Nicholas Broughton

This is a link to a Go Fund Me account being set up for a re-scan of tie particles. Through Tom's goodwill and McCrone Labs' interest in the case, McCrone has agreed to do a re-scan of one of the tie stubs for only $500, which is essentially at cost for microscope time. We are setting up the account for up to $1,500 for the possibility (no guarantees) that McCrone might agree to re-scan an 2 additional stubs in the future at the same cost. A re-scan would provide x-y coordinates with a true "north south" orientation that would allow Tom to look at specific particles of interest more easily and definitively. Thank you for your consideration. update: McCrone has agreed to run a total of four stubs for us at $500 each. https://gofund.me/7a65d011

This is a link to a Go Fund Me account being set up for a re-scan of tie particles. Through Tom's goodwill and McCrone Labs' interest in the case, McCrone has agreed to do a re-scan of one of the tie stubs for only $500, which is essentially at cost for microscope time. We are setting up the account for up to $1,500 for the possibility (no guarantees) that McCrone might agree to re-scan an 2 additional stubs in the future at the same cost. A re-scan would provide x-y coordinates with a true "north south" orientation that would allow Tom to look at specific particles of interest more easily and definitively. Thank you for your consideration. http://This is a link to a Go Fund Me account being set up for a re-scan of tie particles. Through Tom's goodwill and McCrone Labs' interest in the case, McCrone has agreed to do a re-scan of one of the tie stubs for only $500, which is essentially at cost for microscope time. We are setting up the account for up to $1,500 for the possibility (no guarantees) that McCrone might agree to re-scan an 2 additional stubs in the future at the same cost. A re-scan would provide x-y coordinates with a true "north south" orientation that would allow Tom to look at specific particles of interest more easily and definitively. Thank you for your consideration. https://gofund.me/7a65d011

I came across him he was one of the pioneers of the sport along with LC but nothing to connect and a marking on his chin.

Are you back at Elsinore?

She was born in Poland and it’s irrelevant… If WJS was cooper he would of died upon landing.

A contemporary analysis of Max Gunther’s D.B. Cooper: What Really Happened by author Jude Morrow.

Merry Christmas to all my cooperites!

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

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.”

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

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.

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)”

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.