Wikipedia has this:

While many unconventional explanations have been put forward to explain cattle mutilations, a variety of scientists, veterinary workers, and knowledgeable observers (including farmers and other agricultural workers) have suggested more conventional ideas, most of which revolve around the hypothesis that "mutilated" animals died of natural causes and were subjected to known terrestrial phenomena – including the action of predators, parasites, and scavengers.

Missing or mutilated mouth, lips, anus, and genitalia are explained as:

Contraction of missing/damaged areas due to dehydration.
The actions of small scavengers and burrowing parasites seeking to enter or consume the body in areas where skin is at its thinnest.
Missing/mutilated eyes and soft internal organs are explained as:

The action of carrion feeding insects such as blowflies, and opportunistic or carrion birds such as vultures, which are known to direct themselves toward an animal's eyes, and to enter the body through the openings of the mouth and anus in order to feed on soft internal organs.

Absence of blood is explained as:

Blood pooling in the lowest points in the body where it will break down into its basic organic components.
Blood that is external to the body, or in the area of a wound being consumed by insects or reduced by solar desiccation.
Surgical incisions in the skin are explained as:

Tears in the skin created when it is stretched by postmortem bloat and/or as dehydration causes the animal's hide to shrink and split, often in linear cuts.
Incisions caused by scavengers or predators, possibly exacerbated by the above.
The hypothesis that natural phenomena account for most mutilation characteristics has been validated by a number of experiments, including one cited by long-time scientific skeptic Robert T. Carroll, conducted by Washington County (Arkansas) Sheriff's Department. In the experiment, the body of a recently deceased cow was left in a field and observed for 48 hours. During the 48 hours, postmortem bloating was reported to have caused incision-like tears in the cow's skin that matched the "surgical" cuts reported on mutilated cows, while the action of blowflies and maggots reportedly matched the soft tissue damage observed on mutilated cows. No explanation was made however, for the entire absence of any blood.

Experiments have also been conducted to compare the different reactions of surgically cut hide/flesh and predated hide/flesh to natural exposure. They demonstrated pronounced differences between surgical cut and non surgical cuts over time. This article does not address tearing due to bloating.

According to Vern Jones, not only did Reca not know what kind of plane he was on, he really didn't care.

Plus, he didn't mind being really stupid, having just walked up the aft stairs to board the plane at PDX.

SO, did a guy this dumb actually do all the things that others say he did, and that he eventually confessed to? Hard to see it being real.

But what did Jeff Osiadacz really see in the coffee shop in Cle Elum? Was it a truly a soaking wet Walter Reca? Maybe. If so, what does it mean?

What does it mean to you, Georger? Just askin'...

Reca was a USAF (reserve) Para Rescue Jumper (PJ). Dummies don't make the cut for this super competitive elite group. Something doesn't add up. Reserve PJs get no special breaks, same training, same everything. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I have friends who served as PJs in the 129th Rescue Squadron in CA. They were all sharp as hell and super capable parachutists. No way they'd be ignorant about jump aircraft and exit possibilities.

377

"Swarthy" Hahneman is an excellent match for the Cooper description and sketch.

That pic of Hahneman Georger used is from his passport when he appears much heavier in the face, his weight fluctuated greatly, these images (June 1972) show an excellent match to the updated Cooper sketch B.. note, the updated Cooper sketch was created well after the Hahneman hijacking.

and Snowmman missed an HH doc...  One witness shown a photo seemed to agree... "an exceptionally good likeness"

* H was wearing regular glasses in pics, I darkened them for a comparison.

Flyjack wrote:  " Swarthy" Hahneman is an excellent match for the Cooper description and sketch." "

Most of the Hahneman photos show tightly curled hair. Is that a match?

377

I think you are putting to much into the passengers. they had to recall Cooper and differ in descriptions.

A likeness is one thing, positive ID is another.

So, what happened after 1972...still waiting on a color photo?

What show was it that did the layover with Kenny's photo and it was a perfect match?

I think you are putting to much into the passengers. they had to recall Cooper and differ in descriptions.

A likeness is one thing, positive ID is another.

So, what happened after 1972...still waiting on a color photo?

