Poll

How did the money arrive on Tena Bar

River Flooding
1 (5%)
Floated to it's resting spot via Columbia river
2 (10%)
Planted
6 (30%)
Dredge
11 (55%)
tossed in the river in a paper bag
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 17

Voting closed: August 16, 2016, 09:05:28 AM

Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find  (Read 1562231 times)

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3495 on: September 07, 2017, 06:22:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Challenged, fine. But challenged in a negative, condescending tone while peppered with hints of personal attacks at their character, while  some can ignore it, many can't and it drives people away...


I commiserate Blaze. I remember my first few posts at the DZ in 2008 and Georger, and others, blasted my newbie ass - royally. I was stunned, and hurt. Over time I got over it, mostly, and realized that I was actually learning something from people who sadly lack manners and oftentimes any degree of grace. So, I stuck around. I also educated myself and read all the books, etc., and slowly became smarter and re-shaped many of my earlier views, holding a broader, deeper and more nuanced set of possibilities in a kind of quantum flux pattern of potentials.

Yes, those of us who post and read here regularly are "hyper-educated" on Cooper. Nevertheless, I do appreciate you coming to this elite clubhouse because your questions - even if the gist of it has been asked a thousand times before - does stimulate a few brain cells into some new perspective, for me at least, and I am better for it.

One of the bright spots here regarding social etiquette is the general lack of character assassination that was prevalent at the DZ. So, Blaze, it COULD BE WORSE!!! (smile).

But please stick around. Even old enemies can become new friends here in Cooper World. Jo Weber called me last night to give me her "first compliment" as she announced that she thought my newly-posted YouTube video was "pretty good."
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 06:27:16 PM by Bruce A. Smith »
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3496 on: September 07, 2017, 06:56:42 PM »
Overview of Money Find Theories

Blaze's questions about the money find at Tina Bar have triggered an internal review within me of the theories of how the money got to T-Bar. Here's what I see. Please comment and add other angles that you perceive.


1. Dredge Theory

Somehow part or all of the money entered the Columbia River during the period of 1971 to 1974. In 1974 the ACE dredge Bedell scooped at least 6,000-plus dollars worth of Cooper twenties and threw them up on the beach at T-Bar, where they were spread out on the strand by the Fazio Brothers and their bulldozers.

Somehow a portion of those bills got chopped up as if in a Cuisinart and those pieces compose the shard field that was found buried at a depth of 3-4 feet in February 12-14, 1980.

But incredibly, a portion of the money that got dredged stayed mostly intact and was placed in the proverbial three-bundle stack that Brian Ingram found on Feb. 10, 1980.

This theory suggests the possibility that DB Cooper landed in the Columbia River and drowned, but requires that his body, parachutes, briefcase and bomb were never dredged up and deposited on land - inexplicably - only a bit of his money.


2. Cooper Cratered at or near T-Bar

Despite his denials, Bill Rataczak steered Flight 305 over the Columbia River near Longview, WA and flew south towards West Portland over a 40-mile stretch of river. At 8:13 pm, approximately, Cooper jumped in the vicinity of T-Bar. For reasons unknown he no-pulled, and his body and money satchel cratered on land in the area of Caterpillar Island, or somewhere just upstream from the money find site at T-Bar.

Over the next eight and half years, the money drifted downstream and downhill towards the money find site. The bundles of money separated in a variety of ways and natural forces eroded them into the shard field and the bundle site.

Intriguingly, Cooper's remains - and all of the metal components of his parachutes - are still in the Caterpillar Island area.


3. Propeller Theory - ala TK and Larry Carr

Cooper jumped over Ariel and fumbled, bumbled, tumbled due to the cold and hypothermia, either no-pulling or getting tangled in his shroud lines, ultimately landing in the Lewis River and drowning. His body, chute and money floated down to the Columbia River, snagging a propeller of an in-coming freighter and travelling upstream to T-Bar, where the money satchel dislodged itself and spilled the money bundles into the river. The money eventually ended up on the sand, either by natural means or during the dredge process.


4. Plant Theory A - Dwayne Ingram and Rackstraw

Dwayne planted the money at the direction of Robert Rackstraw or was told by Rackstraw or his accomplices where the money was buried, and Dwayne directed his son to the spot where it was found. Reasons? To fool the cops into thinking Rackstraw had died in the jump by drowning in the Columbia River. How the shards got there is irrelevant. Quote: "Let Georger and those smarty-pants at the DB Cooper Forum play in the sand on that one."


