DB Cooper

[Math of Insects 96]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Ok, I figured this out...

"Math", my point about multiple conflations being necessary was in the context of a rebuttal to olemisscub's argument..  For his argument to be valid, it requires multiple conflations.. I was not making a universal statement. I was pointing out the weakness in his argument.

Your argument contradicts his argument.. and requires its own analysis.

Evaluating all the evidence we have, it is apparent that a document we have not seen has Tina claiming Cooper had yellowish stains on the first two fingers of his right hand.. since Tina lit his cigarettes and was next to him this is not unbelievable. Clearly, she witnessed him smoke and with which hand. I have always believed that they knew or strongly suspected if he was right or left handed but held that back..

This document is the source of multiple claims about Cooper having cigarette stains on his right hand.

Is it possible that the document has an error.. it is possible but extremely unlikely.

The FBI docs do have errors they are not conclusions but a gathering of information. For this to be an error it would be inconsistent with the typical errors in the files.. it would have to be a mis-attribution rather than a typo or misunderstanding which it typical.

Also, there is no evidence that it is false,, none whatsoever. Without any contrary evidence we have to take it as valid.. if we don't and dismiss it then anything and everything in this case is open to be dismissed without evidence.

So, my conclusion is that it is legitimate based on the known evidence but remain open to the possibility that it could be an error if some new evidence is found.

This case is closed and any further deviation from the judgement may be punishable by a fine or imprisonment or both in accordance with the laws of the Vortex.

A boilerplate description of a suspect is used thousands of times. 

One of those times, a stray fact is included in it, that never appears before or after.

One conclusion might be that that single instance was a simple error. How could so many different typists over so many years continue to miss the exact same fairly important item?

Another conclusion might be that that single instance is somehow the only time someone mistakenly told the truth and revealed the contents of a double-super-secret document that has been intentionally hidden from everyone involved for 50 years.

You appear to be on Team Cover-up. I am not sure why, but if that feels right to you, you're certainly welcome to that position.

For me, it would be a bit like you one day misspelling your screen name as "Flojack." It's been correct thousands of times; I can safely assume the one variation is a simple mistake. 

For someone else, they might think, "AHA!! I knew his name was really Flo!! Finally he slipped up!!"

I am very solidly on Team "mistake." In my experience, in general the world continues to work as the world works, with or without our overlays. There is nothing mysterious about this, unless you prefer to see mystery.

 

[FLYJACK 654]

1 minute ago, Math of Insects said:

A boilerplate description of a suspect is used thousands of times. 

One of those times, a stray fact is included in it, that never appears before or after.

One conclusion might be that that single instance was a simple error. How could so many different typists over so many years continue to miss the exact same fairly important item?

Another conclusion might be that that single instance is somehow the only time someone mistakenly told the truth and revealed the contents of a double-super-secret document that has been intentionally hidden from everyone involved for 50 years.

You appear to be on Team Cover-up. I am not sure why, but if that feels right to you, you're certainly welcome to that position.

For me, it would be a bit like you one day misspelling your screen name as "Flojack." It's been correct thousands of times; I can safely assume the one variation is a simple mistake. 

For someone else, they might think, "AHA!! I knew his name was really Flo!! Finally he slipped up!!"

I am very solidly on Team "mistake." In my experience, in general the world continues to work as the world works, with or without our overlays. There is nothing mysterious about this, unless you prefer to see mystery.

 

Beyond ridiculous..

Both of you have lost your minds, you have ZERO evidence to support your opinions.. good luck.

I am not participating in this garbage.

[Math of Insects 96]

3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Beyond ridiculous..

Both of you have lost your minds, you have ZERO evidence to support your opinions.. good luck.

I am not participating in this garbage.

I thought "agree to disagree" was the more gracious way to phrase that same sentiment, but they amount to the same in the end.

[FLYJACK 654]

2 minutes ago, Math of Insects said:

I thought "agree to disagree" was the more gracious way to phrase that same sentiment, but they amount to the same in the end.

You thought wrong,, your comment was a pile of crap.

It demonstrated your ignorant thinking process.

[olemisscub 466]

11 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

You thought wrong,, your comment was a pile of crap.

It demonstrated your ignorant thinking process.

What the hell is wrong with you? None of this is worth this hostility and ugliness. No one is being hostile toward you or mocking you. Seriously. You have no reason to be so insulting toward us.

I'm not sure why you treat every disagreement on the DZ like a personal battle. Maybe you're so used to people over the years genuinely being hostile with each other on here that it has given you PTSD, but I assure you that neither I nor MOI are taking that tone with you. That's not the type of people we are. We're just buddies sitting around shooting the shit. Try to keep that in mind as you move forward when interpreting the tone of our messages. 

[FLYJACK 654]

5 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

What the hell is wrong with you? None of this is worth this hostility and ugliness. No one is being hostile toward you or mocking you. Seriously. You have no reason to be so insulting toward us.

