georger

REPLY> Thanks Sluggo. There isnt nearly the elevation I thought there was. It trully is a "bar" (flat). It is not like the hill Ingramis sitting on in the PI photo. photos attached -

We need to know how active T Bar is hydrologically and what years. A writer has suggested T Bar has changed its configuration greatly between 1980 and 2000, but not much at all between 1971 and 1980 (no floods). The same writer says T Bar goes through wet-dry cycles and often wet (from what when?).

at 20:17, there's probably enough forward throw for a no-pull to have Cooper in the Columbia. And if you subtract the apparent error minute, that's 20:16 I think the data suggesting LZ sooner before the Columbia is pretty weak and shouldn't override the more likely Columbia LZ (based on the money) Also, since Columbia/PDX area is an easier visual spot, compared to LZ before that, it makes sense? Assuming Cooper is not a skydiver, the increased risk of drowning might not have registered. REPLY> It doesnt even have to be the Columbia itself but any watershed closely connected to the Columbia that is affected during "any" high water period. (I errored above. 80- 8/74 = 5 years 4 months, not 4 years) Much depends on what Rataczack meant by "hadnt crossed the Columbia yet" while still seeing the "northern suburbs of Portland". Sounds like over Vancouver or very close to it, but still north of the Columbia. Up stream of Hayden Island? That is still a long way from Tina Bar so maybe a floating scenario for some distance until current and debris snag him further up stream closer to the Willamette Columbia junction, to become a part of the bottom closer to Tina Bar? The manager of the dredging operation might have some solution to this. The geologist seemed more concerned to show the money was not part of the pre-dredge layer than to show what part of the post-dredge layer(s) the money was part of? Surely he would have understood the need to know, because fact is the dredge layer and the layers ABOVE IT are/were distinguishable. I dont see any photo where he is distinguishing those layers. Or was he saying 'all layers above the dredge layer are the dredge layer, and there are no further top layers'? (Its like having a conversation with a phone company employee whoc ant answer a simple question!) Because IF that is what the geologist is saying then obvious the money IS a part of the dredged layer!

REPLY> I have tried without success to find a detailed elevation map of Tina Bar to know exactly what elevations exist there. Is it flat or sloped or what! ? The Ingram photo does not match the FBI excavation photos. But 40ft feet up from the waterline seems consistent in every report. The place the money was found, the slope it was, and distance from the water line on are important because they define the processes that apply at that location vs other locations in that area. If anyone has a topographic chart of this bar please post it! So far as I know, we have no great floods between 71 and 80 at Tina Bar. 76 was a mini flood which may or may not have affected T Bar at all. So flooding does not look like a viable scenario for depositing the money at Tina Bar, unless somebody has other facts about flooding at this bar ? See attached graph. Therefore, the only great change at T Bar is the dredging operation. The debris placed on T Bar by the dredging had the dredge working where? Right off T Bar, up or down from T Bar, across the channel from T Bar. Only the manager would know. But, if you cannot provide flooding facts at T Bar then it has to be dredging. Because, the money was found under 2-3" of sand and the bottom of the bundles is part of the layer immediately below it. That amounts to a 6-8 inch layer! Subtract upper layer erosion by seasonal melts and rain etc. That means the layer the money was in was conceivably much deeper at the beginning, and with that we are now "in" the dredging layer itself. Current is a factor in this scenario. In floods you have current. Tina Bar is a fairly open shoreline. Things washed up also wash off in the current. In the case of the money we have washup and staying, and being covered over. That selects against any ordinary current scenario in favour of a deposit+cover scenario, to both deposit the money at the barand have it covered up to stay (to be found later). The height off the waterline is important. The higher up by flood the faster and more prevalent the current. Flooding and current and movement all go together. Only the dredging operation left deposits that stayed HIGHER UP at Tina Bar. Bulldozers open packages of trash as they push along while also covering them up. That is exactly the condition we find the money in at Tina Bar. (an opened package?). Everyone on my end thinks this is the scenario. Nobody thinks this money was buried by hand and flooding is too problematic and fails to provide the covering this money obviously sat in, for years. August 74-1980 is 4 years. Natural rain and melt erosion from '74 on probably removed n-number of inches off the top layer covering the money. The mini flood of 76 may have removed top covering, if there was a mini flood that year? But, in order for the dredge to catch the money it must be being held on the bottom of the Columbia in the first place. That is a problem not easily understood. And no DZ defined to date accomodates any of this! Here's another map of the Tina Bar area...

