georger

Just read all the old posts - should take about a week.

Maybe he thought it would be stupid to jump with a tie so left it behind. Occam's razor. No "message". Very interesting idea. The innocent-naive Cooper. Fits with Larry's theory. Sadly, the tie can't talk.

Been ages since Carr has made any substantive statements about Cooper. When Larry is on the National Geo show will "his" Cooper still be a dead bumbler, ADD engineer/loadmaster? So Barb Dayton wasn't a credible enough Cooper for the show? Wonder if they will even mention the Thailand Air America 727 jumps? Billy W? If they feature Duane and omit Billy (and Billy's DBC suspect) entirely it will tell me a lot about how much research they did. Maybe the show can use the Who's TOMMY as theme music during discussion of the Tena Bar research: "He's a paintball wizard..." 377 And why would this program feature or mention Billy Waugh? You people either take yourselves WAY too seriously or ... some animals have way too much time on their hands.

Funny. Requires the most up-to-date Adobe Flash player. Whoop ti doo!

So you are saying that Fazio and other locals lied to the media and thereafter about the flooding within a few wks of the money find in February of 1980. Where did I say the Fazio's were lying? I did not say that. I said, quote: "I dont doubt for a minute Fazio was correct." Final adios to you -

Remember - in the few wks prior to the find of the money on Tena's bar that there had been some flooding due to the snow melt in the higher area. No responsible farmer would have put his cattle on the river during that time. reply] 1. The extent of that flooding just prior to discovery is not estabplished for Tina Bar. All we know is it was wet, whatever wet means. It is tempting to associate the discovery of the money with this wet period, but the condition of the money pit suggests otherwise ... In addition, we have conflicting data. Fazio's say 'flood', USGS says no flood. USGS and NOAA data suggest '79 was a dry year, drier than usual. There definately was not extensive flooding the winter of 79. Ive never been able to resolve these contradictions and of course all FBI files I know of are mute on the whole subject. 2. The money was already in place prior to this event. The condition of the money guarantees this. Likewise cattle activity on the bar. 3. We dont know what Fazio did or did not do at that time ... all we know is one said there had been flooding. I dont doubt for a minute Fazio was correct. I just cant find anything to prove it.

What are you looking for Georger? Manure trace annual strata? You know cows, I do not. Hope Jerry gets the data and it proves useful. 377 Well, this all stems from the discussion with Safe about erosion, strata, Palmer reprt, etc. The fact is, if you want a beach reworked quickly, just turn 20+ cattle out on a beach front for a season, a practice that is now prohibited by most State DNR's ... for a host of reasons. Cattle can disturb and erode a beachfront in record time - There is nothing in any report I have ever seen including the Palmer report which even mentions cattle on Tina Bar. Why? Everyone knew the history at Tina Bar. If I have a 1000 yard beach frontage (parallel to a river) and I fence off 100 yards and let cattle into that area for only one season, any subsequent core sampling along the 1000 yrd beach will show obvious signs of disturbed strata, and more, for many years after the fact. Cattle tend to turn everything inside out down to a depth of a foot or more and promote and hasten erosion, on a sloping beach front. I am speaking only of the mechanical properties of cattle walking and rooting around on a piece of ground, independent of the chemical affects of cattle. The affects on sandy ground are more pronounced, happen more quickly, and can lead to a complete loss of a beach front, etc ... In effect, the area housing cattle becomes a niche as compared with surrounding undisturbed ground in the area. The cattle niche should be easily identifiable through the examination of strata and simple chemical tests. Not only are the Fazio cattle not mentioned in any report, the photos Palmer and others took dont to my eyes show the affects of cattle having been on the bar, any time in the recent past before Feb 1980. I must be missing something? On the other hand, cow urine tends to sterilize soil below it and may even act as a preservative. It retards bacterial growth etc. Cattle are also very curious creatures and examine every aspect of their environments. Had a bag of money ever landed at Tina Bar and even partially buried, it would have been found and examined and torn apart very quickly by cattle. What bothers me most are Palmer's photos. I dont see any sign of mixed and disturbed strata, sand holes and plugs, or any other sign of disturbance one would normally associate with the presence of cattle. I find that bewildering if there was a history of cattle on Tina Bar ... Safecracking says there is no significant alternative to Palmer's reading of the strata at Tina Bar, that would have allowed Palmer to mistake a clay layer as being 1974 when in fact it was something earlier, say pre 1971. I would normally agree with Safe on this point except for the presence of cattle. The presence of cattle on the new 1974 dredge layer would have promoted erosion of that layer. We can literally see the shoreline reducing quickly after the 1974 dredge layer was added. Did something special happen at Tina Bar because of the presence of cattle? Without a comparison of Tina Bar with the surrounding area you might not know or suspect something special was at work. I can hardly believe Palmer would fall prey to such a basic mistake, but on the other hand 'cattle' are not even mentioned (by anyone in 1980). The Fazios might be able to shed some light on this whole issue -

