What's the risk? A few swear words and a bad attitude once in a while? I can handle it. Perhaps Snow can use my bad behavior free-pass quota. I should have a surplus in my account. Are they like frequent flyer miles Quade, can they be transferred? 377 ARE WE DISCUSSING SNOWMMAN OR COOPER? SHEESH! GET OVER IT AND GET BACK TO COOPER ESPECIALLY NOW THAT VITAL INFO HAS BEEN OPENED HERE ... or is yours a simple attempt to divert discussion on the genetics issue?

The tissue around the neck should be of the Keratinized type. Wikipedia Definition of "integumentary": Wikipedia So the keratinized cells (no nucleuses and no nuclear DNA) cannot give the unique fingerprint because that is where the mitochondrial DNA is located, which is apparently needed for a complete DNA profile and it is gone in the Keratinized cells. Can anyone confirm the above description? So, whose dead skin cells does the FBI have?...that's anyone's guess... Wasn't it Blevins, who said he was an expert in this area, who said: 'The FBi has no viable dna'. He and Jo agreed about this. Then Blevins ran to the FBI asking to know the results of Kenny's tests? Why would it matter if the FBi has no viable dna ? And one obvious answer from the FBI would be: "Kenny hasnt been excluded". (and neither has Prince Charlie's pony) ! My compliments to you Hangdiver for working through some complicated issues in order to ask some intelligent questions - Do you recall what Kenny's parent's genealogy was? Blevins stated it once but I cant find it. German? Scandinavian? Norwegian? English? Maybe Blevins can refresh us.

Yes, he did. The FBI apparently was on his trail too, but there was no public info about their pursuit when Snow ID'd him as a person of interest. I was looking for a skydiver or smoke jumper who worked for Boeing prior to the skyjack, but I never found Pete. Snow is such a great researcher. Shame that Quade wont let him back after such a long banishment. 377 You may be distorting Sheridan through your 'wow' lens. Once cleared I would see Sheridan as a potentially valuable resource. That alone would be reason to converse with him and visit Sheridan again, not as a suspect but as a resource. Ckret used McCoy as a model. Sheridan may have served as a model 'and a resource' for part of the investigation ... has that ever occurred to you? Sheridan isn't talking. Sheridan was in a unique position to give valuable input ... consultant. Suspect vs. Consultant ? He doesnt fit the physical description. Sooner or later you need to take that seriously, if you can. Beyond that what is there? And that is something nobody is going to talk about. Snow needs to shift his focus on Sheridan from suspect to informant and advisor ? The whole idea of Sheridan being a suspect may be concealing his real role... as a recognised innovator who would have valuable insight into Cooper's skills and execution of the hijacking... (Jo. Please dont piggy back on this. I write my own material)

Now we know that the DNA is so incomplete they cannot rule ANY ONE out or IN. . You have said this before, many times. How do you know this to be true? Who told you... since you have no direct knoweldge of the matter.?

Peterson's analysis of Cooper is probably the best part of the artikle. Peterson probably could have saved the FBi a lot of time - 37 years ago!

Could you post on the thread the picture used in the Parachutist magazine of Peterson. could this be him?