5. Plant Theory B - Rackstraw or accomplices threw the money into Vancouver Lake


This is Colbert's current theory and backed by the 40-cop ensemble at the CCT, presumably, despite all efforts to clarify their perspective independently of TJC.

How the money got from Van Lake to T-Bar is left to the power and mystery of Mother Nature.

Again, the reason is to fool the cops that Rackstraw died in the jump and drowned in Van Lake.


6. Plant Theory C - MKULTRA rituals


The money - bundles and shards - were planted in T-Bar during a series of rituals designed to imprint on MKULTRA trainees that they were DB Cooper and were planting their ransom for a later retrieval. This theory suggests that the DB Cooper skyjacking had many secret components, one of which was Cooper was part of a cadre of skyjackers being trained for covert ops. Part of this group was composed of what are now known to be copy-cats and confessees, particularly Richard McCoy, Duane Weber, Robert Rackstraw, Barb Dayton, and others.

 
7. Plant Theory D:  Puppet Masters planted the money to mess with Tina Mucklow's mind

Individuals responsible for the cover-up and perpetration of Norjak planted the money at Tina Bar as a way to amplify their mental torture of Tina Mucklow, who was residing in a health care facility a few miles upstream in Gresham, Washington for the purpose of insuring her silence about what really happened aboard Flight 305.


8. Duane Weber threw the money into the Columbia River


According to Jo Weber, her husband was DB Cooper and he threw his money into the Columbia River in late 1979 from the docks at the Red Lion Inn in Vancouver for unknown reasons. Over the next six months the money floated to T-Bar and Mother Nature dispersed it throughout the sand layers as found in February 1980.


9. Inadvertent deposit during transfer of getaway crafts

Bill Rollins postulates that the money found at T-Bar originated from the night of the skyjacking when DB Cooper transferred the money from the satchel to hidden storage containers on his camper/pick-up truck. This happenstance occurred immediately following his arrival at T-Bar in his Alumacraft boat and prior to his departure from T-Bar to retrieve his Zodiac at the shoreline of the Columbia near PDX.


10. Natural Means

Somehow the money entered the Columbia River Basin, most likely through a mid-air mishap that caused the money satchel to rip apart or separate from DB Cooper's body. Part or all of the money floated down some body of water, such as tributaries to the Columbia, and washed ashore at T-Bar, where natural means deposited them in various layers.

The Washougal River Wash-Down scenario is the most commonly accepted version of this theory, particularly since Bill Rataczak has told several principals, such as Ralph Himmelsbach, he was flying far east of Victor 23 and was over the Washougal River Basin.

This scenario places great import on determining the actual the Flight Path, making this a very contentious part of the Norjak saga.

« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 08:41:21 PM by Bruce A. Smith »
 

Offline 73blazer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3497 on: September 07, 2017, 07:01:50 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

My question is the same _ now as it was then. I posed the exact same question to Safe years ago. He never answered.

Give us one simple example of something discovered by Safe's methods, that is new and unique, that was not already known or already on the table in general discussion.

This isn't rocket science! Either there is or there aint.

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH QUALIFICATIONS. THIS IS SOMETHING ANYONE CAN UNDERSTAND!

Well, I already told you and you dismissed it as him saying the grass the green. Let me expand, up until that point, I for one at least, had never seen a comprehensive analysis of the watersheds in that area. Mabey you did one and didn' t publish it,mabey you did and I missed it,  mabey it's in your head and obvious to you because you live there, I dunno, but I personally had not read or seen anything in that detail which to me showed pretty clearly where things would have to be if you start with premise X or Y and it seems the FBI didn't either.

What it jarred loose for me was, if you believe the drop zone is what the FBI said it is, then you have to believe the money came to be there though some means other than he landed there or landed in an area where the money could have washed down there, basically planted, moved by animal, the Duane or Rackstraw throw in the river or whatever. If you believe the drop zone is somewhere else, you have to believe the flight path as published is way off. That was new at that time, and I think perhaps you too, for if memory serves that's when you guys started going heavily into the flight path is different theme, I could be wrong. Mabey I didn't read everything there was to up to that point I dunno. Carr acknowledged that piece of it as well so I'm not the only one.

Look, I understand you all are far more versed in this than most. But being so engrossed in it for soooo long, you have to admit, you can become somewhat opinionated about it all, which I think is pretty clear you are and anyone who studies people in those positions knows, it can lead to tunnel vision which isn't necessarily a bad thing, it helps pilots land under emergency conditions. But, this is the very reason any investigative force rotates investigators from time to time on cases, get some fresh eyes on it, take a new look, new perspective even if that new investigator is covering ground already covered or following up on what the previous guy might say is "crazy" ideas and leads.
I don't dismiss your years of knowledge and work, I'm not intimate enough with it all and don't know enough to dismiss it or accept it. So, where is this hard data you have that would show the flight path is somewhere else? Is it in the two threads about the flight path here? There is so much discourse in these threads sometimes it's hard to keep reading or even search terms on them. If you say it's there, I'll go read all 79 pages of the one and 20-some pages of the other.

« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 07:31:42 PM by 73blazer »
 

Offline 73blazer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3498 on: September 07, 2017, 07:26:52 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Despite his denials, Bill Rataczak steered Flight 305 over the Columbia River near Longview, WA and flew south towards West Portland over a 40-mile stretch of river.

Well, i'm just here trying to learn and provoke, but thanks for the encouragement.

This here seems to be a huge assertion. I know you guys have worked this out, please help me understand what leads you to this flight path. If it's already in those threads, mabey I just need to read them in full. Doesn't the placard find automatically negate this? I consider this at the moment in my preliminary amateur analysis, to be a 10% chance at best. I guess in my head, for this to be true, either the FBI got it really really really wrong which seems highly unlikely, or they deliberately published it as wrong, aka, the cover-up mentioned earlier.  I know, you guys have covered this all. Help me understand or point me in the right direction where it shows this.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 07:28:30 PM by 73blazer »
 

MeyerLouie

  • Guest
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3499 on: September 07, 2017, 07:39:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Bruce, you had a golden opportunity to get many more readers of your book, and you didn't take it!  Why didn't you ask Josh Gates to let you plug your book on the TC/Expedition Unknown program?  Ten seconds to name the title, your name, and where to find it....it would have gone all over the country for multitudes to see.  In any event...

Well, I read your book.  It is the most comprehensive one on the subject I've seen yet.  If you want to get the big picture overview of what's happened, who's there, it's in your book.  You did a good job.

GG's book, on the other hand, had too many cutesy-pie anecdotes with too little information.  Not only that, I found his writing style to be very annoying.

Meyer

Thank you, Meyer, for your kind words.

One note of information - I asked the TC/EU folks how best to plug my book, after all it is their show, and they said they would consider it. However, they really didn't do too much, other than identify me as an author of DB Cooper and the FBI when my face was on the screen at the start of the show, when we were on the shoreline. That's okay to me.

Yeah, too bad you couldn't get in a plug on the Expedition Unknown program.  Millions would have seen it.  Oh well, there are other avenues to explore, and I'm sure you have the savvy to find 'em.

Meyer
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3500 on: September 07, 2017, 08:13:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Despite his denials, Bill Rataczak steered Flight 305 over the Columbia River near Longview, WA and flew south towards West Portland over a 40-mile stretch of river.

Well, i'm just here trying to learn and provoke, but thanks for the encouragement.

This here seems to be a huge assertion. I know you guys have worked this out, please help me understand what leads you to this flight path. If it's already in those threads, mabey I just need to read them in full. Doesn't the placard find automatically negate this? I consider this at the moment in my preliminary amateur analysis, to be a 10% chance at best. I guess in my head, for this to be true, either the FBI got it really really really wrong which seems highly unlikely, or they deliberately published it as wrong, aka, the cover-up mentioned earlier.  I know, you guys have covered this all. Help me understand or point me in the right direction where it shows this.

Welcome to the Hunt, Blaze.

In essence, there are no actual, incontrovertible facts in Norjak, or so it seems. EVERYTHING is a bit hazy, such as the flight path. Further, the placard found in Silver Lake is just that - a placard. We have no proof that it was from Flight 305, although it is strongly believed that it is because Flight 305 reportedly was missing its instructional placard when Boeing conducted its repairs.

The flight path and money find are intertwined.
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3501 on: September 07, 2017, 08:33:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

...either the FBI got it really really really wrong which seems highly unlikely, or they deliberately published it as wrong.....


Such is the investigatory environment. Much of the FBI's documentation is in conflict with itself, the public statements of the agents, or with statements from principals, such as the passengers. The question is why.

As a result, my book is as much about the FBI as it is DB Cooper, and Norjak is perfect case to witness how a large bureaucratic law enforcement agency truly functions. Sometimes, it ain't pretty.

I suggest that you might "really, really, really" have cultural blinders on. Many researchers, and certainly many posters here, have a hard time accepting FBI malfeasance or blunderings. The need to have heroes is very strong, but there are very few Knights in Shining Armor in life. Mostly, it's bozos like us bouncing along trying to do the right thing.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2017, 08:37:52 PM by Bruce A. Smith »
 
The following users thanked this post: Kermit

georger

  • Guest
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3502 on: September 07, 2017, 11:46:48 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

My question is the same _ now as it was then. I posed the exact same question to Safe years ago. He never answered.

