Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1433421 times)

georger · « **Reply #1695 on:** January 04, 2016, 03:26:27 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't have his book. I'm sure the information is in there...

A quick search

"With the searchers wearing camera-equipped helmets, Tosaw watched the search as it happened, seeing what the divers saw in real time.

The river is about 400 feet across and 40 feet deep at that location. The divers concentrated on the shallows, going no deeper than 30 feet along the bank. They found all kinds of debris, including a 2,000-pound anchor believed to be about 100 years old -- but no sign of Cooper."

Don't understand the 400 feet across part...

I have Tosaw's book (which does not have an index) but I don't remember seeing anything about helmet cameras.

The river at Tina Bar is roughly 1000 feet wide. The shipping channel is 40 feet deep and handles large ocean going ships. Kaiser built Liberty Ships at Portland/Vancouver during WW2.

From personal experience just standing at the water's edge at Tina Bar, my guess is that NMI is correct about the underwater visibility being only in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 feet.

About trees in the river, remember that Bonneville Dam is about 30 or 40 miles upstream of Tina Bar and that the trees would probably enter the river downstream of that dam. And my guess is that the Corp of Engineers would try to ground those trees as soon as they spotted them coming downstream.

Also, Mt. St. Helens blew its top about three months after the money was found at Tina Bar. The ash from Mt. St. Helens fell mainly in the Columbia River watershed and went downstream from there. With all the dams on the Columbia, some of the power generators were damaged by the ash in the water and shipping had to be stopped between Portland and the Pacific while that 40 foot shipping channel was dredged to get the ash out. The Bonneville Dam Visitor's Center has a nice display on this topic.

Let me say with some humor that 'Tom and the FBI lab found no volcanic ash in between the bills' !

Here is what the river washed round silica sand looks like (it's non abrasive) vs volcanic ash -

Robert99 · « **Reply #1696 on:** January 04, 2016, 05:02:48 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't have his book. I'm sure the information is in there...

A quick search

"With the searchers wearing camera-equipped helmets, Tosaw watched the search as it happened, seeing what the divers saw in real time.

The river is about 400 feet across and 40 feet deep at that location. The divers concentrated on the shallows, going no deeper than 30 feet along the bank. They found all kinds of debris, including a 2,000-pound anchor believed to be about 100 years old -- but no sign of Cooper."

Don't understand the 400 feet across part...

I have Tosaw's book (which does not have an index) but I don't remember seeing anything about helmet cameras.

The river at Tina Bar is roughly 1000 feet wide. The shipping channel is 40 feet deep and handles large ocean going ships. Kaiser built Liberty Ships at Portland/Vancouver during WW2.

From personal experience just standing at the water's edge at Tina Bar, my guess is that NMI is correct about the underwater visibility being only in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 feet.

About trees in the river, remember that Bonneville Dam is about 30 or 40 miles upstream of Tina Bar and that the trees would probably enter the river downstream of that dam. And my guess is that the Corp of Engineers would try to ground those trees as soon as they spotted them coming downstream.

Also, Mt. St. Helens blew its top about three months after the money was found at Tina Bar. The ash from Mt. St. Helens fell mainly in the Columbia River watershed and went downstream from there. With all the dams on the Columbia, some of the power generators were damaged by the ash in the water and shipping had to be stopped between Portland and the Pacific while that 40 foot shipping channel was dredged to get the ash out. The Bonneville Dam Visitor's Center has a nice display on this topic.

Let me say with some humor that 'Tom and the FBI lab found no volcanic ash in between the bills' !

Here is what the river washed round silica sand looks like (it's non abrasive) vs volcanic ash -

As I understand your statement above, volcanic didn't make it into the lab where the Tina Bar money had been stored for about three months before Mt. St. Helen's blew.

georger · « **Reply #1697 on:** January 05, 2016, 12:04:13 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't have his book. I'm sure the information is in there...

A quick search

"With the searchers wearing camera-equipped helmets, Tosaw watched the search as it happened, seeing what the divers saw in real time.

The river is about 400 feet across and 40 feet deep at that location. The divers concentrated on the shallows, going no deeper than 30 feet along the bank. They found all kinds of debris, including a 2,000-pound anchor believed to be about 100 years old -- but no sign of Cooper."

Don't understand the 400 feet across part...

I have Tosaw's book (which does not have an index) but I don't remember seeing anything about helmet cameras.

The river at Tina Bar is roughly 1000 feet wide. The shipping channel is 40 feet deep and handles large ocean going ships. Kaiser built Liberty Ships at Portland/Vancouver during WW2.