Complete nonsense, did I ever claim an excellent match is positive ID.. it is one piece of the puzzle.

This place has become a clown show, Georger is an ignorant hypocrite only interested in being right not uncovering the truth. Ridicule and innuendo (lies) aren’t an argument, it shows a lack of confidence in your own opinion and reading some of your opinions, you should lack confidence. I left the Hahneman HH FBI doc out there to see if anyone could get it, Congrats to Snowmman, Georger failed, so simple.. Shutter is nice guy but his reasoning and logic skills are extremely flawed which I have no respect for. I don’t have the patience to straighten out others flawed logic and opinions. Sure, you have the right to your own opinion and to have flawed thinking. You should NEVER EVER use assumptions to reject,,, you use facts. That doesn’t mean you have to accept Hahneman, but you need to be open until you have proof. Rejecting based on assumptions is extremely flawed logic, there is no discussion from that position, NONE. It is placing the conclusion before the arg. You have entered a self imposed intellectual prison. I was stunned by some of Shutter’s recent logically flawed comments and he thinks it is because he doesn’t agree with me. CRAZY. It isn’t what you think that is important it is how you think.

Contrary to the repeated false accusations, I am not selling Hahneman as a suspect.. I am not writing a book and don’t benefit. I really don’t give a shit what anyone thinks, especially if I don’t respect their opinions.  I don’t expect or believe anyone should accept Hahneman as Cooper. I do expect respect and a competent level of critical thinking. Instead, I get insults and ridicule from positions of extreme ignorance.

I can’t find anything expressed by the FBI that they actually eliminated Hahneman. I can’t find any facts that eliminate him.. So, Hahneman is a viable suspect until I can eliminate him. In fact, other than some very short press releases, the FBI has never mentioned anything about Hahneman, he has been shrouded in secrecy, that is really odd.

Everbody assumes the FBI investigated him so he couldn’t be Cooper. Of course they did. Have any of you thought that perhaps the FBI made an error or even a coverup and that is why this thing has never been solved. Rejecting Hahneman because the FBI looked at him is outsourcing your thinking.

In a case this old, we need to review all assumptions and base conclusions on facts. The bias should be toward an open mind, not closed.

Until I am convinced that Hahneman can be eliminated by facts I will consider him a very strong suspect. The strongest.

SNOW,, Hahneman was ID’d based on personal info he gave during the hijacking, tipster info and photo ID. I have an FBI doc that describes information from a tipster, name is redacted but it seems to describe Hahneman’s brother W H. This is why I can’t accept that his death in Honduras was a 100% fact. It may be close but it isn’t 100%. I have no theory or proof other than to keep that door open a crack. A very very slight possibility that he may have faked his death, it would be a great alibi. Though my focus is on F W.

Clearly, I have far more info that you guys, far too much to reveal in any clear and concise way that can do it justice. You can reject each piece as not being proof but in totality, the circumstantial evidence is hard to ignore. At this point getting 100% proof is nearly impossible and probably out of my ability. There may be proof that eliminates him but it hasn’t been found.

I started looking at Hahneman to answer this obvious question, Why is Hahneman NOT Cooper? That is the real question. The more I looked the more he matched..

Also, I posted a note to PM for a summary of an FBI doc, I got a few responses. So, either the rest don't read my posts or give a shit about new info. Window closed. I have even posted new and interesting facts that are completely ignored. I gave some crumbs and virtually no interest. So, why bother and you think my goal is selling a suspect. Fucking insane and delusional.



I see no benefit to me to participate here, none. Closed minded, disrespectful and ignorant environment. You demand people prove a suspect was Cooper or you reject it with assumptions and ridicule. That mindset undermines the very nature of an investigation and destroys intellectual inquiry, the very purpose of this forum and very likely the same reason this case wasn't solved.


That is it, rant over, look in the mirror and figure out what the fuck you are doing here. Ego stroking or intellectual exploration.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I think you are putting to much into the passengers. they had to recall Cooper and differ in descriptions.

A likeness is one thing, positive ID is another.

So, what happened after 1972...still waiting on a color photo?

Complete nonsense, did I ever claim an excellent match is positive ID.. it is one piece of the puzzle.