Give us one simple example of something discovered by Safe's methods, that is new and unique, that was not already known or already on the table in general discussion.

This isn't rocket science! Either there is or there aint.

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH QUALIFICATIONS. THIS IS SOMETHING ANYONE CAN UNDERSTAND!

Well, I already told you and you dismissed it as him saying the grass the green. Let me expand, up until that point, I for one at least, had never seen a comprehensive analysis of the watersheds in that area. Mabey you did one and didn' t publish it,mabey you did and I missed it,  mabey it's in your head and obvious to you because you live there, I dunno, but I personally had not read or seen anything in that detail which to me showed pretty clearly where things would have to be if you start with premise X or Y and it seems the FBI didn't either.

What it jarred loose for me was, if you believe the drop zone is what the FBI said it is, then you have to believe the money came to be there though some means other than he landed there or landed in an area where the money could have washed down there, basically planted, moved by animal, the Duane or Rackstraw throw in the river or whatever. If you believe the drop zone is somewhere else, you have to believe the flight path as published is way off. That was new at that time, and I think perhaps you too, for if memory serves that's when you guys started going heavily into the flight path is different theme, I could be wrong. Mabey I didn't read everything there was to up to that point I dunno. Carr acknowledged that piece of it as well so I'm not the only one.

Look, I understand you all are far more versed in this than most. But being so engrossed in it for soooo long, you have to admit, you can become somewhat opinionated about it all, which I think is pretty clear you are and anyone who studies people in those positions knows, it can lead to tunnel vision which isn't necessarily a bad thing, it helps pilots land under emergency conditions. But, this is the very reason any investigative force rotates investigators from time to time on cases, get some fresh eyes on it, take a new look, new perspective even if that new investigator is covering ground already covered or following up on what the previous guy might say is "crazy" ideas and leads.
I don't dismiss your years of knowledge and work, I'm not intimate enough with it all and don't know enough to dismiss it or accept it. So, where is this hard data you have that would show the flight path is somewhere else? Is it in the two threads about the flight path here? There is so much discourse in these threads sometimes it's hard to keep reading or even search terms on them. If you say it's there, I'll go read all 79 pages of the one and 20-some pages of the other.

OK lets go to the source. Safe called his work 9 Solutions.  Here is what Safe said - quoting... you be the judge. A pdf of his 9 Solutions is available here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

SafecrackingPLF

May 5, 2009, 1:59 PM
Post #10022 of 58140 (60637 views)
Shortcut
          9 Solutions to the Puzzle [In reply to]
 
________________________________________
With apologies for those that hate logic or logic based arguments, I have put together a few.

If Palmer never found the 74 layer, or if the report was wrong, or Palmer was wrong, then for the sake of argument I will call it Palmer was wrong.

The subscripts and arrows did not transfer over; that makes it a bit harder to follow, my apologies. Any place where you see 8594 is an arrow to the right. I can upload a word doc if its possible. PM me if it is.

There are potentially 9 solutions, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z If you do not believe in strata or Palmer, then exclude those portions from the equation.

Here we go. This will give at least one of you a lot to chew on. Please PM flaws that you might find. I was flying on a 377 when I decided to dedicate this post to 377.

Symbol Key:
Cooper Died = CD
Cooper Lost Money = C$
Cooper Lived (& did not lose money) = CL
Palmer was wrong = PW
Condition 72 = J72
Clocks Slow ≈ 3 min = CS3
Clocks Slow more than 3 min = CS3+
Dislodging Event = DE
Dredge layer was pre 1971 = P71
Dredge layer was 1974 = L74
1974 Layer Eroded = L74E
Pre 1971 Layer Eroded = P71E
Spent all the money = SA
Dumped Money = DM
Stored Money = SM
A logical reason to = R
Tributary Area = T
Money Traveled Naturally = MN
Money Landed in the Columbia = MC
Money Landed in a Tributary = MT
Money is quickly covered/locked in place = QC
Quick Covering Eroded = QCE
All deposit above QC did erode = EE
Flight Path Off by 12 miles = PO12
Major Flight Correction = MFC
PDX/FAA Radar Correct = RC
Flight control unaware = FCU
FAA unaware = FAU
Captains unaware = CPTU
Captains forgot = CPTF
Flight Path West of PDX = FPWST
Flight Path East of PDX = FPEST
Someone Found the Money = SF
Passes Time = PT
Returns/Comes back = CBCK

Condition 72 means the money arrives at Tina Bar within 3 months of the crime. The rubber band analysis suggests the rubber would have disintegrated if they would have been in the elements longer than 3 months. Condition 72 specifically speaks to the found money arriving at Tina Bar by January or February 1972 (0-3 months).