Excellent. Lets talk Sunday night regular time if that's ok. All is well here. Busy but well... A statement made by one of the FAZIO brothers who was at the river in 2001 when they did the film talked about the cattle. The cattle had been run on the beach in the time prior to the find - on a regular basis. Something he said gave me the impression the cattle had been there in recent weeks prior to the find. That would have been winter so I don't know why they would have them on the river in winter...........but they must have had their reason. There was also been a recent rise in the water due to a big SNOW melt (1980). Maybe the water/pond in the fields or holding areas were frozen. There had been a recent snow melt in the high areas which caused minor flooding on the river - this was stated in Tosaw's book and at the river that day in 2001. I do not remember how they classifed it - rising water or flooding...but water had risen over the area the money was found in recent wks prior to the find (stated by Fazio). Just relaying what I heard that day on Tena's Bar. I did NOT stay with the crew all of the time...so I am sure other things where said. Since Jerry "claims" to be friends with the crew - I am sure they have notes or tapes of the conversations made. Maybe they didn't think any of it worth the storage to save. Thanks. That's my recollection too from prior discussions but I just cant seem to nail anything definate down. But yours does help - See my reply to 377.

Excellent. Lets talk Sunday night regular time if that's ok. All is well here. Busy but well...

Do you know anything about the years Fazios let their cows out on Tina Bar?

salmon. 377 377, do you recall any past posts where the years Fazios had cows on Tina Bar was mentioned?

Is Sunday evening good for you? Read all posts by Safecracking and me ... Can you come up with a list of the years Fazio's had cows on the bar between 71-80? Am I asking for the impossible? The list has to be accurate. '

I called you trollmman (with 2 Ms) because that is my perception. It had nothing to do with my argument, but rather my musing that you responded in the manner I expected. It didn’t mater what I posted; your response would have been similar. That’s as much a part of your personality as my “Died-in-the-wool Southerner act" is part of mine. I think you are smart. I like people who truly “get it” in regard to the bond between humans and canines. I think you must be a brave person (after seeing the ice-climbing pics). You sure know your stuff when it comes to contesting (Ham Radio). I also think you are a troll. Live with it… Embrace it… Perfect it… BUT DON’T, FOR ONE MINUTE, THINK IT WILL WIN AN ARGUMENT OR CHANGE AN OPINION! The best you can hope for is some redneck will call you trollmman (with 2 Ms).

Do you think core sampling at T-Bar would still be worthwhile? Are you still in WA? I could coax JT to help ... but only under your direction! Jerry tends to get lost in open spaces

I just like core sampling. Im funny that way. Old school. Core samples tend to nail everything down especially when the job at hand is the identification of a niche - I dont like orphan niches especially when you know there are going to be question surface later (inevitably) as Palmer must have known. I said core samples, plural. Not just one. Presumably no spoil samples were kept from the whole excavation. I find that peculiar also. I dont know if core sampling done today would be of much value given the disturbed nature of the beach. If it were me I probably would do core sampling today, but nobody else seems to agree. Curiosity is just my nature. Fragments: Fragments of money at Tina Bar was/is a fact. This speaks to the volume of money originally there. That in turn can speak to a number of issues. Some estimate of total volume should have been made. That was not done to my knowledge. Likewise fragments is not defined by Palmer. Location & Depth of fragments found is not identified. This is crucial evidence that was passed over ... by a geologist who does not seem to be thinking 'forensics' at all times. I keep praying thje FBI has something specific on "Fragments". I fear they do not. Core sampling at depth might even today restore some of that missing evidence. It's a long shot. I consider the Fragments that were found distributed at Tina Bar as big a story (if not bigger) than the bundles of bills themselves. Once Fragments were found at T-Bar the whole beach should have been secured and people kept out, followed by an effort made to examine distribution of fragments. That would have addressed key questions including direction of arrival. Maybe this was done and I just dont know about it. I find no record of this having been done, and Larry could not find any record of this kind either... we presume the effort was not made. Haste: A number of people have stated the work at Tina Bar was done in haste. I dont know what compelled that, if this is the case. The time element alone may account for the techniques Palmer opted to use vrs. techniques he did not employ or thought unnecessary. History: Tina Bar was a high traffic area populated by cows during part of its history. The existence of cows and the fate of the money may be tied. There was no historical account given, to my knowledge, which explained the multi-use nature of the the sandbar with respect to the Cooper money. The Fazio's, however, have given their account of when and from where they think the money arrived. These are just a few of the issues I see active - Rubber Bands: Let me add this. The figure [< or = ] 3 months was never suggested as a hard and fast clock, by anyone. It is an approximate value based on very specific 'stress' tests the maker conducted in his lab. The manufacturer still has bands from the same period and a nearly identical lot which have been stored in cool dry conditions and are almost as viable as the day they were made. So temperture, UV exposure, etc play a big role in band deterioration. This is rather well defined chemistry. The fact band pieces were still in place on Ingram bundles is very significant. But the clock, les than or equal to 3 months, is probably not appropriate in this case and tells its own story. I hope that clears that up. [edit]: If I was a phD student at Portland State or wherever and looking for a thesis topic, I would be all over this! This is an excellent phD thesis waiting to happena dn I hope somebody reads this and takes it seriously!! Thanks to Sluggo for his "very fine excellent" summary of the socalled Dream Team's status, its original mandate vis-a-vis the FBI, et cetera. Im just speaking for myself here but I appreciate Sluggo writing what he did.