From personal experience just standing at the water's edge at Tina Bar, my guess is that NMI is correct about the underwater visibility being only in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 feet.

About trees in the river, remember that Bonneville Dam is about 30 or 40 miles upstream of Tina Bar and that the trees would probably enter the river downstream of that dam. And my guess is that the Corp of Engineers would try to ground those trees as soon as they spotted them coming downstream.

Also, Mt. St. Helens blew its top about three months after the money was found at Tina Bar. The ash from Mt. St. Helens fell mainly in the Columbia River watershed and went downstream from there. With all the dams on the Columbia, some of the power generators were damaged by the ash in the water and shipping had to be stopped between Portland and the Pacific while that 40 foot shipping channel was dredged to get the ash out. The Bonneville Dam Visitor's Center has a nice display on this topic.

Let me say with some humor that 'Tom and the FBI lab found no volcanic ash in between the bills' !

Here is what the river washed round silica sand looks like (it's non abrasive) vs volcanic ash -

As I understand your statement above, volcanic didn't make it into the lab where the Tina Bar money had been stored for about three months before Mt. St. Helen's blew.

Yes, the lab in Washington had their windows closed -

No sign of St Helens volcanic sand or anything else related to St Helens, on or in the money. The Fifty-seven people who died when Mount St. Helens erupted in Washington on May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m. very likely never had the money. Were any of them DB Cooper? I dunnoh. Harry Randall Truman never had the money, and very likely he was not DB Cooper.

The car pictured was ten miles from St Helens. It belonged to photographer Reid Blackburn who only had time to get in his car before he was hit by the superheated cloud of ash and gas. He was not DB Cooper either!

georger · « **Reply #1698 on:** January 05, 2016, 09:57:47 AM »

I need to make a correction to something Bruce has said, in reply to Shutter, below:

December 20, 2015, 07:00:57 PM » Thousands (of fragments), according to Dorwin when I first spoke with him in 2011 (?) Equally scattered throughout the sand column to a depth of at least three feet, and radiating out in a circular pattern 20 yards from the spot where Brian found his money …

What Bruce is saying Dorwin said, is physically impossible. 20 yards = 60 feet. The Ingram site was only 40 feet from the waterline. I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet", not 20 yards. Because "10-20 feet in an irregular pattern" is what Dorwin told me.

This becomes important when I lay out the several patterns Dorwin says they found, around the Ingram site and in a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath of fragments leading south of the Ingram find. It is this swath Dorwin says "a blind man could have followed...". These two patterns must then be reconciled with digging photos of the excavation we have, which will either agree or not-agree with the patterns Dorwin describes.

Shutter · « **Reply #1699 on:** January 05, 2016, 10:03:05 AM »

Quote

I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

georger · « **Reply #1700 on:** January 05, 2016, 10:06:28 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote
I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

Yes but that was an arbitrary dimension - has nothing to do with money found. Th figure of 60 yards does. 60 yards is where Dorwin said the fragment field trailed off an diminished south of the Ingram find.

There are two basic patterns working here. A 20 foot irregular semi circle at the Ingram find, and a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath going south from the Ingram find. I will try and draw up a graph of something...

(my keyboard is sticking so making typos ... )

Robert99 · « **Reply #1701 on:** January 05, 2016, 12:50:33 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

Yes but that was an arbitrary dimension - has nothing to do with money found. Th figure of 60 yards does. 60 yards is where Dorwin said the fragment field trailed off an diminished south of the Ingram find.

There are two basic patterns working here. A 20 foot irregular semi circle at the Ingram find, and a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath going south from the Ingram find. I will try and draw up a graph of something...

(my keyboard is sticking so making typos ... )

Are you certain that the fragment field trailed off to the south (upstream) of the money find location? Or was it to the north (downstream) of that location?

georger · « **Reply #1702 on:** January 05, 2016, 06:47:34 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

Yes but that was an arbitrary dimension - has nothing to do with money found. Th figure of 60 yards does. 60 yards is where Dorwin said the fragment field trailed off an diminished south of the Ingram find.

There are two basic patterns working here. A 20 foot irregular semi circle at the Ingram find, and a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath going south from the Ingram find. I will try and draw up a graph of something...

(my keyboard is sticking so making typos ... )

Are you certain that the fragment field trailed off to the south (upstream) of the money find location? Or was it to the north (downstream) of that location?

