Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1559006 times)

georger · « **Reply #4830 on:** May 23, 2020, 05:12:48 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
This photo Tom posted shows he marked where a formosa joins at its ends vs Fragilaria crotonensis which joins in its serrated middles ... see Tom's words "connected at base" in his reference to a-formosa.

I guess keep repeating it until it's your idea and not mine? Do you have any thoughts of your own on the matter, or were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing?

well you are the one who came here with a question - not me! How about them apples! I even got her phone number!

Unlike you, I actually am laughing my ass off. You heard of this species like an hour ago, from me, and now you think I am coming to you with questions about it. I guess that's common when you're a college professor. Where was it you taught again?

Good night all. See you in the funny papers.

No. You are just upset that your original claim is probably wrong! You said: " a diatom called Fragilaria crotonensis (see attached) is a dead-ringer for what is actually on 377's bill..." Show us Fragilaria crotonensis in any of Tom's photos. Show us any of Tom's photos where Tom himself identifies anything as Fragilaria crotonensis ?

This is simple. It either is or it aint. And, nothing in this has a God damned thing to do with ME! I'm just a spectator in your claim.

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4831 on:** May 23, 2020, 08:44:40 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
This photo Tom posted shows he marked where a formosa joins at its ends vs Fragilaria crotonensis which joins in its serrated middles ... see Tom's words "connected at base" in his reference to a-formosa.

I guess keep repeating it until it's your idea and not mine? Do you have any thoughts of your own on the matter, or were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing?

well you are the one who came here with a question - not me! How about them apples! I even got her phone number!

Unlike you, I actually am laughing my ass off. You heard of this species like an hour ago, from me, and now you think I am coming to you with questions about it. I guess that's common when you're a college professor. Where was it you taught again?

Good night all. See you in the funny papers.

No. You are just upset that your original claim is probably wrong! You said: " a diatom called Fragilaria crotonensis (see attached) is a dead-ringer for what is actually on 377's bill..." Show us Fragilaria crotonensis in any of Tom's photos. Show us any of Tom's photos where Tom himself identifies anything as Fragilaria crotonensis ?

This is simple. It either is or it aint. And, nothing in this has a God damned thing to do with ME! I'm just a spectator in your claim.

That's very sharp of you. You have correctly identified a fact: that Tom hasn't identified anything as Fragilaria crotonensis. At least not here. Bravo. Now if only I had said that, in my original post on the matter. And if only I had posted photos, showing those diatoms, and someone else had seen them right away and saw what I saw. And if only you could stop yourself from trying rt take everyone else's material. What's the matter, Flyjack not posting anything for you to repost? Again, do you have any thoughts of your own on the matter?

Why can you never get anything right? That's an actual question. Please answer it. (I can put together a highlight reel for you, "This is Your Life" style if you like.)

Another discussion off the rails. Is there any way I can interest you in a cozy little Jack the Ripper forum? Perhaps an Amelia Erhardt discussion page?

*Update: See EU's post below. Tom has confirmed the photo showed Fragileria Crotonensis, which I already knew, after a 10-minute Google session a week or two ago, just moments after reading his posts from February. Why did it take you three months and *ME* telling you before you even bothered to look? Don't wait for Tom to get an expert if you want your answers. Either do the research or contact someone with the knowledge *yourself* rather than pressure a guy who is already busy? Guy's probably trying not to post things prematurely instead of satisfying your curiosity and getting it wrong.

EU · « **Reply #4832 on:** May 23, 2020, 10:16:29 AM »

I asked Tom about this last night. Here’s how he responded:

“There was one Fragilaria (I posted the pic) and many A. formosa’s. At the time of the post I did not know the difference, now I can tell them apart just from fragments.”

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4833 on:** May 23, 2020, 10:45:49 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I asked Tom about this last night. Here’s how he responded:

“There was one Fragilaria (I posted the pic) and many A. formosa’s. At the time of the post I did not know the difference, now I can tell them apart just from fragments.”

That was my guess. "Likely" having been my first word. The guy is doing more research, as he mentioned. Long process. Excited to see/read the results.

georger · « **Reply #4834 on:** May 23, 2020, 11:13:59 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I asked Tom about this last night. Here’s how he responded:

“There was one Fragilaria (I posted the pic) and many A. formosa’s. At the time of the post I did not know the difference, now I can tell them apart just from fragments.”

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

These people have researched Columbia diatoms for decades. No learning curve required.

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4835 on:** May 23, 2020, 12:23:41 PM »

Wish List, 2020:

- Three sets of Bills dipped in Columbia River Water examined for diatoms
> February
> March
> July
- River silt gathered from each of the times above, checked for Diatoms/frustules
- One set of the above bills circulated in silty river water from each of those times and examined for diatoms/frustules
- Sand from the shoreline gathered at each of those times examined for diatoms/frustules, multiple depths
- Sand from the money find spot (or suspected money find spots) at each of those times examined for diatoms/frustules, multiple depths
- Money buried in sand that is occasionally "watered" with river water checked for diatoms over time

Since we're at it...

