FLYJACK

You already said it was all wrong but can't point to a single error. Why, because it contradicts your WFP theory.. We can calculate the NM travelled along the path. We can calculate ground speed based on times. We can compare ground speed to known reported airspeed. We can derive the average wind speed. and we can determine that the plane can't be at 23 DME PDX at/before 20:18, it would have to have travelled too fast.

Yes, it isn't 100% proof but the totality of evidence suggests right handed. Also. cig stains on right hand,, 85% are right handed.. Point is there is no evidence to indicate left handed. and Cooper must have believed the plane could reach Mexico otherwise he would not have made a demand he knew was impossible and would have been rejected.. therefore, it is likely a comms error via Tina relaying the message to the crew. Perhaps he initially wanted flaps down gear down later when stairs were lowered inflight. That changed when Reno was in play... This is the best info for Cooper's initial demand.. The crew's comm's.. First, Cooper wanted airstairs lowered inflight. Initial demand. and the the gear down flaps down is vague... did he want to fly all the way dirty or later when stairs are lowered.. The crew/Tina assumed fly dirty from take off... but he may not have meant that. That assumption, if wrong would mean Cooper's demand to fly to Mexico was achievable and it makes sense. Remember, the demands went through Tina to the crew.

R99 has not responded so I guess he realized he was wrong. I checked with a friend who is a current commercial pilot and he said it is correct, the only additional comment was the curvature of the earth but that is insignificant over short distances. What does it indicate,, For the 10 minutes between 20:05 and 20:15, The ground speed was 188.52 nm, the plane slowed down to about 150 k airspeed. If we assume the average speed in this section was slightly higher at 155 that means Cooper jumped into a 33 knot South wind... Cooper's wind drift would have been about 33 knots toward North at exit,, the variables are time under canopy and wind at lower altitudes. Spangler calculated a drift zone using wind estimates and without transcripts.. IMO, this data indicates Cooper's drift was more Northerly up to 5 nm..

Cooper sat on the right to have the bomb on his right controlled by his dominant hand. He carried the case flat with his right hand,, You carry a case with your dominant hand. It isn't 100% that he was right handed but all evidence supports it, ZERO evidence supports left handed.

Nope, No evidence for that. Evidence is against. He changed his plan.. then he was delayed and never gave any location instructions.. He landed in an unplanned area and would not have had an escape plan for it.

A common question is why did Cooper choose 305 from Portland to Seattle.. I don't believe Cooper was local so there is that caveat. IMO, flight 305 was a good choice for the following... a short flight. a light passenger load. A full plane is harder to manage. a location he was familiar with/had been there before. a flight to a major city with easier access to ransom money. a flight to a location within an hour of a major AFB to obtain parachutes. Front and back chutes is military speak.. Major US AFB bases..

Does anybody know about the use of ties in the military after about 1965... Were they strictly regulated? I have read that some used clipons and even bought their own,,, might depend on branch.. and rank.. job. (obviously not combat soldiers) Could Cooper's Penny's Towncraft clipon have been used in a military environment?? https://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/83572-clip-on-tie/

So, the alligator clip can only grab a man's shirt from the right side.. Whether the wearer is right or left handed. Further, there are two pin holes in the tie, one is very significant meaning that for the life of the tie pre-Norjak, it had a pin. Since you don't wear a pin and a clip that suggests the clip was put on for the hijacking and the pin was removed. Also, if you have a tie with an obvious pin hole you keep using the same hole to hide the damage to the tie, you don't switch to a clasp leaving the significant pin hole damage exposed. Why remove the pin and use the clip for the hijacking.. if it was a company/agency pin you would remove it OR the tie was not worn by Cooper pre-Norjak and the tie was obtained for the hijacking with the pin removed. So, Cooper's tie from about 1965-1971 had a pin, either a company/agency pin and was replaced with the MOP alligator clip for the hijacking. If Cooper owned the tie he removed the pin OR Cooper obtained the tie for the hijacking and added the alligator clip. Further, with an alligator clip it is easier to remove the tie and replace and more robust for a jump. An alligator clip is a better option for a hijacking.

Why ask then? Point is we have enough trouble sorting out evidence, some dummy sticks the clasp on the wrong side of the tie and so it gets used over and over as "false" evidence that Cooper was left handed..

Try Google before you embarrass yourself.

A profile would have been helpful... even 3/4 view. Matches Cooper's lower lip profile.. none of the rest of the image.