Money Traveled Naturally refers to no human intervention as the money travels to its destination.

The easiest way to understand the chain is to demonstrate it in chunks and then break down those chunks in greater detail.

We’ll begin with Condition 72 since this is a recent hypothesis put forward by some on this board. The hypothesis is that the money traveled to Tina Bar in less than 3 months. If this was to happen, then the money had to be quickly covered with sand locking it in place. As accumulation built up, the money would be buried deeper and deeper. In 1974, a dredge layer was dropped on top of it. After 1974, this layer eroded and any other accumulation between the years 1972 to 1974 prior to the dredge also were eroded leaving the money just under a small amount of sand, barely covered so that when boy Ingram smoothes out the sand, the money stacks are revealed.

Here’s how this looks logically:
J72 → [QC & -QCE & EE] → P71 & -L74 → L74E & -P71E → PW

Effectively this states, if you have condition 72, then it means the money was [quickly covered and that layer did not erode and all deposits above that layer did erode]. If all that happened, then it means the layer that Palmer found was a pre 1971 dredge layer and not actually from 1974. If that was the case, then it means the 1974 layer did erode and the pre 1971 layer did not erode (effectively the older dredge layer was still there but the newer one was not). If this was the case, then it means Palmer got it wrong.

Now for the logic junkies, the contra positive:
-PW → -L74E or P71E → -P71 or L74 → [-QC or QCE or –EE] → -J72

If Palmer was right then it means the 1974 layer did not erode or that the layer found was not pre 1971 (it was post 71). If that was the case, then there was no pre 1971 layer or the layer was from 1974. If that holds true, then the money was not quickly covered or the quick cover eroded, or the deposit on top of the money did not erode. If that holds true there was no Condition 72.

Basically, either all that stuff happened, or Palmer was right.

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 Cooper died or if Cooper lost the money on the way down, then it means one of two things: either someone found the money and then dumped the money, or the money arrived naturally (because there’s no one there to help it along). Most of us discount someone finding the money and then dumping it into the Columbia, but it is a viable hypothesis supposing Cooper died or lost the money.

Instead, most everyone talks about the money traveling naturally. If that happened, then the money either landed in the Columbia or in a tributary zone. If it landed in the Columbia, then it means the FBI, FAA, and Northwest all had their clocks fast by roughly 3 minutes. This allows the three of them, all monitoring and communicating with the pilots via telephone/radio hook-up in real time (this is verified by Himmelsbach BTW) to all mistakenly believe the time of the jump took place at 8:11 when it actually occurred later. If that that happened, then condition 72 must take place.

The second option is that the money landed in a tributary zone. If that’s the case, then it means the flight was off by roughly 12 land miles. If that happened, then it means the FAA’s radar was incorrect AND the clocks were slow by at least 3 minutes. If this was the case, then it requires either PDX/FAA to be unaware that the flight is traveling east of PDX and also that the captains are unaware they’re flying east of PDX or that the captains corrected the flight to get it back on course so they can fly west of PDX while also allowing for both the FAA and the Captains to forget about this major correction in flight.

If that sounded like a mouth full, that’s because it is.

Here’s the logical articulation:
CD or C$ → SF or MN
SF → DM
MN → MC → CS3 → J72
or MT → PO12 → -RC & CS3+ → FCU & CPTU & FAU → FPEST → J72
or → MFC & [FAU & FCU] & CPTF → J72



The contra positives:
-SF & -MN → -CD & -C$
This says if someone didn’t find the money and it didn’t get there naturally, then Cooper did not die and he did not lose the money.

-DM → -SF
-J72 → -CS3 → -MC → -MN
(If condition 72 does not exist, then the money did not arrive naturally. This is why Palmer is attacked)
-J72 → -FPEST → -FCU or -CPTU or –FAU → RC or –CS3+ → -PO12 → -MT
(If condition 72 does not exist, then the money never landed in a tributary. Again, why Palmer must be defeated)
-J72 → -MFC or [-FAU or –FCU] or -CPTF
(If condition 72 does not exist then at least one of the following is also true: there was no flight correction, the FAA was aware or flight control was aware, or the captains did not forget correcting course.)

