47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Here is the 72 and 74 flood timeframe in June, the 21 ft floods are about 60-70 ft beyond the money spot.

This indicates you don't require the extreme 72/74 flood event for the River to reach the spot. Much lesser high water events would reach the spot and that was confirmed in 1980 when the money spot was noted to be at high water mark and sometimes underwater..

The diatoms indicate the money went into the River in spring (fanned out), that could be 72 to 79..

TBAR72-74flood.jpg.6ac3d15bd06dda7a71ae76a6c0aae72f.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

hard to get perspective on level, it could be a two foot range..

Appears to be about 2 feet.  If you speed up the video you can better appreciate the in/out wave action caused by the freighter 

The wave action would cause debris to be tossed to shore.  

Be nice to have freighter activity logs for about the time the money supposively washed ashore.

If I remember correctly a Crewmen on a freighter in the area notice a white parachute or something dangling body? from its underbody.  It disappeared not long after they saw it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric Ulis wrote...

"What I do know is that if you want to see the precise money find spot today, punch 45.718551, -122.759407 into Google Earth and you're going to see the spot. I cannot speak to the accuracy of overlaying pictures from 30 years ago onto the GPS co-ords I have provided.

Nonetheless, the old gravel road doesn't lie. And it didn't move."

 

Eric is relying on images of a road from 1980.. nearly the entire road has been eroded into the River and YES, it has moved. At the money spot the old road is gone.

That is why I have looked at many maps and multiple markers over the years. You can't determine the spot standing there today as everything has changed, including the road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, you are barking up the wrong tree...CONTACT either Sheridan or Snowmman in reference to the BOOK. I didn't put any input to the publishing. I had NOTHING to do with the publishing of the book. I didn't design the cover, I didn't speak to Sheridan. I didn't go over any details with either party. it was discussed for a period on the forum in 2018, mainly by 377 and Snow. it's of none of my concern even though it was discussed doesn't mean I have to do anything. I am bound by squat. if you had a contract then sue for breach..once again, the only person upset appears to be you..

 

If any apologies are in order they would be required from you..you have been caught lying multiple times. you constantly break the rules on this thread clogging up the discussion of the intended purpose of this thread with either off topic rants or half page comments about truck tires (ad included), shower tents and old pictures of camp outs..one small paragraph about Cooper and the next 6 paragraphs full of false narratives and hatred. you instigate causing a never ending loop..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, one more time...I had nothing to do with the damn book. just because it was discussed on my forum doesn't bind me to it. no, I didn't buy the book. Sheridan doesn't interest me in the least. it's not my responsibility to contact anyone for you. that all falls on you. how much higher can you get this molehill?

It's Sheridan's book, no? contact him about it. I'm not going to help you in anyway, period. go directly to the source, isn't that what you tell others? drive, fly, walk to his house, what ever it takes to accomplish what ever the hell it is you want. your not getting it from me. members on my forum appreciate personal information and don't wish it to be handed out. you burn too many bridges to even know Snowmman's name. it's not my fault you don't know how to contact him. the source is Sheridan anyway. you had 30 emails back and forth, right? why would the person (Sheridan Peterson) not work with you on this. it's his book? the book was published long after Snowmman left the forum so once again you are not telling the truth. they obviously mended there differences and published the book. not me or Bruce, or anyone else. 

Sheridan appears to be able to make his own decisions. why you were left out is unknown and is of no concern to me. take it up with those involved as to why..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Wow,,  2010 Columbia River bottom off Caterpillar Island 35 ft deep River mile 98.. TBAR is River mile  97.1-97.3

drifts downriver, must be right off TBAR..

looks sandy with small rocks and some garbage..

It looks like a water logged bundle of cash could easily get pushed down river.

 

Is that a pop/beer can at about 5:28?   Pop cans were found buried next to the Cooper money.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

It doesn't matter what you say..I didn't "sponsor" anything. it's a public forum. I'm not dodging anything. the material Snow had was purchased by him. he is friends with the person who wrote the material. the book was published after Snow left the forum. sponsoring the book would include being involved in it and money exchanged and promoting it etc.

Portions of a material and other copyright material can be posted under the fair use clause. Sheridan asked him to stop posting portions which Snow did..you steal complete posts from my site? 

Why is it so hard for you to call Sheridan who wrote the book. why is it your business? I told you earlier, if you have a contract then he breached it. how hard can this be and why would it be up to me when you have the contract and was directly involved in trying to publish the book? it's similar to the threats you make with law suits against Kenny. you don't own him. you own what is written in the book. how does one sue for slander on a dead guy? 

I didn't put the book online, Sheridan and Snow apparently did. I don't know, you know why I don't know?. because I wasn't involved. you can't blame anyone for what others did Robert. I never spoke to him in regards to publishing squat. I don't know Sheridan and have never spoken to him. if HE has a problem with the book. HE needs to take action. not you, not me but SHERIDAN PETERSON. the owner of the book?