I'm not sure why you treat every disagreement on the DZ like a personal battle. Maybe you're so used to people over the years genuinely being hostile with each other on here that it has given you PTSD, but I assure you that neither I nor MOI are taking that tone with you. That's not the type of people we are. We're just buddies sitting around shooting the shit. Try to keep that in mind as you move forward when interpreting the tone of our messages. 

The comment from "Math" was insane..  no facts, no evidence, just incoherent gibberish.. 

Team cover up, what is this straw-man crap.

I have no interest is participating in a discussion with irrational people. None. 

You two have the info, you reject it without any evidence whatsoever... you both have made incoherent/false arguments completely pulled from thin air... 

This is Blevins/Ulis level idiocy and a waste of time.

[olemisscub 466]

If you want the DZ to be even more dead, then you got it. There's no need for you to behave like this. None. 

Edited April 2, 2023 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 654]

4 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

If you want the DZ to be even more dead, then you got it. There's no need for you to behave like this. None. 

It isn't me.. I gave you guys lot of facts you didn't have.. It doesn't matter you two reject everything for an unfounded and meaningless opinion..  then I get called team cover up.. absolutely insane. 

Opinions in this case are a dime a dozen, if you can't back them up it is a waste of everyone's time.

If you apply that standard that means NO evidence in this case is valid... and I am not interested in any discussion that doesn't apply the basic rules of critical thinking. 

Both of you have have asserted the same opinion contrary to the evidence but with conflicting arguments... those arguments are invalid, they have no facts, they are made up nonsense. But it is all my fault.

Stop wasting my time,,

 

[Math of Insects 96]

I'm trying to figure out what set off this response.

There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event.

You feel that is evidence of a document we have yet to see, and which is not mentioned, cited, or enumerated in any other paperwork associated with the case.

I feel it's possible that, given the timeline and lack of any other mentions of this, it's an error of one kind or another, even a well-intentioned one.

That's the crux of it, right? This hardly seems worth the level of aggression and disrespect you've opted for.

I do agree that any discussion with that tone is a waste of time. Why not just disengage? Particularly if you're unable to conduct yourself with decorum around a topic of--let's face it--very low stakes?

[FLYJACK 654]

3 hours ago, Math of Insects said:

I'm trying to figure out what set off this response.

There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event.

You feel that is evidence of a document we have yet to see, and which is not mentioned, cited, or enumerated in any other paperwork associated with the case.
 

100% Clueless.

This indicates that witness was Tina..

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 654]

On 11/21/2022 at 3:09 PM, olemisscub said:

Vordahl was very athletic and fits the FBI profile of Cooper being a middle aged man who exercised (a rarity in those days to be sure). Vordahl was a runner way before his time. We have writings of his where he talks about it from the 1960’s. As you know not many people did that back then. He was also a competitive amateur tennis and golf player. In fact, when you deep dive on him many of things you come across are stories or articles where he is competing and often placing or winning these tennis or golf tournaments. 
 

He was also into eating organic and all that. I believe one of his patents concerns something to do with organic food development.

This is Ryan's bias..

Older competitive tennis players who eat organic do not smoke... and Vordahl was claimed to be left handed..

Cooper, a right handed long term smoker is Vordahl's silver bullet.. done, finished.

Math just seems incapable of comprehending the facts.. just can't even get the facts right.. so attacks my cred for having the audacity to agree with the case facts..

To be correct they need the Himmelsbach book to be wrong, Himmelsbach himself to be wrong. McPheters to be wrong, the FBI files to be wrong and amazingly absorbed the Himmelsbach book, Calame and Rhodes to be wrong even though they had more details than the Himmelsbach book.. they somehow absorbed Himmelsbach false info..

Their arguments are even contradictory,, an illogical mess.

It is an incredulous feat... and you two have ZERO evidence, just a useless and baseless opinion you can't back up. If I wanted those I'd listen to Ulis or Blevins.

Both of you are intellectually dishonest.

IMO, you both have lost all your credibility with me. 

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

13 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

100% Clueless.

 

 

and we're the ones who are intellectually dishonest? You know exactly what you did here. 

[FLYJACK 654]

2 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

and we're the ones who are intellectually dishonest? You know exactly what you did here. 

No, what did I do?

Please enlighten me...

Math said there was no reference to a file,, there was. he was wrong.

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

Just now, FLYJACK said:

No, what did I do?

We both know the FBI Files as well as the other. Be better than that. 

[FLYJACK 654]

3 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

We both know the FBI Files as well as the other. Be better than that. 

You have lost it.. you are paranoid.

You accuse me of something then back it up..

I was pointing out MATH's false claim, proving he doesn't know the subject..

He also claimed there were only a couple mentions, which is false.

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

Just now, FLYJACK said:

You have lost it.. 

You accuse me of something then back it up..

you posted that to act like it's a separate and unique instance of cig stains being mentioned in the FBI Files than what has already been posted. 

[FLYJACK 654]

5 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

you posted that to act like it's a separate and unique instance of cig stains being mentioned in the FBI Files than what has already been posted. 