"The tie clip, though it has been pictured as being on both the left and right sides of the tie, is believed to have originally been inserted from the left side." When will this nonsense die.. "believed" by who? A photo had the clip on the left side of the tie,, that was somebody putting it back on the wrong side. Men's shirts have buttons on the right, the clip only works from the right side.. It can't clip the shirt from the left side.. unless Cooper wears a woman's shirt. Further, Tom's UV particle image indicates the clip location was on the right,,

Of course it was after the process started.. they initiated the process with the goal of updating AGE and COMPLEXION.. they also wanted to do a profile and standing image. Profile would have been nice. Your argument was that the Cary sketch was based on an error by Farrell, that is false. It was based on input from most witnesses. But we are making progress, you are walking it back from ONLY reason to PRIMARY reason... There were many reasons to revise the sketch.. because Farrell applied Flo's KK5-1 comment to sketch A that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't know she was referring to the first sketch. Flo had selected a facial ID image that she claimed better reflected AGE,, they believed it did vs sketch A and since it differed primarily in AGE, it was perfectly reasonable to use it.. If Flo had never made the initial KK5-1 comment they would have still revised the sketch and used input from witnesses... the sketch B would still exist. BTW, there are few other important things we don't know about the sketch process,, did Rose know about Flo's KK5-1 in the production of sketch A. He must have if she picked it out from the facial catalog, was it used or altered by the stews input?? Did it play any part in the production of sketch A. If it did play a role but the final image came out too young then everything makes sense and your speculation is over.. IMO, Rose must have in some way incorporated it in the sketch A process.. but the final image came out too young.. Would Rose completely ignore Flo's KK5-1 comment?? The FBI did say the primary difference was age.. We don't have proof but this must have happened,, Rose must have had Flo's KK5-1 comment for the production of sketch A.. but the final came out too young.. that is why Farrell mentions it and they use it for sketch B. That is why they said KK5-1 differed from sketch A primarily in AGE. Solved that, no wiggle room. I'll be here all week try the veal. Boomski.. Flo's KK5-1 comment had to be known to Rose while doing sketch A.

This is why you get Sketch B (Cary)... not from Flo... They incorporated ADDITIONAL modifications witnesses suggested during the process of updating AGE and COMPLEXION. The result.. sketch B was more accurate than A..

I didn't just accuse you,, you did it.. every single time. Admit it instead of writing some floundering excuse. You can't write a post without a personal attack...

You said we wouldn't have the "Cary" sketch... yes we would. It wasn't trashed, an initial sketch B was created which was a blend of KK5-1 and A.. That was refined over months of input from witnesses... to the final sketch B in Jan 1973.. Remember, they said the primary difference between KK5-1 and sketch A was age, so KK5-1 is a reasonable starting point.. whether Farrell believed Flo was referring to Sketch A or not... KK5-1 would be a reasonable starting point BECAUSE they believed the primary difference was age. An attribution error by Farrell would be irrelevant. The shape of the lower face is very close between Sketch A and the initial sketch B.

You are making assumptions with no evidence.. The FBI wanted to do AGE and COMPLEXION... Flo's KK5-1 had nothing to do with complexion. CHECKMATE Flo's KK5-1 was not the ONLY reason for the revised sketch. Why is this so hard for you to grasp. KK5-1 was used as the base for sketch B because they thought age was the primary difference from sketch A.

It wasn't a joke,,

The checkmate is that Flo's KK5-1 was about age,, the sketch was redone for age and complexion and others criticized age. It is absolutely clear that the sketch was not ONLY based on Flo's KK5-1 comment.

First , why do you always have to slide in a personal dig.. is it hard wired into your personality. but you are just wrong,,, He posts them on forums, facebook I assume, youtube and his website... maybe his upcoming book? They will be forever on the internet.. It pollutes the perception and influences people... this is just a fact. If he wants to be a credible researcher and author, he should be more careful with the evidence, perhaps a disclaimer on the image.. If he wants to influence people's perceptions then by all means post them everywhere. I have done some photoshopped images for my own research,, if I posted them publicly I'd get trashed for it.

Don't act 12.. Your response to criticism is to post a childish joke.

Essentially we have only two images from the FBI that were used. Those are the evidence.. the photoshops and AI stuff is not. Polluting the public sphere with these concocted things distorts the real evidence.. Photoshop is a useful tool and has a place but credible researchers have a responsibility to preserve the original evidence.. Distorting and diluting the actual evidence is not helpful. IMO, flooding the public space with these distortions is unprofessional and juvenile.

Are you 12 ...

I think you are muddying the waters and polluting public perception with the endless photoshops and AI versions of sketches and images.. We have the original descriptions and sketches created by the actual witnesses. Last I checked you weren't a witness. You are not adding value, you are distorting evidence.

Farrell looked at KK5-1 and sketch A,, the primary difference was age. They knew age was not reflected well.. That is where they started.