YOU have the contact information to the person who own's the book and had some sort of agreement or contract. why can't you resolve the problem with the owner of the book? why didn't Sheridan contact me? YOU need to go directly to the source, period.

1) The book was published.

2) The owner obviously agreed to publish.

3) The owner hasn't voiced out against the publishing.

4) Someone who didn't publish the book is screaming injustice. 

Edited by mrshutter45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Eric's premise is FALSE..

"OK. You may recall in an earlier post (Page 343, Reply #5144) that I stated that Tena Bar had had seven high-water events—defined as water levels that would reach the money find spot per 1980 standards —between June 1950 (approx. time Fazio’s purchased the property) and February 1980 (when the money was found)."

This is exactly why I have been trying to nail down the exact spot.

You do not need a "recorded" high water event to reach the spot.

The money was found at the 1980 high water mark and was sometimes underwater.. (Reports in 1980)

 

The evidence suggests it was deposited in Spring closer to 1980.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

AAAANNNNND   here we go...............

L to R = Sept 71 / June 74 / Sep 74

Sept 71, money spot est 70-80 ft from river..

June 74, money spot est 70-80 ft from land.. (underwater)

Sept 74, money spot est 40-50 ft from river..

tbar717474.jpeg.b1aac6b922d2a91146b9ffd01ed88919.jpeg

.

June 28/74.. close to record high water event,, far above the money spot. (70-80ft)

A record flood event is not required for the river to reach the money spot, confirmed by reports in 1980.

TBAR72-74flood.jpg.cf1da7c90792aec6afad6038a6715d78.jpg

 

Dredge spoils were determined by the Corps of Engineers. They have very detailed records.

Reports in 1980 - money was at high water line and sometimes underwater. YOU DO NOT NEED A FLOOD EVENT FOR WATER TO REACH THE MONEY SPOT.

Palmer concluded money arrived within a year or so.

Tom's diatom research indicates a spring only exposure to the Columbia R.

The money was given to Cooper rubber banded in bundles of packets, there is no evidence the three packets arrived individually. It is more likely they arrived in a single bundle then fell apart as the rubber bands deteriorated.

 

Conclusion, money went into the Columbia (as a single bundle) and onto TBAR in spring closer to 1980.. Spring 79 or maybe 78.

 

"June 72 and 74? if they are not relevant then why are you posting them? "

HUH,, I never said they weren't relevant, they show that the flood event was FAR above the money spot. 

Why is this hard to understand.. YOU DO NOT NEED THE 72 or 74 recorded flood events for the River to reach the money spot.. it is FALSE. It is confirmed by Palmer and reports in 1980.

Eric's premise is that ONLY the 72/74 high water events after 71 reached the money spot. FALSE, FALSE, FALSE..

Eric needs this to be true for his narrative to work. It isn't.

 

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
5 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

BREAKING... The dredge layer was identified by the Corps of Engineers...  

 

armcordredgelayer.jpeg.639ebab3a8cefab48c5ee1717e1975e7.jpeg

Georger is attacking me again with his typical strawman nonsense,,, and misinformation because he didn't check the source. No wonder some of these guys have got nowhere in a decade. NEVER EVER trust anything Georger claims without checking thoroughly.

The FACTS..

QUOTE:

"The agents were joined Wednesday by Leonard Palmer, Portland State University geology professor, and Corps of Engineers specialists in analyzing the area. The Corps of Engineers identified a layer of sand as having been deposited when the 40-foot ship channel was dredged in August 1974."

 

and on cue Georger doubles down on stupid..  admit when you are wrong.. you can pop open the article and read it clearly unless you are still on that Commodore 64.

 

The only thing funny is Georger getting caught again in his own ignorance... HILARIOUS..

We can start a gofundme to get you a modern computer so you can actually read my post and you don't have to make up stuff.

I guess this flips the dredge spoils argument around...

I was neutral on it but the Corps makes it very likely that the money was on top of the dredge spoils..

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The max tidal swing on the Columbia is about 4.5 ft...

But, the tidal numbers are not the absolute water level. It is only the tidal fluctuation, It does not account for other factors like flow..

 

The data shutter is using is based on gravitational maths for a general location. It has nothing to do with the Columbia R. It is an algorithm probably meant for the Ocean tides.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

The Palmer report was released in a recent FBI file...

Georger is correct, it doesn't confirm the Corps IDing the dredge spoils on site.. it confirms their participation.

But that is a red herring... 

 

The Corps of Engineers are extremely thorough and have very detailed records.. it is a big lift to undermine their claims. Eric will try, Georger will settle down with a chamomile tea and a blanket in his rocking chair and will eventually realize this is a game changer.

I just report what I find..  don't shoot the messenger. 

 

palmer1.jpeg.74ecc799026757e20ef391e6c245ae10.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Palmer Report and the article confirm and support each other.. both indicate the Corps was involved in determining the location of the dredge layer. The article only indicates they were on site with Palmer.

Claiming the article is wrong with zero evidence...  nice try.