Attend the next conference (Jerry reported on months back), go to Seattle and search the records as Tom etc did, form an investigative panel for some aspect of the case and get approved, etc. I suppose it would toast your grits to find out there are other panels! You really don't get out much do you?

QuoteThat post I made about 9 solutions had some assumptions built in. One of them had to do with layers in the sand. At the time, yourself along with others felt that it was highly likely that sand was eroding (and it is) and that it was also likely that the dredge layer itself eroded. I accounted for that in a few of the chains I wrote out. If the money gets there in 1971/early 72, and the money was found at the surface, any sand including dredge layers deposited from that time to 1980 would have had to erode. The layer that Palmer found in the sand would then have to be a pre-1971 layer and NOT the dredge layer like he thought. I'll let you figure out why that must be true. There's nothing illogical about it. And if you don't know what layer I'm talking about, go look at the picture of him pointing to the layer. If it's a pre-1971 layer, then you must say that this layer (whenever it was formed) was able to remain on the beach without erosion, but that subsequent layers (ie, dredge) were not able to remain but washed away. As to Palmer's report, I can only comment that his findings were reported on in the 80s. It's not as though they didn't exist or that he did not visit the site to give his professional opinion. Where his report went, where it can be found today, well.... your guess is as good as mine. reply] My quarel with Palmer is his lack of core sampling which would have provided a baseline (going back decades) for his labeling of strata 71-80. Core sampling was not done - Palmer's colleagues state. Palmer specifically chose not to waste time doing core sampling - he thought it unecessary relying instead on his long experience and expertise in the area of beach strata dynamics gained over 30+ years. Palmer's colleagues still alive support this interpretation of how Palmer conducted the work at Tina Bar. Palmer's report to the FBI dated 2/14/80 states something like: 'Geologist Palmer advises that he found the beach area in the vicinity where the money was found to be in approximately four different layers. The layers consisted of an upper sand layer, a post dredging sand layer, a clay lump (dredge) sand layer and below that an older sand layer. The upper layer consisted. of six inches to eight inches of reworked beach sand and is the sand which contained the fragments and bundles of the recovered money. This sand also contained soda pop cans and other debris, which were not severely damaged and/or rusted. This uppermpost layer is what I shall later describe as the 'upper active working layer' because it is most recent in aquisition showing signs of both acquisition and erosion, in the near term. The post dredging sand layer under the upper active working layer contained older soda pop cans, rusted nails and spikes, and other older rusted artifacts, which were in a much more deteriorated condition indicative of their age compared to the upper active working layer. " [Georger posted a strata chart as per the above] All of this has been posted before by several people. In addition to no core sampling, Palmer did not resort to chemical analysis either, in distinguishing strata. Palmer relied on his experience and saw nothing at Tina Bar which moved him to a more indepth analysis. One later minor report by _________ characterised Palmer's clay-lump dredge layer as having a bluish tint, said to be characteristic of dredging silt. Palmer's report does not mention "any" pre-1971 layer or strata, dredge or otherwise (which core sampling would have revealed). Palmer's report does not mention any "erosional" effects being a sigificiant factor at Tina Bar below the upper active working layer. (Again core sampling would have helped clarify erosional issues). Palmer's report does not address the issue of erosion or slumping in the 1974 dredge layer(s) at all. Pending other evidence like core sampling, it is safe to assume Palmer did not believe the 74 dredge layer had eroded significantly and that what he found and identified as the 74 dredge layer was that, and no other layer.... all based on Palmer's personal experience in Columbia beach strata and dredging layers he had worked with and identified many times over many years.