Can Ckret tell us the history on this "transcript"? A very unusual choice of words indeed. If transcript is accurate, there must be a clue here. The rust stains still puzzle me. I doubt if they came from something random, like the bundles coming to rest on some wet rusty scrap metal. Seems more likely that they came from something the money was transported in, but just a hunch. Chute hardware on my military surplus gear was not stainless steel. Only the ripcord was stainless. I think most of the metal pieces were cadmium or nickel plated steel, but a rigger would know exactly. I do remember seeing rusty harness parts on discarded surplus gear that had been left out in the elements. 377 The history of the transcript(s) has been covered at length earlier in these pages.You might also try: http://n467us.com/ which is a valuable resource. Ive looked at a lot of photos of the money. Rust of the kind shown in the attached has appeared on only one bill that I know of. Tina bar is a sandbar. It collects debris of all kinds naturally. The dredging operation deposited more debris of all kinds. I wouldnt extrapolate from one rust on one bill that the iron sword of King Arthur has been discovered!

The FBI "folder" bills seem to have some waviness/distortion that the Ingram auction bills don't. The Ingram auction bills may have been pressed/cleaned up a bit by the PCGS currency folk? It'd be interesting to know if the FBI got the bills "fully dry" or still damp. I suppose if they were wet when the Ingrams got them, they would distort a bit while drying. I'm still perplexed about the apparent "leaching" stains in the FBI folder. All in all, it seems like a pretty piss-poor way to store evidence. The photos from 2/12/80 don't seem to have any obvious distortion, but I think we need more photos to be sure. I'm thinking we can't even be sure of distortion ideas, because of the behavior of the bills while drying? REPLY> Its a dead horse, but both the Ingrams and the FBI did nobody any favors by the way the money scene was handled. Disturbing the site lost vital-crucuial information. Bore tests could still be done, if somebody is up for it and looking for a phD dissertation. Tina Bar is by definition a sandbar, ie. a place of alluvial desposits. Tina Bar directly connects to the whole wide alluvial system just up-current from the Columbia-Willammette junction. That we find something deposited there should be no surprise. It is a place where things get deposited, after arriving in or near the water systems which feed the sandbar. Siltation happens quickly. These are the kinds of places an arcaheologist loves! The removal or siltation also happens quickly during melts and flood. Very likely the money at Tina Bar was part of a deeper deposit complex, then finally exposed for Ingram to feel and find it. After how many seasons is the only question. Once deposited the layers on top simply washed and weathered away. Fibre analysis of the soil would have given the answer whether some container was originally there or not. I tend to favor the dredging hypothesis because it would account for the money being covered over and being preserved for many years to finally have anything left 'to' find. A bulldoxer pushing sand and silt around could very easily have broken the container and its contents to leave the part of the money we find nearer the surface. Erosion then exposes the bundles over time near the surface. But there is no water-route (that works) for the money from Orchards or anywhere else north of the Columbia! Whatever happened to Cooper, his money wound up in the immediate watershed of the Columbia or the upper Willamette to have it be found at Tina Bar, a sandbar created by deposition. Key to this may be the amount of yearly top sand erosion. That amount per year may be an estimate as to when the money originally came to Tina Bar, because preservation and erosion are key elements in this scenario. Preservation implies rather deep burial in the first place. Deep burial leads to dredging burial vs flood because in a flood you have current which would not simply have deposited the money but also moved it along not being covered over immediately. The fact the money was found rather high off the waterline also suggests the dredging deposit idea. Something as light as this money would be moved by currents in flood and never stay at a high elevation. Something "put" the money high up on the bar then buried it in one single scenario. Flooding can deposit something but not bury it to have it secured, especially at the open location of Tina Bar. You have to explain not just the conveyance to Tina Bar but also its burial for preservation. A flood scenario does not provide those two ingredients in the open location at Tina Bar. A dredging operation does provide both those elements. Im only brainstorming here but its a plausable scenario. George-

QuoteQuoteQuote So I dunno..I'm not sure that we can date anything about the money reliably. REPLY> That remains to be tried. If those are really rust stains on that one bill though, I can't understand that though. (as people have pointed out stainless hardware) RELPLY> The rust could have come from any steel or iron that happened tobe in the same burial place. In the Columbia you have current to deal with with at the bottom of wherever else.

...just a reminder that "paper" money is not actually paper as most people think of it...(sorry, this pedant in me is hard to keep down). Then again, as it should be more resilient than paper I guess that underscores rather than undermines your quote. REPLY> very correct. I took some bills last night and dropped into the tub. Float time in still cold water was 1hr 37 minutes, so I finally pulled one to examine it and it was wet clear through,soI did stress test on it. It pulled (distorted) very well. Resilient stuff money is. But the fibres dont seem to have much of a memory - the stretching permanently distorted the bills even after they dried. I noticed the bills absorbed and held a lot of water. I can see how bills wet and pressed into a block would present a semi solid mass, to be eaten away atthe outside but not internally - just as some of the Cooper money appears. I am discussing possible tests with a colleague of mine and may present some of that later - George

REPLY> well known in archaeology circles - temperature of the water matters. The colder the better. Note the stress on currents vs still water above. Note hat he says about paper: "Some people might feel that if paper items do indeed decompose in a very short time, why go to the trouble of recycling them? But wouldn't they feel differently if they knew that most paper doesn't decompose rapidly in standard landfills or that, even if it did biodegrade, microorganisms do not affect the lignin (the fiber element in paper) that comprises 40% or so of paper's volume? We could add sunlight into the equation. G.

