I'm not being persnickety.
It just seems like you or Tom are saying that money floating from somewhere on a branch to Tena Bar after some number of years, has packets in a different state than money packets being dredged up from the Columbia?

I really don't understand the thinking. Why is he packet state different in those two cases?  Both are wet packets aren't they? Or are the magical floating bills dry? Or dry/wet depending on the season?

there's too much unstated information.

yet I'm supposed to say one supports diatom migration, and one doesn't ?
It seems more like religious beliefs.

Hang on.

I’m not disagreeing with you. In fact, I’ve stated a couple of times that I am not dismissing the dredge theory. I even quoted Tom saying “it was in play”.

I’m coming at this from the angle of whether you think the money floated there on debris, was thrown up there as dredge spoils, or fell out of the sky and landed there, it must align with Tom’s diatom research. His research puts restrictions on when the money got diatoms on the bills (late spring/early summer) and how the diatoms got on the bills (fanned out in the water for several minutes).

Regardless of what theory you prefer, I believe we have to remain within these limitations. My opinion is that money spilling out of the bag into shallow water six months after the crime would have a better chance of doing that than sitting on the river bottom for several years and then being sucked into a dredge machine. Maybe I am very wrong about that, but it’s just my opinion. I’m open to dredging as long as it aligns with Tom’s diatom research.

Perhaps you put less stock in Tom’s research than I do, and that’s your right. Bottom line is, while I favor my flotation theory, I think the dredge theory is viable and interesting.

My last few posts have simply been sharing information to add to the discussion, not to dispute any theories.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

  I'm merely asking how a money bag could rest on the bottom of Columbia for years, but only have spring diatoms on them? Also, the bills had to have fanned out for a period of time for exposure to occur. How could that happen in the rather rapid process of dredging?

If a money bag went to the bottom of the Columbia and was buried, why would any bills have diatoms on them? (from Nov 1971?)

Yes, this is my question too.

I am no diatom expert, but having read some of Tom's work, previous discussions on this board as well as a little internet searching, I believe that A. formosa and most diatoms need sunlight to live.  Does sunlight reach or make it to the bottom of the Columbia ?  I forget the depth of the river that has been discussed before...30, 40 or 50 feet ?

right, I am just skeptical that they could remain stuck together given the dynamic forces at play in the dredge.  Admittedly, my skepticism isn't really based on any empirical testing or first hand knowledge of this type of dredge system, only the imagination of my mind I suppose combined with some of the basic data points discussed here so far.  What I see is suction + water + sand + other sharp debris + a wiper bar and then some type of forceful ejection out of the 24 inch pipe. 

Clearly, larger items do make it through the dredge, and that can mean that the money could as well.  But the question is could the three packets, congealed together, remain together through the dredge ?   I can't say that they couldn't, that's for sure.  I guess without understanding how strong the bond is between the packets and the forces under which they could be subject to within the dredge, it's a tough answer.

On the other hand, one can argue that the forces inside the dredge could be responsible for rounding the edges of the packets too....I wonder if one were to examine the edges of the bills under magnification, if it could be determined if the edging indicates a tear or not ?  Sorry, now I am all over the place.

Where did the chops and cuts a that abraded area (abrasion?) come from - how?

right, I am just skeptical that they could remain stuck together given the dynamic forces at play in the dredge.  Admittedly, my skepticism isn't really based on any empirical testing or first hand knowledge of this type of dredge system, only the imagination of my mind I suppose combined with some of the basic data points discussed here so far.  What I see is suction + water + sand + other sharp debris + a wiper bar and then some type of forceful ejection out of the 24 inch pipe. 

Clearly, larger items do make it through the dredge, and that can mean that the money could as well.  But the question is could the three packets, congealed together, remain together through the dredge ?   I can't say that they couldn't, that's for sure.  I guess without understanding how strong the bond is between the packets and the forces under which they could be subject to within the dredge, it's a tough answer.

On the other hand, one can argue that the forces inside the dredge could be responsible for rounding the edges of the packets too....I wonder if one were to examine the edges of the bills under magnification, if it could be determined if the edging indicates a tear or not ?  Sorry, now I am all over the place.

Actually the money may have an advantage - its compressible. If its in a bag (almost has to be for bundles to survive) the bag is flexible. Its contents are flexible. What doesnt get chopped or blasted into atoms by the sand, slips through and once under pressure it conforms in the high velocity stream and comes out the long end of the tube. The money must survive a fairly long journey through the tube, but being under pressure it compresses and travels ... Im only guessing. 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The dredge is compelling for obvious reasons, but at the moment, I just can't wrap my head around the how the "bundola triplet" (Bruce do I send you a royalty for using this term?  ) )

No, JAG. Actually, you can send all royalties to Georger, as he is the Forum member who coined the phrase several years ago. G says a LOT of crazy shit, but this phrase stuck. I love it.

I love it too, ok then I will send the royalties to Iowa I believe....

One of the things I am trying to be sensitive to is the fact that many of you have been at this for a long time and have done so much impressive investigating, moving the case forward with the little information that is available.  So I don't want to be lazy and bring up tired and board questions that have been discussed ad nauseum or abuse conjecture and speculation too much, so I will be striving for that 

Anyway, mega kudos to all of you for the research and work that you have put in to this.

here's a good pic of a bundle
The top bill is
L55479078B 1963A