CooperNWO305

Just now, CooperNWO305 said:

For anyone who is “friends” or Facebook friends with this person, this is pure libel. I have made updates in the past to the Wiki entry, but the full entry is based off a news article. The Wiki tree and grave deal are complete falsehoods, and can be proven with subpoenas.  

I stand by what I’ve done. But lies are lies. Thanks to the group member who notified me of this libelous comment. 

For anyone who is “friends” or Facebook friends with this person, this is pure libel. I have made updates in the past to the Wiki entry, but the full entry is based off a news article. The Wiki tree and grave deal are complete falsehoods, and can be proven with subpoenas.  

As promised. Video about the Clara letter. It’s about 45 minutes. The first 30 are about Stylometry and how it refutes the claims that Barb is Clara. The last 15 are on Barb in general. 
 

You should be able to play it at 1.25 or even 1.5 to get through it quicker. 
 

Leaving the Vortex. Might be back someday. I still believe WJS is Cooper. Need two mods for Reddit, neutral people. If you think you should be one, you probably shouldn’t. IM me. Good luck all. 

1 hour ago, DanCooperHimself said:

Agreed! From some chats I’ve had - Benzedrine was passed around like M&Ms at recreational DZs and passed out among the military. The mantra seemed to be, “if Uncle Sam gives it to his men we can have it to”. It didn’t stop a massive cocaine influx when Wee Pablo got a foothold into America in the early 70s. The more vault papers are coming out, the more Agent Tosaw’s book (as Bill refers to him as), is pretty spot on.

It’s awesome if Ryan or someone is in contact with Tina. Huge win. 

Darren's latest podcast.  Some responses here.

Darren seems to have asked some harder questions this time. Good to see.  He seems less married to Barb being Clara now.  He also was skeptical about her traveling to send the letters.  I hope future podcasts have new material and are not just a better version of Facebook Live.  I think we may have just run out of solid material to work with. Good to see Darren maybe back in the Vortex.

Two podcasts in a row Darren and his guests said Vordahl was not close to being Cooper.  That seems to be lost on Nicky.

DNA.  Chris used the term "easy" as in testing the Gunther stamp for DNA.  He must know something I don't know.  Given that I'm the one who had the testing done, I'll elaborate.  You can't just take a stamp and test for STR and SNP at the same time.  Maybe if you had vial of blood to work with, but that is not the way it works.  My focus is SNP testing, not spending my money and time doing one of testing on a suspect like Barb who you guys have now invented a story behind and are adjusting things as you go.  

Also, just because DNA has been extracted does not mean it is in the right form, or that we have enough to go playing around with it.  Think like this. When you go to the doctor and they take blood, they take multiple vials for different tests.  The blood gets used up, just like the DNA.  I'm not using it up on Barb.  Come on.  What a joke.

I recommend that the Dayton team get Barb's DNA in SNP form and get that loaded into GED Match.  If they want to do STR, then go for it.  Don't say "we can do it" do it.  SNP is the best because if it is not Barb (which we know it won't be) or Smith or anyone else, we can still find out who.

If all else fails, I will work the STR angle.  However, if I rule out Smith, Clair, Gunther, etc, then I'm right where EU is if he does an STR profile. I have then test every male's DNA who was alive in 1972.  Yes I have Smith relatives ready to test, but I prefer a male child, which he does not have.

In terms of me not wanting to give the results if it is Barb or someone else.  I get it, I know how Chris operates, I got the backhanded comment. He dropped the underhanded comment that Nicky would tell us if he had exculpatory evidence on Vordahl, like he has some sort of integrity.  We already have plenty that rules him out, but Nicky keeps going.  Vordahl used hair gel in high school, was on the rifle team, wrote a few letters to the newspaper (that's what people did back then, now they tweet and use Facebook), etc. etc.  You threw a softball question at him at CC and set it up that he was a good guy for coming off Klansnic because of the blue eyes and mole. Nicky came off Klansnic just like he came off Rackstraw, to go to a new suspect.  A guy that fakes being a nurse to catfish someone is not someone who would normally rate the word integrity.  Nicky's whole life in the Vortex for the past few months has been discrediting Smith and Gunther.  He's got some followers, but luckily you guys spend most of your time talking about other things.  At least you stand for something.  But I get it, you guys are now all friendly with Smith's daughter and in contact and Nicky is the mascot of the group, nice to everyone. Like Eddie Haskell. I think he's just an internet troll. We have a few of those.