I dont see anything in the Brian photo that matches any of the other Tina Bar photos. ???? G.

REPLY> I have also wondered about this because Brian's photo shows him sitting on a hill - downslope. I think we decided maybe the Brian photo was staged? Not where he found the money? The recently wet was from snow melt, as I recall this. G.

REPLY - QUESTIONS>>> _Was there an inventory of things found in the T_Bar excavation? May we see that inventory? _Were any bag fibres or cloth pieces noted in the excavation at T-Bar ? Georger

The air stair itself was not a pressure bulkhead door...You claim a pressure bump "only by someone jumping." Well, thinking like that only leads to dead ends, and DB Cooper has been nothing but one big dead end. Were the packs running? More than likely. A pressure bump could occur simply by a fluctuation in the position of the "pressure bulkhead" door....you can leave the air stairs out of this, they've got nothing to do with it. They can be open in flight, and that cabin fully pressurized. Don't mind me however, I've pulled silver many times, going to go pull one now. REPLY> You sure have my attention. Could you speak more about this? You do realise the FBI conducted tests and the bump was linked to the stairs slamming back up after weight was off them ? Thanks - George

Thanks Ckret - George

REPLY: waymore than $5800.

The most important thing about a circle jerk, is announcing a time because everyone has to be there simultaneously. This is not a circle jerk because we don't need simultaneity. It's more like mutual self-masturbation. Still good. REPLY> I like that definition - hell I thought I was just insane!

I have not read today's posts to catch up - will later tonight, but I am making this post because a brand new assertion has surfaced which we need to handle as myth or fact: An environmentalist at Vancouver claims (a) there may NEVER have been any dredging deposits placed at Tina Bar in 1974 because of environmental issues. This may have included concerns over livestock being kept in the area which used Tina Bar at the time. (b) if any dredging deposits were ever put at Tina Bar they were never deposited there directly but possibly moved there later from some place else nearby, because the Bar was subject to environmental restrictions, and something about the bar's physical situation (including nearby Catapillar Island) made it impossible for dredge to be pumped directly on to the bar .... This is all I know. What say yee .... Must run. George

Most of the railroad flares I remember as a kid were about the size Tina described. Fire engine Red or slightly darker with printing on the sides explaining how to STRIKE them. But, all flares have a hard knob on one end - the strike or striker. The strikes might have been hard to see in a container. And the striker end is too hard to pass a wire through without making a hole first. I know - we tried as kids!

So, did a man with no jump experience at all really jump? A man who had executed a plan flawlessly, screw it all up at the end? REPLY> Are you saying he was Elvis?

I did. I was waiting for Jo to go ballistic about bundles in metal cans..Was waiting for it so I could talk about how silly her Nigerian 419 story, I mean Duane waiting till a business trip .................................. REPLY> > ! Rust makes you wonder if a parchute harness or metal something was wrapped up with the money? My mind works that way - cant help it. SAFE's rermarks got me to thinking - turn this on its head. Why Tina Bar. Why not someplace else? There must be a million other places more logical or likely. Why Tina Bar? Why not Joe's Bar. Mary's woods. Jim's snake ranch? George

Im really surprised you didnt pick up on the rust on the bill -

Isn't that the geology professor? background from sluggo's site who knows if FBI ever consulted hydrologists? * Dr. Leonard Palmer of Portland State University concluded that the dredging operation in 1974 did not put the money onto the beach, because the bills were found above clay deposits put on the banks by the dredge. [AP Release 02-14-1980] * Leonard A. Palmer, emeritus associate professor of geology, died 31 December 2001 in Seattle following a 3.5-year bout with pancreatic cancer. [A Tribute to Leonard Palmer, PhD. From [url]http://geology.pdx.edu/files/Emeriti/Palmer/index REPLY> Thats him. Thanks. Ckret calls him hydrologist, you say Geologist. That's the man. Thanks.

Hope your random walk brings you back!

Can you give me the name of the hydrologist? Photo below - Thanks, George

I can make the following observations - I think there is no escaping testing the money, if you are going to try and prove a route to Tina Bar. Every major route to Tina Bar has the potential for uniqueness in it, with respect to the state of the money. We need to be looking at each route for properties which are unique to each route alone. examples@ Washougal: offers the presence of basaltic silt residues with 86Sr/87Sr associations not found elsewhere (if my reading is correct). Tina Bar associations: sedimentary as opposed to basaltic. micro fossil associations. Willamette & Vancouver Lake associations: fine non basaltic Willamette/Vancouvr Lake silt deposits... Deposit by land or air with no water routes: lack of basaltic or sedimentary or Willamette associations . . Grease or other traits associated with civilisation as opposed to nature. Pending no evidence elsewhere which would give perspectve on the money at Tina Bar,and without any tests to nail down traits in the money itself, then ... IF THE GLOVES DONT FIT YOU MUST AQUIT! George