 

You can do that with anything, just deny it if you don't like it. That is how Eric rolls.

 

Things don't have to be peer reviewed to be true. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, it's very simple...why haven't YOU discussed this problem with the author of the book (Sheridan Peterson) why are you trying to work around the actual owner of the book? this horrific injustice could be solved with you contacting the owner of the book, no? where is the FBI and law suits, the book has been published? It's my understanding Snow even went to Sheridan's house. 

 

You also LIED about the manuscript being "stolen" by misquoting Sheridan. Snow purchased the manuscript prior to Sheridan taking it offline as he stated in 2018. the manuscript was online for a short period in the mid 2000's. you also have no value for privacy by posting Sheridan's email address in his reply. did you ask him if you could post personal information or the email? if you did that to me all trust would be gone. 

 

The book was published and the owner of the book is under the name of Sheridan Peterson..for some reason you are not contacting this person (Sheridan Peterson) in regards to your rants. any changes surround said book needs to be discussed with those involved in the book. especially, the person who wrote it..that would be Sheridan Peterson. I don't go to McDonalds looking for a Whopper? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zero dodging..I had nothing to do with the publication of the book..CONTACT the person who wrote it and has the COPYRIGHTS to it...that's very simple and that person is Sheridan Peterson..Snowmman and Sheridan apparently got the book published. you have lied several times in this story along with the conference. I don't know Sheridan or even Snowmman other than on my site. I had one PM with him in regards to controlling the 302's when he first came to the forum.

You claim to of had some sort of contract or dealings with Sheridan, not Snowmman. Sheridan owns the rights and has the final say unless Snow has some sort of contract with him which is extremely doubtful..you don't need me for squat..CONTACT the rightful owner of the book. stop accusing me of publishing the book. why isn't Sheridan screaming? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are finally partially correct...377 is friends with both of them or at least was with Sheridan.  email 377 about your problems. I didn't write the book nor did I have anything to do with publishing the book..the email for Sheridan is written on the reply you posted from him. contact Sheridan to fix Sheridan's book you claim to want to do? you had 30 emails with Sheridan, make it 31?

 

1) Why do you fail to make contact the owner of the book?

2) What rights do you have to side step Sheridan like you accuse Snow of?

3) Snowmman doesn't own the rights to the book.

 

How about YOU do the right thing by going DIRECTLY to the source. why are you whining to me about a problem YOU have? it happened in 2018 and brought up by you in 2020. it appears to be YOU doing the whining...? contact Sheridan Peterson to fix anything to do with Sheridan Peterson? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a problem for you and not me...Sheridan owns the book. you need to speak with him in regards to any agreement you had prior to Snowmman. I could care less the amounts you offer Robert. that's really cheesy and unprofessional IMHO. it's the thought that counts, not the amount. you always feel the need to include dollar amounts with things. 

I know nothing about any files about the book. you need to speak with the people involved. I'm not going to help you in anyway. If Sheridan really wanted this from you then what's the frickin' problem? how do you know what Snow has and what Sheridan has without talking with either or if the agreement you had is still valid? you dive into the water and climb out wanting everyone to dry you off, really? it's your deal between you and Sheridan that was apparently made! I had nothing to do with that either...I'm not obligated to do anything for you. doesn't matter what you think is right. I don't know Sheridan at ALL, no emails, no comments online, no Facebook, Twitter, nothing. same for Snow. he was on my forum but that doesn't imply we are pals? the most I recall commenting with him about was documents surrounding Reca..this is between the three of you, period. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old divert comes into play..that's my opinion. you don't like it that's tough. I responded to someone who spoke of the very issue I wrote about...don't put that up? 

I don't care about your forum..what is it, attempt 8-9? of course you won't allow what you do on everyone else's sites. no clogging up that forum with off topic comments, right. only where you can you can break someone else's rules..it speaks volumes..nicely put, bravo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do what you have to do there Mr. Honest...this is one complete and total bold faced LIE.

"One of them is how members of the biggest website on the Cooper case conspired together to steal a book and publish it."

Now you are openly accusing me of theft. you just go right ahead. I'm ready this time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, once again - this is not a place for members to have back and forths about their own issues with one another. Discuss the case, not the endless drama involving people who have sought to engage in the topic. If in doubt, rather leave it out. Let's also not forget that a few of these posts may even cross the line into personal attacks and I have removed some posts in accordance. The above discussion is an example of what will result in warnings going forward - I am only leaving it up for reference to this post. Warning points accumulated result in a temporary ban and a permanent ban if persistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

article in FBI files..

The pop cans and most of the money were found six to eight inches below the surface, but fragments of the money reportedly were as far down as three feet.

Palmer could not explain how the money might have been buried that deep. He said there was "no conclusive evidence" that money was in fact found three feet down, and surmised that it may have been deposited there in digging actions.

 

It indicates Palmer did not believe the money fragments were three feet deep.

 

moneydeeppalmer.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

47 47