South is my understanding. The frag field began roughly at the Ingram find and trailed south. So the frag field lead up to the Ingram find. Accordingly, they began their grid just before the Ingram find and laid it out south of the Ingram find in 20ft segments. ?? ?

Shutter · « **Reply #1703 on:** January 05, 2016, 06:59:34 PM »

It's odd that there could be pieces (thousands) and yet they ruled out the dredge? the dredge would shred a large portion of the bills, but I'd bet a few would escape.

How long would small pieces survive in the wild

georger · « **Reply #1704 on:** January 05, 2016, 11:44:29 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

It's odd that there could be pieces (thousands) and yet they ruled out the dredge? the dredge would shred a large portion of the bills, but I'd bet a few would escape.

How long would small pieces survive in the wild

I know - Dorwin's scenario fits the dredge & spread narrative well. How long would small pieces survive in the wild, or on or in that beach ? That is one of the wild cards and nobody seems to have a good answer. Personally I wouldnt think too long until bacteria reduced everything to mush. And in several holes Dorwin claims they found clumps of "mush" but of course we dont know if it had any lab work done on it to know if it was currency. One newspaper article cites 'a fist sized clump of ... decayed money' ? Tom doesn't state much specific about age on his website. The question of age is important, so again I wanted specific work done on that issue alone but alas it never happened. The forensic section in the Dept of Treasury deals with that issue all the time. A specialist in these matters could probably make a good estimate based on some testing. How come they didn't get to examine any of the Cooper money ... or mush?

Go to Tom's website and see his photos of bacteria caused holes, in stages of development. What timeline applies to that?

However, Palmer cited the good condition of the Ingram bills as evidence the money had only been in nature no more than a year, and in what Palmer said was "upper active sterile sand". The implication is, any deeper and nothing would have been left in sand that is continually moist or humid where bacteria work.

Robert99 · « **Reply #1705 on:** January 06, 2016, 12:01:26 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

Yes but that was an arbitrary dimension - has nothing to do with money found. Th figure of 60 yards does. 60 yards is where Dorwin said the fragment field trailed off an diminished south of the Ingram find.

There are two basic patterns working here. A 20 foot irregular semi circle at the Ingram find, and a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath going south from the Ingram find. I will try and draw up a graph of something...

(my keyboard is sticking so making typos ... )

Are you certain that the fragment field trailed off to the south (upstream) of the money find location? Or was it to the north (downstream) of that location?

South is my understanding. The frag field began roughly at the Ingram find and trailed south. So the frag field lead up to the Ingram find. Accordingly, they began their grid just before the Ingram find and laid it out south of the Ingram find in 20ft segments. ?? ?

I don't want to make a federal case out of this point, but if the fragment field started at the Ingram find and then spread out to the south (upstream) then that is very unusual. It would require the current that spread out the fragments to be moving upstream against the river flow.

Does NMI or anyone with experience with sub-surface river currents know if there can be substantial currents below the surface that are opposite to the main river current?

I am aware that some relatively minor upstream currents can frequently be observed along the usual shoreline. But to spread out the fragments would require something much stronger and below the surface.

georger · « **Reply #1706 on:** January 06, 2016, 01:37:20 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I think Bruce meant to say "20 feet"

Wasn't the lines (grid) set in the sand at 20 feet?

Yes but that was an arbitrary dimension - has nothing to do with money found. Th figure of 60 yards does. 60 yards is where Dorwin said the fragment field trailed off an diminished south of the Ingram find.

There are two basic patterns working here. A 20 foot irregular semi circle at the Ingram find, and a 4-6ft x 60 yard swath going south from the Ingram find. I will try and draw up a graph of something...

(my keyboard is sticking so making typos ... )

Are you certain that the fragment field trailed off to the south (upstream) of the money find location? Or was it to the north (downstream) of that location?

South is my understanding. The frag field began roughly at the Ingram find and trailed south. So the frag field lead up to the Ingram find. Accordingly, they began their grid just before the Ingram find and laid it out south of the Ingram find in 20ft segments. ?? ?

I don't want to make a federal case out of this point, but if the fragment field started at the Ingram find and then spread out to the south (upstream) then that is very unusual. It would require the current that spread out the fragments to be moving upstream against the river flow.

Does NMI or anyone with experience with sub-surface river currents know if there can be substantial currents below the surface that are opposite to the main river current?

I am aware that some relatively minor upstream currents can frequently be observed along the usual shoreline. But to spread out the fragments would require something much stronger and below the surface.

Maybe we need a third opinion because we seem hung up on this point, or maybe its just me.