The main argument, however, is the first one listed, because if condition 72 does not exist, then effectively Cooper did not die and he did not lose the money (if you also assume no one found the money and then dumped it). If you can get around the rubber band analysis, then it will open the door to more possibilities, but many of the conditions will still have to hold true.

Let’s look at what has to happen if Cooper survived and got away with the crime.

If Cooper lived, then either condition X, Y, or Z must hold true.

Condition X = he has a reason to dump money into the river as he gets away. If this holds true, then condition 72 must also hold true.

Condition Y = he has a reason to store at least some money (has to be greater than 0) in a tributary area. If this holds true, then some event dislodges the money.

Condition Z = Reason to store at least some of the money (can be in the woods or at his house or any other place he deems safe). If that holds true, he has to have a reason to pass time and not spend the money that’s been stored. If this holds true, he has to come back/visit the river or a tributary. If this holds true, he has to have a reason to dump the money into the river/tributary.

When most people speak of Cooper getting away with it, they usually talk about condition X.
Here’s how that looks symbolically:
X: CL → -SA & R → DM → MC → J72
Y: → -SA & R → SM → R → T → DE
Y2: → SF → DM
Z: → -SA & R → SM → R → PT → CBCK → DM
Z2: → SF → DM

Effectively, if Cooper lived, then either he stored the money or he threw it in the river as he escaped. The latter can only happen if condition 72 exists. Given the highly improbable odds that condition 72 exists, then Cooper would have stored the money somehow if he survived the jump. It was then either nature, a lucky person stumbling onto the money, or Cooper himself that put the stored money into the river.

If condition 72 does not hold true and a natural dislodge does not happen, then either Cooper died/lost the money OR he lived and stored the money.

Anyone want to put some relative odds on each of these scenarios?

EDIT: I've upload the post in PDF form; it's much easier to follow the reasoning that way.


(This post was edited by SafecrackingPLF on May 5, 2009, 2:40 PM

« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 12:08:13 AM by georger »
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3503 on: September 07, 2017, 11:51:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

My question is the same _ now as it was then. I posed the exact same question to Safe years ago. He never answered.

Give us one simple example of something discovered by Safe's methods, that is new and unique, that was not already known or already on the table in general discussion.

This isn't rocket science! Either there is or there aint.

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH QUALIFICATIONS. THIS IS SOMETHING ANYONE CAN UNDERSTAND!

Well, I already told you and you dismissed it as him saying the grass the green. Let me expand, up until that point, I for one at least, had never seen a comprehensive analysis of the watersheds in that area. Mabey you did one and didn' t publish it,mabey you did and I missed it,  mabey it's in your head and obvious to you because you live there, I dunno, but I personally had not read or seen anything in that detail which to me showed pretty clearly where things would have to be if you start with premise X or Y and it seems the FBI didn't either.

What it jarred loose for me was, if you believe the drop zone is what the FBI said it is, then you have to believe the money came to be there though some means other than he landed there or landed in an area where the money could have washed down there, basically planted, moved by animal, the Duane or Rackstraw throw in the river or whatever. If you believe the drop zone is somewhere else, you have to believe the flight path as published is way off. That was new at that time, and I think perhaps you too, for if memory serves that's when you guys started going heavily into the flight path is different theme, I could be wrong. Mabey I didn't read everything there was to up to that point I dunno. Carr acknowledged that piece of it as well so I'm not the only one.

Look, I understand you all are far more versed in this than most. But being so engrossed in it for soooo long, you have to admit, you can become somewhat opinionated about it all, which I think is pretty clear you are and anyone who studies people in those positions knows, it can lead to tunnel vision which isn't necessarily a bad thing, it helps pilots land under emergency conditions. But, this is the very reason any investigative force rotates investigators from time to time on cases, get some fresh eyes on it, take a new look, new perspective even if that new investigator is covering ground already covered or following up on what the previous guy might say is "crazy" ideas and leads.
I don't dismiss your years of knowledge and work, I'm not intimate enough with it all and don't know enough to dismiss it or accept it. So, where is this hard data you have that would show the flight path is somewhere else? Is it in the two threads about the flight path here? There is so much discourse in these threads sometimes it's hard to keep reading or even search terms on them. If you say it's there, I'll go read all 79 pages of the one and 20-some pages of the other.

No need for that! Safe said this was the most probable drop zone for Cooper - see attached. His drop zone depicted recent work (at the time) done by Sluggo, in the Orchard area. I will post all of Safe's tributary maps asap, or provide a link. I have already posted Safe's central post on his "9 Solutions".