- 3 packets of money bundled with rubber bands and suspended in river water until "fanned out," then removed from the water and immediately buried to test ability to re-stack properly. Then checked for diatoms/frustules.

Alright Eric, Tom...get those ATM cards ready! I'll be over here if you need me.

EU · « **Reply #4836 on:** May 23, 2020, 12:55:54 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Wish List, 2020:

- Three sets of Bills dipped in Columbia River Water examined for diatoms
> February
> March
> July
- River silt gathered from each of the times above, checked for Diatoms/frustules
- One set of the above bills circulated in silty river water from each of those times and examined for diatoms/frustules
- Sand from the shoreline gathered at each of those times examined for diatoms/frustules, multiple depths
- Sand from the money find spot (or suspected money find spots) at each of those times examined for diatoms/frustules, multiple depths
- Money buried in sand that is occasionally "watered" with river water checked for diatoms over time

Since we're at it...

- 3 packets of money bundled with rubber bands and suspended in river water until "fanned out," then removed from the water and immediately buried to test ability to re-stack properly. Then checked for diatoms/frustules.

Alright Eric, Tom...get those ATM cards ready! I'll be over here if you need me.

As it stands right now I'm flying up there June 1st. I've already had to postpone a couple of times because of the COVID stuff. My plan is to bury some bills, take back some sand from various depths and to dip a bill into the water and bring that bill back to Tom.

Then, at the beginning of August, I will retrieve the buried bills for Tom to analyze. I suppose we'll go from there.

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4837 on:** May 30, 2020, 01:18:41 PM »

Here are a few head-scratchers regarding money found with the centers cut out, where even the cops had barely a guess as to why.

"...almost $1,000 worth of bills that floated off of Bouvier Bay. The centers have been cut from most of the bills and the edges are covered with red dye. Police believe the dye means that the money may have been stolen from a bank. They don't know why the centers are missing."

"...Deputies confiscated the money without speculating why someone would cut out Jackson's picture."

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4838 on:** May 30, 2020, 07:58:04 PM »

One guy in Missouri seemed to get it.

"We aren't sure yet why $20 bills would be cut...Possibly the money was stolen, and it was an effort to make it difficult to trace..." Chief Archer explained.

Unsurelock · « **Reply #4839 on:** June 01, 2020, 10:55:52 AM »

In Tom's Kaye's money experiments, his test bills showed "almost no decomposition," with the majority of damage coming from shrinkage of the edges upon drying. I asked him if he had determined whether this damage was cyclical, meaning more damage would happen each time the bills were saturated/swelled and dried/shrunk, or if it was a one-off. I suspect the latter, as money is mostly cotton, but as this question was not a part of Tom's conclusions, I would be very interested to have the question answered.

If the damage is cyclical, the amount of damage could potentially help determine how long the bills were on that beach, out of the water, assuming the subsequent flooding info is accurate. It could also account for the entirety of the edge material missing from the bills. If it is a one-off, then shrinkage alone would not account for the amount of edge material missing. Tom's bill, for instance, shows a bit of the light outer edge left with the artwork all intact, and the corners are not rounded, though no longer sharp angles.

Finally, if the bills were saturated, dried and sustained damage from a one-time shrinking event, and we can determine how much of the edge matter was removed by this event, then using it we can reconstruct how the bills must have looked when they came out of the water and/or were buried.

Bruce, if Galen is completely out of the Cooper game, do you think he'd allow access to his money experiment? (Also, I'm still hoping to talk to him about the corners his fishermen said they found - see previous post's Missouri article about pieces of cash in a baggie.)
Eric, are you burying whole bills, or Tom's suggested half bills?

Bruce A. Smith · « **Reply #4840 on:** June 02, 2020, 10:11:39 PM »

Yo Sherlock - Galen is not completely out of the Cooper game. In fact, he is holding all of his findings pretty close to his vest.

As for access to his money experiment, ask him. Or if you don't have his contact info, you can always send him an email via me and I'll forward it to him. I'm at brucesmith at rainierconnect dot com.

In further conversations with Galen, he has updated my perspective on what the kids found back in 1980. Only one corner of one twenty. I thought there had been many more.

georger · « **Reply #4841 on:** June 17, 2020, 03:12:42 PM »

People keep asking WHY the gate sign to the recreation area (fishing bar) on the Fazio property reads: "TINA-BAR". It's simple.

TINA was the name of the former owner of the Fazio property. The name he was using at the time the Fazios purchased the property in May 1954 was "DELL TINA". And, "Tina or Tina's" bar, was the name everyone had been calling this fishing bar for generations when the Fazio family erected the gate sign at the entrance to the fishing bar. See the photo of the sign below, with new info attached to it!