Safe says in his 9-Solutions: "The reason why Palmer is in dispute is because those with some brains know that he absolutely must be wrong for their hypothesis to hold any kind of merit." If that isnt prejudicial I dont know what is. Safe is appealing to "brains" and if that isnt a put-down I dont know what is, right in the heart of his analytical work. Safe is of course referring to ... Jerry Thomas. The problem with Safe's reference above is it turns out to characterise his whole work. His work is something a rank amateur would do and yet I can only assume he is passing this off as some kind of scholarly work? Laying on hands and Judgements is not formal logic. I think I know what Safe has in mind. Safe is trying to suggest a method for sorting and analysing evidence, inferentially. But his application severely flawed and full of opinions & suppositions like: "The reason why Palmer is in dispute is because those with some brains know that he absolutely must be wrong for their hypothesis to hold any kind of merit." I tried very early to suggest 'inferences are no better than the suppositions which support them' but Safe never replied. I now believe Safe did not reply because he literally does not know the difference to be able to respond, as a practical working matter. Safe needs to build a logical chain which is an actual chain of logical inferences, starting at the beginning (not in the middle), and work from there if is he going to rely on Logic as his formal model. Otherwise he would be better to use Ven Diagrams or something similar ... because otherwise I seriously doubt anyone here will even pay any attention to it. All criminal cases face the task of organising evidence. There are established models for doing that. Maybe Safe could use one of those models and start at the beginning, if this really is his ambition. In the case of Jerry Thomas and his beliefs, it is not a matter of "brains" as Safe suggests, but something else. Safe might learn something from exploring that rather than demeaning Jerry Thomas. Finally, Safe might do better if he picked a small aspect of the Cooper case and tried to analyse that only (inferentially), vs trying to bite off the whole case. Most good science is built from the bottom up, inductively, not deductively ... from the middle out!

I knew you would say this, not knowing the difference. If we are going to allow people to bandy around words like logic, equation, etc then the least we can do is at some point give an honest appraisal, especially if the student continues to come forth with more moralisms passing as modus ponens. I mean shouldn't "Safecrackers" at least know what a "safe" looks like and be held to that standard? It's a little odd to have safecrackers flipping toilet lids with burglar tools and nobody say anything .... ? Or this is the DB Cooper Area Development Centre Forum. Shouldnt an auto mechanic at least know which end the motor is at? How far do we dumb this forum down and still keep a straight lying face? I mean Safecracking has been coming here for a long time, in spurts, bestowing his knowledge, expertise, and wisdom from on High. He refuses to engage in common discussion. He could refute his own arguements, if he cared. Rather we are left having to move ten tons of dinosaur dung each time he comes to pontficate. For those who dont know the difference its ENTERTAINMENT. For those who know the difference, its unsettling. I asked him if he had read the Palmer report. He talks about Palmer as if he has, but he wont say. Do you know? Maybe you and Safe could team up and explain his "9-Solutions". Its not being mean to ask: HAVE YOU READ THE PALMER REPORT! WHERE DO YOU GET "PRE 1971 DREDGE LAYER" from?

Rather than "precisely seeing key players in this mystery" why not learn some logic and set theory and actually fulfill one ambition in your life.

In your 9-Solutions I find references to Palmer's work. Have you read the Palmer report? What is the basis for your "pre 1971 dredge layer" ? Did you invent that on your own? Rather than avoiding conspiracy theories, you appear to have invented one - any explanation for that?

dont worry. he will be back, could not resist sniping at that which he covets... and must steer. something will come up which requires his presents.

I think you and Snow & Jo are on your own for a while - the rest of us somewhere doing something, anywhere but here. Good luck to you and Michael Jackson and Jo Jackson.

Georger, get out your microscope and circle the scars that come to you in your psychedelic dreams. If the shrooms grow in the woods, are they illegal? A finstere cholem auf dein kopf und auf dein hent und fiss putz -

Uh. My impression of the kind of stories/reality that Vietnam vets dealt with, and feel motivated to write down on the web for guys like me, rarely involve reading comic books. How about any Canadian Hutterites in SOG units, that would mate up with Cooper DNA profile TK is working with?