As I understand the grid it starts at the Ingram site and goes back with the flow that would have brought the bundles of bills to their location where found. The debris field leads with the current to the Ingram site? The Ingram site is north of where the debris field started, according to Schreuder, 60 yards behind the Ingram site?

Shutter: when you look at the excavation photos and the grid, which way are they going relative to the Ingram site? North or south?

Also - if the debris is the result of spreading by a tractor then current has little or nothing to do with its placement. The Ingram find itself becomes a random drop in the spreading scenario? On the other hand if current is an active player then yes, you would expect fragments down stream of the Ingram find and perhaps before it, but according to Dorwin that is 'not' what they found ... that is one of the reasons Dorwin opts for the dredging theory.

Shutter · « **Reply #1707 on:** January 06, 2016, 06:50:24 AM »

Quote

Shutter: when you look at the excavation photos and the grid, which way are they going relative to the Ingram site? North or south?

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. the photo is looking south. grid lines are going east & west.

Other than Dorwin, who else can confirm the stories about thousands of pieces/frags of the bills being found. IMO it would be rather easy to conclude the money did in fact go through the dredge. on the other hand, we have claims that the sand wasn't spread that far north, but, we have Palmer identifying the dredge layer? then we have Tom stating the clay layer Palmer seen actually runs the whole length of the beach?

Could the small pieces survive 6 years in the elements?
If the money was close to the area (protected) how could all of the pieces exist?
If the money was planted I doubt much would be found outside of the actual money found?

In the photo I don't see 120 feet of surface dug up, or filtered. the most I see is 3 sections in width. perhaps running east & west might be close in one area.

Robert99 · « **Reply #1708 on:** January 06, 2016, 12:30:58 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote
Shutter: when you look at the excavation photos and the grid, which way are they going relative to the Ingram site? North or south?

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. the photo is looking south. grid lines are going east & west.

Other than Dorwin, who else can confirm the stories about thousands of pieces/frags of the bills being found. IMO it would be rather easy to conclude the money did in fact go through the dredge. on the other hand, we have claims that the sand wasn't spread that far north, but, we have Palmer identifying the dredge layer? then we have Tom stating the clay layer Palmer seen actually runs the whole length of the beach?

Could the small pieces survive 6 years in the elements?
If the money was close to the area (protected) how could all of the pieces exist?
If the money was planted I doubt much would be found outside of the actual money found?

In the photo I don't see 120 feet of surface dug up, or filtered. the most I see is 3 sections in width. perhaps running east & west might be close in one area.

There is another FBI agent who was at Tina Bar helping recover the Ingram money and fragments. He is Mike McPheters, who was recently discussed in a post by Bruce Smith. McPheters has written a book on his FBI service and on page 138 of that book he states that he found fragments approximately two inches wide, stored them in plastic bags, and tagged them with his initials, the date, and case number. He documented his efforts at Tina Bar in "one of the most interesting reports I had ever written."

georger · « **Reply #1709 on:** January 06, 2016, 01:13:26 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote
Shutter: when you look at the excavation photos and the grid, which way are they going relative to the Ingram site? North or south?

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. the photo is looking south. grid lines are going east & west.

Other than Dorwin, who else can confirm the stories about thousands of pieces/frags of the bills being found. IMO it would be rather easy to conclude the money did in fact go through the dredge. on the other hand, we have claims that the sand wasn't spread that far north, but, we have Palmer identifying the dredge layer? then we have Tom stating the clay layer Palmer seen actually runs the whole length of the beach?

Could the small pieces survive 6 years in the elements?
If the money was close to the area (protected) how could all of the pieces exist?
If the money was planted I doubt much would be found outside of the actual money found?

In the photo I don't see 120 feet of surface dug up, or filtered. the most I see is 3 sections in width. perhaps running east & west might be close in one area.

Ok, so the photo is looking south. Dorwin said the starting point for their grid was near the Ingram site and Tom's photo attached seems to confirm that, and the grid pattern is running south as per Dorwin.. So that fits with your interpretation also.

I agree, I dont even see them digging within the 4-6ft swath that Dorwin mentioned. In some press photos I see them digging specific locations, and in Tom's press photo overlay the area of intensive raking and digging is the whole sections between 100 - 120 feet south of the Ingram find. I wonder what date Tom's photo is from? But, Tom's photo definitely confirms Dorwin saying they dug fragments at "60 yards" because that is where they are digging! That's the first independent confirmation of Dorwin's "60 yards" we have?

Poll

How did the money arrive on Tena Bar

Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1433421 times)

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find