I posted it to prove that MATH doesn't know the subject they are arguing.. that is it.

Anything else is in your warped imagination.

Seriously, you seem irrational.

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

Just now, FLYJACK said:

I posted it to prove that MATH doesn't know the subject he is arguing.. that is it.

Anything else is in your warped imagination.

Sure. So why not just post what has already been posted instead of seeking out a different looking version of the same description? Why did you go to that effort if it wasn't intended to mislead people into thinking it was a separate incident?

 

[FLYJACK 654]

12 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Sure. So why not just post what has already been posted instead of seeking out a different looking version of the same description? Why did you go to that effort if it wasn't intended to mislead people into thinking it was a separate incident?

 

You are wrong,, 

I posted that clip because MATH claimed there was no reference to an FBI file.. clearly wrong.

Falsely accusing me of something dishonest for posting a fact.. 

You owe me an apology..

and you see why I am pissed and disappointed with you two..

Seriously, you two are in the Ulis/Blevins zone and I mean it.

You see things that aren't there and MATH can't see things that are there.

 

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

3 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

You are wrong,, 

I posted that clip because MATH claimed there was no reference to an FBI file.. clearly wrong.

How could he have claimed there was no reference when an FBI file mentioning it was already posted and is what he was referring to when he said: "There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event."

[FLYJACK 654]

28 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

How could he have claimed there was no reference when an FBI file mentioning it was already posted and is what he was referring to when he said: "There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event."

What is wrong with you,, MATH wrote it, I even quoted it in my post...

Neither of you actually read.... so you dream up some unhinged nefarious motive for posting a fact..

You see why I can't take you seriously..

MATH wrote..

"You feel that is evidence of a document we have yet to see, and which is not mentioned, cited, or enumerated in any other paperwork associated with the case.
 "

So, I posted the reference to an FBI file...

BTW.. Chaucer did a similar thing,, when I didn't accept his Columbia R landing theory but agreed with the FBI version he became completely unhinged and attacked me personally.. all I did was agree with the facts.. Ask him to release his Rataczak video, he spends about 45 minutes trashing Rataczak's character and credibility.. it is insane, he took it down.

I think you are emotionally invested in a theory and it has distorted your judgement..  you see things that aren't there and form opinions that are invalid, not supported by any evidence..

The Vortex has taken another soul..

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 466]

2 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

What is wrong with you,, MATH wrote it, I even quoted it in my post...

Neither of you actually read.... so you dream up some unhinged nefarious motive for posting a fact..

You see why I can't take you seriously..

MATH wrote..

"You feel that is evidence of a document we have yet to see, and which is not mentioned, cited, or enumerated in any other paperwork associated with the case.
 "

He's clearly referring to the ORIGIN of this cigarette stains issue i.e. where is the original witness statement claiming this unique characteristic? What is the provenance of this statement? I can show you the provenance of literally every single descriptor in that Cooper description. Literally the exact verbiage from the witness statements were put into the description. So where on Earth does this statement come from and why is there not a single solitary reference to it anywhere else in the FBI Files except this one incident from 1988?

 

[FLYJACK 654]

4 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

He's clearly referring to the ORIGIN of this cigarette stains issue i.e. where is the original witness statement claiming this unique characteristic? What is the provenance of this statement? I can show you the provenance of literally every single descriptor in that Cooper description. Literally the exact verbiage from the witness statements were put into the description. So where on Earth does this statement come from and why is there not a single solitary reference to it anywhere else in the FBI Files except this one incident from 1988?

 

What a dodge,, you misfired and can't admit it.

MATH claimed there was no reference anywhere to a file...  there is, I posted it that is all.

So, you are wrong.. and make assumptions to justify attacking my motives for posting a fact. 

 

Then, you shift to another subject.. and try your failed argument again.

You claim that we don't have the source file so it can't exist. This isn't a rational argument.

Calame and Rhodes added information beyond Himmelsbach book, how is that, it came from Tina and it was "yellowish" stains on the first two fingers..

MATH said we have only a couple references,, we have FIVE and I think there is at least one more in an interview but gave up looking for it when you two went cray cray...

You need to discredit the facts to support Vordahl and you crossed the line when you tried to discredit me for supporting the evidence..  it is clear. 

There is no discussion here..  you have a narrative, run with it.

[olemisscub 466]

1 minute ago, FLYJACK said:

 

You need to discredit the facts to support Vordahl and you crossed the line when you tried to discredit me for supporting the evidence..  it is clear. 

 

This is literally has NOTHING to do with Milton freaking Vordahl. You know that. I know you do. 

Crossed the line? Dude, you really need to chill out. 

[FLYJACK 654]

Just now, olemisscub said:

This is literally has NOTHING to do with Milton freaking Vordahl. You know that. I know you do. 

Crossed the line? Dude, you really need to chill out. 

You falsely accused me of something nefarious, you had no evidence it was made up in your own paranoia..

and you won't admit it.

All I did was post a fact..  that you didn't like.