I'm not dropping Smith.  I was ready before CC to slow down, but given the ridiculous rebuttals from that camp, I am pushing ahead in earnest.  I don't need the Vortex to give approval on my approach, what matters is what the DNA shows, what the FBI, IRS, and Treasury think, and what the public thinks, to include the media, not the echo chamber in the group. I offered to address things one on one behind the scenes, but all bets are off now.

As for people willing to pay for DNA testing.  Right now the bill is $3000.  That will continue to go up. So if you want to take a dent out of things, hit me up offline.  A $20 donation is not going to cut it.  The technology is advancing, I have a number of options, but some will take time, and may involve me going out of the country to get done.

Chris claimed that EU can only get STR and not SNP data.  False.  EU may only be trying to get STR.  However, even with three profiles, it is technically possible.  However, this costs money, and may require advancements in technology, not to mention getting around a lot of rules/laws/procedures.

Good to see you are still on the money theory that it landed and then got washed into a flood. I'm ok with that.  It's odd that you take Marty's analysis as gospel, but not Tom's diatom research.

Peer reviews are done before you present evidence. Not after.  Who do you have in mind for peer reviews? I've been in contact with the creator of the Signature program, does that count?

Nice lovefest too.  Half the podcast was telling us how great certain people in the Vortex are.  The buddy buddy social club you guys have makes it so no one ever questions anything.  I get it, some people are smart, some people are good guys.  Let's talk data and reality.  You used to stand for neutrality and critical thinking, what happened?

Had to throw in the anti EU stuff too.  Calling out Vince Peterson.  I know EU does not check here or waste is time with podcasts, oh well.  Your group is clearly anti-EU, yet he is the one getting publicity for the case.

And last but not least, you called for peer review on the Barb letters, but continued to say multiple times how you think the analysis is good and is accurate.  FYI, it's dead in the water.  I'll get a video out on it, or a paper.  I just would like to know once it's debunked, will people go back to saying Gunther made it up?  Will Marty go back to thinking LeClair is Cooper? My guess is people will keep pushing Barb, and slink away from the letters, or all of a sudden agree that there are multiple issues with the analysis.

I like Marty's approach.  I'm in a STEM field, and appreciate how he thinks.  His mistake was letting the Vortex push him into putting something out that was not ready for primetime.  I'd reccomend in the future to vett something like that through someone like Georger, or Flyjack, or Tom Kaye. I'd say me too, but I get it, people wanted to use it to discredit Smith.

Hint, doing some Google searches should tell you the sample size is too small, regardelss of if it is in Polish or English.  Fun fact, posts on DZ and the Cooper Forum are not too short in aggregate.  I did some fun testing and did find a perfect match for two posters on the old Cooper Forum.  Multiple screen names with many posts.

I'll get my video out soon, I hope.

On 3/13/2024 at 6:07 AM, JAGdb said:

Full disclosure, I have no background in the discipline of Stylometry. 

But my immediate take on this topic is that the sample size is too small.  Could comparing one small letter be enough to draw the conclusions that were being made?  Questions popping into my head like if you took 100 or 1000 other comparable sized control letters and compared them to the same group of Barb's letters, would you get any other similar results i.e. 97% certainty.  Other questions I have are more generic to Stylometry and false positive statistics?  How does it compare to a DNA match which is typically 99% accurate ?  What are the odds of two people writing in a similar way both structurally and using a similar vocabulary catalog ?

I think more work needs to be done to validate the initial test.

One of the things I missed in the Youtube video, was how or why Barb Dayton became the target of the Stylometry exercise in the first place.  I am going to go back and watch it again.

On the percentages, if DNA is 99%, then there is no way Stylometry can be even close. Even in the Unabomber case which was more forensic linguistics as a whole versus the subset of Stylometry, they still needed a warrant once they had the analysis. The forensic linguistics helped get the warrant, but it took a lot more to solve the case. 
 

