DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 654]

How accurate is the McCrone process for the trace stuff on the particles..

[FLYJACK 654]

I doubled checked the Al Mg particles...

Problem,, most show no third element.. and all the registered alloys have trace elements

So, either McCrone isn't that accurate for trace elements OR those Al Mg particles are not registered alloys..

[CooperNWO305 146]

7 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I doubled checked the Al Mg particles...

Problem,, most show no third element.. and all the registered alloys have trace elements

So, either McCrone isn't that accurate for trace elements OR those Al Mg particles are not registered alloys..

Unfortunately we are back where we started on the tie. The issue is that now the evidentiary value of it has been questioned so much that it is really a rabbit hole. I guess you could make it be anything you want. Assuming it was Cooper’s or someone close to him, we can still assume that he was a blue collar worker or in a metals type plant. The FBI called him high school educated. He was clearly bright. In the end it may be that the DNA is the only thing of true value. When we have very little evidence in the case, the tie becomes a family heirloom and is held onto as a reminder. 

[FLYJACK 654]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Unfortunately we are back where we started on the tie. The issue is that now the evidentiary value of it has been questioned so much that it is really a rabbit hole. I guess you could make it be anything you want. Assuming it was Cooper’s or someone close to him, we can still assume that he was a blue collar worker or in a metals type plant. The FBI called him high school educated. He was clearly bright. In the end it may be that the DNA is the only thing of true value. When we have very little evidence in the case, the tie becomes a family heirloom and is held onto as a reminder. 

and Cooper may not have even worn the tie when the particles were deposited..

I found a 100% gold particle... does that mean he was also a gold miner.

The particles can be from the plane, from handling or storage post Norjak from fingerprint processing,,  plus the life of the tie from about 1965 to 1971...

Since the particles are on the backside.. they were deposited from the hands or while not worn.

The particles generally fit pyrotechnics, dentistry, electronics and other environments.

OR a combination of environments.

 

 

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

11 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I doubled checked the Al Mg particles...

Problem,, most show no third element.. and all the registered alloys have trace elements

So, either McCrone isn't that accurate for trace elements OR those Al Mg particles are not registered alloys..

Actually only 39% of particles that are Al#1 and Mg#2 are only those 2 elements (187 out of 482), while 61% have a 3rd or 4th element (295 out of 482). Table courtesy of Chris Broer. 

Edited December 21, 2023 by Nicholas Broughton

[FLYJACK 654]

1 hour ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

Actually only 39% of particles that are Al#1 and Mg#2 are only those 2 elements (187 out of 482), while 61% have a 3rd or 4th element (295 out of 482). Table courtesy of Chris Broer. 

I was looking at one area/sheet in the file with a concentration of AlMg.. most there do not have a third element and the others are inconsistent.

That tells me either McCrone is a bit sketchy or they just aren't alloys.

 

[FLYJACK 654]

I had noticed that there are horizontal lines of concentrated particles on the tie under UV..

At first I thought they were smears as if an object was wiped across the tie which would be odd.

However, now I think those smears of particles are from the tie clip... the tie was folded over in storage in different ways over the years.. As it was removed it was put back slightly differently..

In other words,, those lines of concentrated particles are from contact with the clasp when the tie was folded up in storage.

 

The take away... samples were taken from those areas and the particle concentration would be transfer from the tie clasp.

 

and the clasp was on the right.. (the left side was an error)

 

Edited December 21, 2023 by FLYJACK

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

15 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I was looking at one area/sheet in the file with a concentration of AlMg.. most there do not have a third element and the others are inconsistent.

That tells me either McCrone is a bit sketchy or they just aren't alloys.

 

From my metallurgist: “All automated EDS is a bit sketchy. Especially so if it can’t be checked against a calibrated standard, like here. I would definitely assume that any Al-5Mg particle is a 5000-series Al alloy whether the database is showing me more elements or not. It might also be helpful to reel back a little bit and think about what is meant by “alloy”: a metallic mixture of two or more elements. It needn’t be homogeneous (eg nickel superalloys), and it can include nonmetallic elements (eg carbon in steel)”

Edited December 21, 2023 by Nicholas Broughton

[FLYJACK 654]

5 hours ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

From my metallurgist: “All automated EDS is a bit sketchy. Especially so if it can’t be checked against a calibrated standard, like here. I would definitely assume that any Al-5Mg particle is a 5000-series Al alloy whether the database is showing me more elements or not. It might also be helpful to reel back a little bit and think about what is meant by “alloy”: a metallic mixture of two or more elements. It needn’t be homogeneous (eg nickel superalloys), and it can include nonmetallic elements (eg carbon in steel)”

This tells me we can't really rely on the accuracy of the EDS and particles may or may not be alloyed or registered alloys.

In other words..  we can't use the particles with any specificity..

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

This tells me we can't really rely on the accuracy of the EDS and particles may or may not be alloyed or registered alloys.

In other words..  we can't use the particles with any specificity..

From my metallurgist: “Registered alloys” is still a red herring. Don’t focus on that. Readings with elemental concentration of greater than 1% are perfectly fine even in the automated EDS. With the possible exception of Ni in this specific test.

[FLYJACK 654]

9 hours ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

From my metallurgist: “Registered alloys” is still a red herring. Don’t focus on that. Readings with elemental concentration of greater than 1% are perfectly fine even in the automated EDS. With the possible exception of Ni in this specific test.

Without a registered alloy you can't research a use.. or environment. 

[FLYJACK 654]

My take on the tie...

It was purchased about 1964/65, very cheap and very dirty, had two tie pin holes and significant dust in the knot area.