Here is also his index to all of his flow charts, most of which have nothing to do with the Cooper money. He said he was posting these in order to accommodate any possible theory! As you can see there are 49 flow maps in Safe's full archive.

<edit> all Safecracking tributary maps (50 of them) can be found starting here and on the next page: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 05:51:36 PM by georger »
 

Offline Unsurelock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3504 on: September 14, 2017, 07:27:13 PM »
Howdy, Folks.

I got a question for you all, regarding the debris field I have been reading about on Tena Bar.  According to all of the accounts I have read, there were a large number of money "shards" found all over the beach down to a depth of 3 feet, and thus far dredging and flooding have failed to explain how they got there. Am I off base there?

If I'm not, has anyone looked to the Ingram family as a means of distributing these fragments?  From what I have read, they found the bills, tried to separate them, then spent all day digging up and down that beach for more bills, all the while handling those three brittle bundles and continuing to pick at them.  This sounds like what law enforcement would call a contaminated crime scene, except instead of fingerprints and DNA, they were redistributing their own fragments everywhere, creating a mystery for you fine folks.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3505 on: September 14, 2017, 08:45:08 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Howdy, Folks.

I got a question for you all, regarding the debris field I have been reading about on Tena Bar.  According to all of the accounts I have read, there were a large number of money "shards" found all over the beach down to a depth of 3 feet, and thus far dredging and flooding have failed to explain how they got there. Am I off base there?

If I'm not, has anyone looked to the Ingram family as a means of distributing these fragments?  From what I have read, they found the bills, tried to separate them, then spent all day digging up and down that beach for more bills, all the while handling those three brittle bundles and continuing to pick at them.  This sounds like what law enforcement would call a contaminated crime scene, except instead of fingerprints and DNA, they were redistributing their own fragments everywhere, creating a mystery for you fine folks.

That said, I do agree with many who have posted here and elsewhere that Dwayne/Harold Ingram, Brian's father, sure looks squirrelly in the HC docu. Is he lying to protect Rackstraw and his own involvement in a plant? I don't think so, and I say that with a strong belief, but I do acknowledge that the elder Ingram is weird. Plus, I probably wouldn't trust him with more than enough money to buy a pack of cigarettes.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

The dredge, and a later bulldozing effort by the Fazios to spread out dredge spoils on their beachfront, are the leading theories of how the money - shards and bundles - landed where they did. It's not definitive, and for some not even compelling, but for my money that is most logical explanation for the two money finds, given the evidence and documentation that we have so far.

As for the Ingram family, my understanding from Brian and all the docus on him and his father, indicate that the basic Ingram story is correct. On Sunday February 10, 1980, Brian was clearing/smoothing a spot of sand, found the three bundles, and even though the family spent the next few hours looking up and down the beach they didn't find any more money. It was only when the FBI came out two days later and started digging that other pieces of money were found - the famous shard field.

Welcome to the Forum, Unlocked. We're glad to have ya.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2017, 08:52:18 PM by Bruce A. Smith »
 

Offline Unsurelock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3506 on: September 14, 2017, 08:58:14 PM »
See, when they say, "...but most of the pieces of money they found was up near the surface" in the KATU video, it tells me the deeper pieces may have been pushed down by shovel activity and "discovered" deeper. I believe the Ingram's story. I just think it could also make sense that they inadvertently dropped & reburied all of these pieces over those few hours. At the very least I'd like to eliminate that as a possibility. Somebody slam the door for me.

Thanks for the welcome.
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3507 on: September 14, 2017, 09:41:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
See, when they say, "...but most of the pieces of money they found was up near the surface" in the KATU video, it tells me the deeper pieces may have been pushed down by shovel activity and "discovered" deeper. I believe the Ingram's story. I just think it could also make sense that they inadvertently dropped & reburied all of these pieces over those few hours. At the very least I'd like to eliminate that as a possibility. Somebody slam the door for me.

Thanks for the welcome.

Welcome to the forum and let me see if I can help clarify things a bit.  I think you can forget about human involvement in burying the money (I'll qualify this slightly later).  The three bundles were reported to have been buried about two or three inches below the sand and above the recent tide lines.  The fragments were scattered in the same general area but were buried deeper than the bundles.

It should be noted that the bundles were found about two or three feet vertically above the water level on the day they were found. Tina Bar is about 95 river miles from the Pacific and has a typical daily tidal fluctuation of between one and two feet.  Due to extreme soil erosion at the money find location, the original money find location is those two or three feet above the nominal water level and several feet out from the present day shore line.