This place has become a clown show, Georger is an ignorant hypocrite only interested in being right not uncovering the truth. Ridicule and innuendo (lies) aren’t an argument, it shows a lack of confidence in your own opinion and reading some of your opinions, you should lack confidence. I left the Hahneman HH FBI doc out there to see if anyone could get it, Congrats to Snowmman, Georger failed, so simple.. Shutter is nice guy but his reasoning and logic skills are extremely flawed which I have no respect for. I don’t have the patience to straighten out others flawed logic and opinions. Sure, you have the right to your own opinion and to have flawed thinking. You should NEVER EVER use assumptions to reject,,, you use facts. That doesn’t mean you have to accept Hahneman, but you need to be open until you have proof. Rejecting based on assumptions is extremely flawed logic, there is no discussion from that position, NONE. It is placing the conclusion before the arg. You have entered a self imposed intellectual prison. I was stunned by some of Shutter’s recent logically flawed comments and he thinks it is because he doesn’t agree with me. CRAZY. It isn’t what you think that is important it is how you think.

Contrary to the repeated false accusations, I am not selling Hahneman as a suspect.. I am not writing a book and don’t benefit. I really don’t give a shit what anyone thinks, especially if I don’t respect their opinions.  I don’t expect or believe anyone should accept Hahneman as Cooper. I do expect respect and a competent level of critical thinking. Instead, I get insults and ridicule from positions of extreme ignorance.

I can’t find anything expressed by the FBI that they actually eliminated Hahneman. I can’t find any facts that eliminate him.. So, Hahneman is a viable suspect until I can eliminate him. In fact, other than some very short press releases, the FBI has never mentioned anything about Hahneman, he has been shrouded in secrecy, that is really odd.

Everbody assumes the FBI investigated him so he couldn’t be Cooper. Of course they did. Have any of you thought that perhaps the FBI made an error or even a coverup and that is why this thing has never been solved. Rejecting Hahneman because the FBI looked at him is outsourcing your thinking.

In a case this old, we need to review all assumptions and base conclusions on facts. The bias should be toward an open mind, not closed.

Until I am convinced that Hahneman can be eliminated by facts I will consider him a very strong suspect. The strongest.

SNOW,, Hahneman was ID’d based on personal info he gave during the hijacking, tipster info and photo ID. I have an FBI doc that describes information from a tipster, name is redacted but it seems to describe Hahneman’s brother W H. This is why I can’t accept that his death in Honduras was a 100% fact. It may be close but it isn’t 100%. I have no theory or proof other than to keep that door open a crack. A very very slight possibility that he may have faked his death, it would be a great alibi. Though my focus is on F W.

Clearly, I have far more info that you guys, far too much to reveal in any clear and concise way that can do it justice. You can reject each piece as not being proof but in totality, the circumstantial evidence is hard to ignore. At this point getting 100% proof is nearly impossible and probably out of my ability. There may be proof that eliminates him but it hasn’t been found.

I started looking at Hahneman to answer this obvious question, Why is Hahneman NOT Cooper? That is the real question. The more I looked the more he matched..

Also, I posted a note to PM for a summary of an FBI doc, I got a few responses. So, either the rest don't read my posts or give a shit about new info. Window closed. I have even posted new and interesting facts that are completely ignored. I gave some crumbs and virtually no interest. So, why bother and you think my goal is selling a suspect. Fucking insane and delusional.



I see no benefit to me to participate here, none. Closed minded, disrespectful and ignorant environment. You demand people prove a suspect was Cooper or you reject it with assumptions and ridicule. That mindset undermines the very nature of an investigation and destroys intellectual inquiry, the very purpose of this forum and very likely the same reason this case wasn't solved.


That is it, rant over, look in the mirror and figure out what the fuck you are doing here. Ego stroking or intellectual exploration.

woah - hold up cowboy! what has any of this got to do with me? Find a new scapegoat Ajax! 

HAPPY LANDING ON PLUTO!  CALL HOME - SEND PHOTOS!   

DONT FALL OFF YOUR MULE!

Fact is, Hahneman checks some boxes. He fails to check other important boxes. Any idiot can see that!

 CALL HOME - SEND PHOTOS!