The 1930 Census for Vancouver includes the following entry:

1930 census at Vancouver, Clark County, WA. Name of head of household: "Tell Tena". 33 yo - birthplace Switzerland, wife, 25, named Frances, 2 daughters, 7 and 8: Maybelle, and Yvonne. Also known as: Dell Tena and Dell Tina.

Nobody including Al Fazio (who I have interviewed multiple times) is sure when "Tell Tena" aka "Dell Tina" purchased this river front property near Vancouver, however Tena's purchase was noted by a newspaper at the time and an undated clipping from that old newspaper archive is included in a document below, found by TestXYZ and Smokin99 back in 2011 at Dropzone:

1889-1938 Chehalis Bee Nugget Newspaper Archives from Chehalis, Washington: article undated: "Tell Tena of Switzerland buys 580 Acre Dairy Ranch - Sale of a 58O-acre dairy ranch on the Columbia near Vancouver is reported at a price of ?1.25 per acre. The purchaser is a man named “Tell Tena” and he has placed his herd of 85 dairy cattle on the place and will probably add others. He will also be raising cabbages and potatoes."
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The sign to Tina Bar reads "TINA BAR" because that was the name of the man who owned the property at the time Al Fazio's father and uncle purchased the property in May, 1956 ... after the great flood of 1956 and Dell Tina and Dell's tenant renter, Gary Kersping, gave up on the property due to continual flooding/erosion and continual financial losses with the property. "TINA BAR" was the name locals had been associating with this property for generations. It's like naming Seattle, 'SEATTLE"!

*The history of Tena's struggle with this property, and then Fazio's struggle with this property, is interesting; because that goes directly to the hydrological properties of this area and how people have struggled with that for many generations. These facts bear directly on the Tina Bar Cooper money, in the opinions of many people.

** Vancouver Area Chronology citation: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Bruce A. Smith · « **Reply #4842 on:** June 17, 2020, 06:59:17 PM »

Good to know. Thanks, G.

georger · « **Reply #4843 on:** June 17, 2020, 11:39:28 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Good to know. Thanks, G.

The best is yet to come -

georger · « **Reply #4844 on:** June 25, 2020, 05:54:00 PM »

Fyjack's latest statement about the money!

FLYJACK
•
•   1,028 posts
•    #62107
Tuesday at 09:15 AM no date

This is getting silly... Georger still doesn't understand the "packets".. this is so simple.

The bills were all in a random SN order.. so random means count for this discussion.

Larry Carr claimed the 3 bundles found were each in random counts. He was wrong, they weren't random counts and they were really in "packets of 100 bills each". He claimed the bundles were random counts and rubber banded. This is correct but because Larry incorrectly thought the "packets" were "bundles", his conclusion was wrong. He incorrectly applied the correct premise to the packets instead of the group of packets, the bundles.
This is why it is crucial to correctly identify "packets" and "bundles"..

Larry and Georger screwed this up 10 years ago and he still can't see the obvious error.

Remember, the money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills each. Those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.
How did the money go to Cooper in packets of 100 each and get found in random counts... it didn't. Larry and Georger conflated the terms "packets" and "bundles" to erroneously conclude the packets were a random count.. they weren't. The bundles were a random number of packets.

Those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. So, a single bundle may have 3, 4 or 5 packets of 100 bills each rubber banded into one bundle.
Cooper received 100 packets of 100 bills each. Those individual packets were rubber banded into bundles. Each bundle had a random number of packets,, perhaps 3s, 4s, 5s per bundle.

It is very likely the 3 TBAR packets of 100 bills each arrived as 1 rubber banded bundle. As the rubber bands deteriorated the 3 packets of 100 bills each separated slightly.

The claim that the three packets only arrived on TBAR separately is bogus. For 3 packets to arrive at the same spot independently but together limits the means by which they could have arrived. More likely, they arrived in one bundle and the possible means by which they arrived is expanded.
Since the FBI had the bill sequence on Micro they could easily compare and determine the TBAR bill count.

What happened to the few missing bills..
1. The bills were removed before deposit on TBAR. Potentially spent into circulation.
2. The bills were worn away due to erosion, perhaps they were on the top of the top packet in the single bundle.
3. The bills were taken, removed or kept after the money was found before the FBI got the money.
•

***
REPLY: Packet is not a formal banking term! No bank including the US Federal Reserve has the slightest idea what Flyjack means by "packet". All said packet is NOT a formal banking term. No bank organises its money in "@packets"! SeaFirst could not have delivered its ransom money to Cooper in packets ... because SeaFirst doles not have the faintest idea what a packet of money is! All say Flyjack has invented a term which has no meaning in reality!

EU should take note of this fact for his next invention/speculation about the Cooper ransom.

Poll

How did the money arrive on Tena Bar

Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1559006 times)

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

EU

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

EU

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Unsurelock

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Bruce A. Smith

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Bruce A. Smith

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find