You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Now I've got a very difficult question that I want to direct to that icon of internet civility, GEORGER.

Here it goes:

What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?

Perhaps...not finding anything along that flight path after 47 years? How about...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path? Hmmmm...

What say you GEORGER? What exactly does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?

Answer: Any flight path that isnt based on some well documented data. In this case any flight path that is outside V23 and has Cooper landing in Montana or Lima Peru!

BTW, when will it dawn on you you don't need a west path to get the money bundles to Tina Bar! That was already known clear back in 1980 when the Palmer Rpt listed all of the likely options, of which there were four!

It sounds as if we're in the same spot we have been all along. That is to say, R99 and I think the FBI flight path is fatally flawed. Everyone else, the FBI flight path is essentially accurate.

I feel as if we have stated our case quite well. I'm sure others feel they have stated their case well too. Therefore, I agree, there is probably little to be gained by going much further with it all.

Someone is right. Someone is wrong.

This whole flight path discussion reminds me of Kevin Costner (Jim Garrison) in JFK.  By creating doubt that Oswald could have gotten off 3 shots in less than 6 seconds, Jim Garrison determined that there had to be a second gunman, and therefore a conspiracy, and then he said the conspiracy had to be big (Mafia, Cuba, CIA, etc.).  That's what this is, creating doubt to advance a theory. 

Oswald likely took all the shots.  Flight 305 likely flew on or near the FBI flight path.  But if Flight 305 was off the flight path some, it does not make for some huge downstream effect.  The FBI had a pretty good handle on the case, and we still don't know everything they did or all the evidence they have.  So I tend to believe they are generally correct.  If the flight path is a little off, then what does it mean?  It does not mean that the FBI was wrong about everything. 

This is arguing for the sake of arguing, to find some tiny flaw and therefore invalidate an entire process.  This is just like the money find topic a few months ago.  What's next, the tie?  Flight 305 took off from Portland, it landed in Seattle, it flew to Reno.  Somewhere around 8:12 PM, just north of Portland, D.B. Cooper jumped out.  If the North Vietnamese could shoot down our fighters in 1971, then I think American technology could figure out where a passenger airplane was between Seattle and Portland.

What do you hope to gain by disproving the current flight path theory?  To prove that there were inconsistencies in the investigation? Of course there were.  People can't even agree on what color his suit jacket was.  When does this stop?  Maybe he took $500,000.  Maybe he was a she, like in the Barb Dayton theory.  Maybe the flight crew was in on it.  Maybe the plane flew over Cle Elum.  Nothing is ever 100% for certain.   

Any chance we can start a new topic so there is interest in coming back here to read up on the case?  I'd rather hear from you guys about the case than have to read 302's.

Robert--My point about the map is to simply say that any 2D rendering of a 3D event won't perfectly reflect the event (theoretical models of a hologram universe aside) and I was trying to show how ridiculous radical skepticism (in this case, and elsewhere) can be. I am well aware of your criticisms of the FBI map and have taken them seriously (seriously enough to include them in my book as a plausible explanation for Tina Bar). I also supported, a couple of years ago now, searching Caterpillar Island and other areas associated with your theory with a cadaver dog. I even suggested such a segment for a TV show to a producer.

I'll even admit that I struggle with the placard find, but that my personal opinion on the matter is that the wind was coming more directly from the south than what appears in our limited measurements. I could be wrong.

Regardless...

I don't need the flight path to be in V-23. I don't have a theory or a suspect that requires an alternate flight path. I don't need to put a dead Cooper near a culvert upstream of Tina Bar. I don't need a living Cooper to land in Ridgefield NWR. In my mind, the explanatory power of R99's flight path helps us *only if* the money wasn't found in the dredge later. Unfortunately, I think the money was found in the dredge layer and that eradicates the explanatory power of the theory, and thus the need for the theory.

I wish we had the radar tapes, or a print out of the data, or a photo of the radar screen. We got a hand-drawn map that was handled by a bunch of people, one of who played connect-the-dots and obscured the original plots. If that's all that's left of the radar data, so be it.

If you look at satellite photos of the areas where we think the jump took place, there are fewer and fewer places to look regardless of where you move the flight path. So knowing the *real* flight path is less and less useful to finding evidence of Cooper on the ground. Either Cooper took everything with him, or it all washed out with his body into the Pacific.

"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."

"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."

"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."

"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."

" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."

Robert

Quote

"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."

It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.

Quote

"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."

That made me smile, thank you

Eric

Quote

"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."

And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.

Quote

"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."

265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.

Quote

" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."

I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74.  A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.

According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.

Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.