That essentially rules out a thrift shop..

The tie was worn with a tie pin based on the well worn hole, not the alligator clip. You don't use both a pin and a clip. The alligator clip made the tie easier to remove and was probably added for the hijacking. The tie pin may have been a company/agency pin identifying its source and one reason fo its removal.

The dust in the knot area indicates that the tie was not worn for some time, perhaps a few years. It was likely stored hanging in a dusty environment to get the concentration in the knot area.

IMO, it was purchased/obtained in 1964/65 for a specific job and used for several years (to 1968/69) with a tie pin, then it was stored upright for a few years until Norjak when the alligator clip was added...

Many of the horizontal particle concentrations shown under UV are from the folded tie touching the alligator clip in storage. Many of those particles are from the alligator clip.

I have two specific theories for the ownership,, one is Cooper and one is not Cooper. NOT A THRIFT SHOP.

Edited December 22, 2023 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 146]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

My take on the tie...

It was purchased about 1964/65, very cheap and very dirty, had two tie pin holes and significant dust in the knot area.

That essentially rules out a thrift shop..

The tie was worn with a tie pin based on the well worn hole, not the alligator clip. You don't use both a pin and a clip. The alligator clip made the tie easier to remove and was probably added for the hijacking. The tie pin may have been a company/agency pin identifying its source and one reason fo its removal.

The dust in the knot area indicates that the tie was not worn for some time, perhaps a few years. It was likely stored hanging in a dusty environment to get the concentration in the knot area.

IMO, it was purchased/obtained in 1964/65 for a specific job and used for several years (to 1968/69) with a tie pin, then it was stored upright for a few years until Norjak when the alligator clip was added...

Many of the horizontal particle concentrations shown under UV are from the folded tie touching the alligator clip in storage. Many of those particles are from the alligator clip.

I have two specific theories for the ownership,, one is Cooper and one is not Cooper. NOT A THRIFT SHOP.

The tie bar had gold in it right? What other elements?

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Without a registered alloy you can't research a use.. or environment. 

My metallurgist says: “What. Of course you can!”

[FLYJACK 654]

35 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

The tie bar had gold in it right? What other elements?

I doubt it had real gold,,  They used cheap metals and plating for those things.

Some of the stub samples were taken from the location of those clasp marks..

Maybe Tom needs to sort that out.

[FLYJACK 654]

29 minutes ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

My metallurgist says: “What. Of course you can!”

How? 

You can't confirm a registered alloy or even an alloy..

It is like finding mustard on a tie and trying to claim the guy worked in a mustard factory.

When it is more likely he just ate a hot dog..

 

[c99acer 6]

3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

My take on the tie...

It was purchased about 1964/65, very cheap and very dirty, had two tie pin holes and significant dust in the knot area.

That essentially rules out a thrift shop..

...

I have two specific theories for the ownership,, one is Cooper and one is not Cooper. NOT A THRIFT SHOP.

How does your first sentence rule out a thrift shop? Is it the two holes, the dust, or cheap and dirty? Maybe the year?

[FLYJACK 654]

1 minute ago, c99acer said:

How does your first sentence rule out a thrift shop? Is it the two holes, the dust, or cheap and dirty? Maybe the year?

 

Too cheap and used for a thrift shop and too dirty, they would have at least cleaned it. 

That tie had no value in that condition.

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

How? 

You can't confirm a registered alloy or even an alloy..

It is like finding mustard on a tie and trying to claim the guy worked in a mustard factory.

When it is more likely he just ate a hot dog..

 

His reply “lol that is exactly what we’re doing. Consider it a gift if you can pin a particle down to a specific time and place. I would argue that’s probably less likely with a “registered, alloy”, because those have greater adoption and are used in more places.”

[FLYJACK 654]

16 minutes ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

His reply “lol that is exactly what we’re doing. Consider it a gift if you can pin a particle down to a specific time and place. I would argue that’s probably less likely with a “registered, alloy”, because those have greater adoption and are used in more places.”

But you can't pin it down because the data is not accurate enough and you can't know every environment for any subset of particles or its place in the entire complex of particles.

It isn't science, it is speculation and the danger is to represent it as science.

 

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

5 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

But you can't pin it down because the data is not accurate enough and you can't know every environment for any subset of particles or its place in the entire complex of particles.

It isn't science, it is speculation and the danger is to represent it as science.

 

You are entitled to that opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree here fly. At any rate a Merry Christmas to you sir. 
 
Keep Digging! 
 

Nicky 

[FLYJACK 654]

13 hours ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

You are entitled to that opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree here fly. At any rate a Merry Christmas to you sir. 
 
Keep Digging! 
 

Nicky 

It is more than an opinion, it is logic..

You can't know the entire universe that a particle existed in the mid 60's and you can't know that the particle composition is accurate. Those are facts.

Just be careful, you guys elevated the TiSb particles from speculation/assumption to fact and used it to run with Vordahl. Some of us knew that was a bogus foundation to build a suspect on. Vordahl has no connection to the Cooper case and the tie has no substantiated connection to Rem Cru or Vordahl... the TiSb Rem Cru connection was over played.

The particles are worth exploring but don't make the same mistake twice.

[Andrade1812 51]

Merry Christmas Flyjack!

[FLYJACK 654]

36 minutes ago, Andrade1812 said:

Merry Christmas Flyjack!

Merry Christmas to you and all the Cooper sleuths,,, even Georger..

 

[Nicholas Broughton 53]

Merry Christmas to all my cooperites!

 

 

Edited December 25, 2023 by Nicholas Broughton