Does anyone have a copy of A River Runs Through It. AH, Jo, I love Norman Maclean (spelling?). Young Men and Fire is a fantastic book, as is A River Runs through It. Oddly, I don't have a copy of either. Movie is top-notch, too, stars Robert Redford. reply] Redford was the Director & narrator, not an actor in the movie. Here's the cast. Directed by Robert Redford Robert Redford ... Narrator (voice) (uncredited) Writing credits (WGA) Norman Maclean (story) Richard Friedenberg (screenplay) Cast (in credits order) verified as complete Craig Sheffer ... Norman Maclean Brad Pitt ... Paul Maclean Tom Skerritt ... Rev. Maclean Brenda Blethyn ... Mrs. Maclean Emily Lloyd ... Jessie Burns Edie McClurg ... Mrs. Burns Stephen Shellen ... Neal Burns Vann Gravage ... Young Paul Nicole Burdette ... Mabel Susan Traylor ... Rawhide Michael Cudlitz ... Chub Rob Cox ... Conroy Buck Simmonds ... Humph Fred Oakland ... Mr. Burns David Creamer ... Ken Burns Madonna Reubens ... Aunt Sally John Reubens ... Uncle Jimmy Arnold Richardson ... Old Norman MacIntyre Dixon ... Police sergeant William Hootkins ... Murphy Al Richardson ... Mr. Murchison Jess Schwidde ... Mr. Sweeney Chuck Adamson ... Harry (editor) Rex Kendall ... Reporter Jack Kroll ... Reporter Martina Kreidl ... Secretary at newspaper Noah Snyder ... Copy Boy at newspaper Margot Kiser ... Sal Philip A. Braun ... Dealer at Lolo Tracy Mayfield ... Bouncer at Lolo Anne Merren ... Hooker at Lolo Chuck Tweed ... Drunk in jail Prudence Johnson ... Pavilion singer D. Gorton ... Pavilion announcer Lincoln Quesenberry ... Drunk in alley Hawk Forssell ... Bouncer at speakeasy Jim Dunkin ... Speakeasy bartender Jacob Snyder ... Piano player Kathy Scharler ... Waitress at speakeasy Don Jeffery ... Black Jack Byron Dingman ... Speakeasy patron Cecily Johnson ... Speakeasy patron Caleb Shiff ... Young John Joseph Gordon-Levitt ... Young Norman rest of cast listed alphabetically: Rock Taulbee ... Stand In For Tom Skierrit (credit only) Daren Eastwold ... Montana Saloon Dancer (uncredited) Lance R. Jones ... Party Goer (uncredited) Robert Redford ... Narrator (voice) (uncredited) at LoloDrunk in jailPavilion singerPavilion announcerDrunk in alleyBouncer at speakeasySpeakeasy bartenderPiano playerWaitress at speakeasyBlack JackSpeakeasy patronSpeakeasy patronYoung JohnStand In For Tom SkierritMontana Saloon DancerParty GoerNarrator

Wish I had your way with words. I am reading a book by Norman Maclean born in Carinda, Iowa in 1902, but I am puzzled by something. He worked in the logging camps and for the United States Forest Servcie before beginning his academic career. This goes on to say he was Willaim Rainey Harper Professor of English at the University of Chicago until his retirement in 1973. He also wrote another book called A River Runs Through It and Other Stories This book is called Young Men and Fire and is about the Mann Gulch Fire in 1949 and was actually put together from the manuscripts after his death by the University. Does anyone have a copy of A River Runs Through It. Thats Clarinda Ia. Have lots of family there. Tosaw had contacts there. River Runs Through It is a great movie. Good author - love his works. Seriously - rent the movie. You would love it. Its a true story - very heart warming.

Sigh. I want a solution, not an endless mystery. We've got a few plausible Coopers. Pick one and let's have a party. This new Sheridan Peterson info is tantalizing, but the FBI has had two swings at that pitch and they walked. No home run, no grand slam. 377 The Good News is: Peterson is a genuine candidate self spawned and FBI tested - no less. Real skills and real history. Nothing made up. Red flag went up when he came to the FBI's attention ... they pursued him, not the reverse. Serious candidate. These traits alone separate him from the crowd. And he needs no publisher!

good info Bruce - thanks. by letters I meant his letter to the SF Chronicle? Maybe I misread that - will go back and re/read. The FBI's concentration on the skydiving community shows their initial focus/interpretation ... not the nasty vile dumb food worker profile H dispensed for public consumption. But it proved a dry hole. But,, that alone explains the continued interest in Petey who might as well have had a neon sign on himself. Just speaking for myself, your account looks like s.o.p. on the FBI's part. I mean you look at the obvious first. But the obvious proved empty. Thus, here we are today. G.

I concur on all points, Three-Seven-Seven. Bruce, you need to ask Bob why Sheridan called himself "Dan" - what that's all about if Bob knows? Dan who? Also more on his letter writing, some of which I guess is documented? I find his book plain wierd. A made up affair, a conversation with himself for some wierd reason, perhaps even a ploy given his mentality, ... I get the feeling even at a young age Sheridan was playing with reality, ..... why? I can see why the FBI might have checked Sheridan out .... same reason they check other wacko's out just to see how serious they are about their 'gests' ... let me just pose these questions and leave it at that.