There are several theories about how the bundles and fragments arrived at Tina Bar.  The hijacking occurred on the afternoon/evening of November 24, 1971.  At Tina Bar, the Columbia River runs almost straight north (actually, about two degrees east of true north).  On the west side of the river is a 40 foot deep shipping channel which is dredged from time to time.  Apparently the only time this channel was dredged in the 1970s was about 1974 or so.  The money was found about February 10th, 1980 and in May 1980, Mount St. Helens blew it stack with most of the ash debris moving to the northeast and falling into the Columbia River watershed.  This ash worked its way downstream and in due time filled up the shipping channel.  So the shipping had to be shut down in 1980 (after the money find) and the channel was dredged again.  This second dredging did not have anything to do with the Cooper money.

Some people claim that the money was deliberately buried at Tina Bar.  But they have never been able to provide a meaningful reason for Cooper wanting to bury money there in the first place.

Others claim that the money went through the dredge in 1974 and was deposited on Tina Bar where the Fazio family were paid to use their tractors to spread it out along the beach.  Nevertheless, there are reasons for believing that the dredged material was never deposited on or spread out on the location where the money and fragments were later found.

Still others, probably just me, believe that the hijacked airliner bypassed Portland on the west side and was essentially flying approximately over the western edge of the river when Cooper jumped.  Cooper then failed to get his parachute open and died as a no pull while landing on dry land on the eastern side of the river and just upstream of Tina Bar.  During the spring water runoffs, the money bag (and maybe Cooper himself) was washed underwater down the eastern shore line.  The money bag hung up underwater at what became the money find location and the three bundles came out and stayed together.  The fragments were dispersed by the water and shortly covered by the sand in the flooding water.

It is possible that at some point, the Fazio family which operates a commercial sand operation adjacent to Tina Bar, added additional sand to the Tina Bar shoreline and then spread it over the actual point where the money was later found.  This would help explain the differences in burial depths.

I suggest that you take a look at Tom Kaye's web page (check his listing in the members list above) for a more detailed explanation on various parts of the above.  If you want to know more about the flight path problem, take a look at the thread I have prepared on the subject.

Robert99 
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3508 on: September 14, 2017, 11:13:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Howdy, Folks.

I got a question for you all, regarding the debris field I have been reading about on Tena Bar.  According to all of the accounts I have read, there were a large number of money "shards" found all over the beach down to a depth of 3 feet, and thus far dredging and flooding have failed to explain how they got there. Am I off base there?

If I'm not, has anyone looked to the Ingram family as a means of distributing these fragments?  From what I have read, they found the bills, tried to separate them, then spent all day digging up and down that beach for more bills, all the while handling those three brittle bundles and continuing to pick at them.  This sounds like what law enforcement would call a contaminated crime scene, except instead of fingerprints and DNA, they were redistributing their own fragments everywhere, creating a mystery for you fine folks.

That said, I do agree with many who have posted here and elsewhere that Dwayne/Harold Ingram, Brian's father, sure looks squirrelly in the HC docu. Is he lying to protect Rackstraw and his own involvement in a plant? I don't think so, and I say that with a strong belief, but I do acknowledge that the elder Ingram is weird. Plus, I probably wouldn't trust him with more than enough money to buy a pack of cigarettes.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

The dredge, and a later bulldozing effort by the Fazios to spread out dredge spoils on their beachfront, are the leading theories of how the money - shards and bundles - landed where they did. It's not definitive, and for some not even compelling, but for my money that is most logical explanation for the two money finds, given the evidence and documentation that we have so far.

As for the Ingram family, my understanding from Brian and all the docus on him and his father, indicate that the basic Ingram story is correct. On Sunday February 10, 1980, Brian was clearing/smoothing a spot of sand, found the three bundles, and even though the family spent the next few hours looking up and down the beach they didn't find any more money. It was only when the FBI came out two days later and started digging that other pieces of money were found - the famous shard field.

Welcome to the Forum, Unlocked. We're glad to have ya.

No bulldozer. Was a tractor.
 

Offline Unsurelock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #3509 on: September 14, 2017, 11:27:54 PM »
Bruce, it appears you typed into the body of my post so that your paragraph below is attributed to me:

"That said, I do agree with many who have posted here and elsewhere that Dwayne/Harold Ingram, Brian's father, sure looks squirrelly in the HC docu. Is he lying to protect Rackstraw and his own involvement in a plant? I don't think so, and I say that with a strong belief, but I do acknowledge that the elder Ingram is weird. Plus, I probably wouldn't trust him with more than enough money to buy a pack of cigarettes."

I did not type this.