I’ll get into it later, but hypothesis testing is not proof per se like a blood test or DNA would be or a measurement of chemical makeup in a product. 
 

The 97% although understood by us in the statistics field, and those with schooling like Marty, has been misunderstood or misappropriated by others here in this situation. 97% would indicate something you would bet your whole pot in poker on. 

For those who listened to the Barb/Clara podcast. I’m curious to get your impression of what 97% match means. Marty has already explained, but I’d like to get other impressions. Do you compare it to something like a .970 batting average or 97% free throw percentage or 97% chance that a King high straight flush will win on the river  Kind of in your own words.

The DZ group for all its disagreement, does seem to have the most concentrated group of more experienced/educated etc. individuals. Higher ed is represented here, and even if not, there are mostly bright people here, even if we don’t all like eachother. And a good amount of you are not on the FB group. 

18 hours ago, georger said:

I havent followed the evolution of linguistic computer programming but of course its been part of the whole computer revolution in data analysis since the 60s, in every area of science. My old colleague William P Gibson (a programmer) would be proud and very pleased. Bill was a mathematician by trade. One of Bill's concerns  was 'when computers begin talking to each other the dialogue will move beyond human comprehension quickly! Then where do we go from there?' I miss Bill every day. He would have loved the dialogue that is happening here lately - - -     

Georger. I vaguely remember you had some connection to linguistics along with your math background. This stylometry is basically part of forensic linguistics. Your input would be interesting. 

6 hours ago, DanCooperHimself said:

I appreciate this Dave. So I’m on a Vortex right of passage where I’ve ran my mouth excitedly and been brought back a peg or two today in terms of these letters. 
 

One of the coding people I use for app content checks (no real experience in forensic stylometry but handy with code) said that the match is enough to “prosecute but not convict”. What we use is R, because it can be adapted to suit our content, scheduler, plagiarism checks, embedding of videos/fillable activities and so on.
 

Needs further analysis perhaps from software not available to the gen pop to get a totally rock solid definitive answer. It gives a good indicator, it gives a strong direction, but not necessarily a 100% answer. 
 

It’s still a remarkable find that Barbs writing can be matched to the Clara letter, but even as a small chance - it could still technically be matched to someone else (remote possibility but not nil). 
 

Very encouraging, but not enough to say BEYOND all reasonable doubt that Barb authored the letters. Signature is a good software to give indication for sure, but not enough to state authorship as a resolute fact. 
 

What would be needed - at least 3/4 stylometric detection softwares (very expensive to buy, expensive to get a forensic coder to configure them as it’s very niche) at least 3 or 4 other samples of Barbs writings and then a compatible made against all the tests. 
 

So there we go. A step in a direction and a viable opening of a line of enquiry, but the end result after an extensive test can still rule Barb out, even at a small possibility. 

R is what I work with. I’ve seen some amazing things done with it, and I can’t hold a candle to some of the people I work with. 

14 hours ago, Chaucer said:

Right. And has been pointed out, the age of the program is essentially meaningless considering its necessity. Also, word use is meaningless in this regard as well. That's not how stylometry works. It's not just about WHAT words are used, but HOW. It's phrasing, construction, and convention. It's linguistic style. 

The more I look into this, the more I'm convinced the original conclusion was right. 

Where did you come up with the belief that word use is not relevant in Stylometry, and that’s not how Stylometry works? Why is word use meaningless?  Also curious to hear more details about why a 20 year old program is as good as say one updated recently? 
 

Did I say somewhere that word count was the only part of stylometry?

8 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Fair point there. But I'm just saying that this apparent 97% match being tied to a known Cooper bullshitter from that era has me intrigued and questioning my own belief that it was complete fiction. 

Ok. Makes sense. I’m less impressed with the 97%, just given my experience. However, I am excited to interact with everything and see how people interact with things too. I was up late watching YouTube videos on coding and programming to help dust some cobwebs off before I fire up the more complex programs to look at these letters. I should have been at a bar. :). 
 

I’m trying to understand if the comments here are in reference to just the Signature program or Stylometry as a whole. As in, if Stylo works, does that mean Signature works? I’m sensing that the Signature results are being looked at as gospel. That seems unusual given the education and experience level of this group. 
 

I’ll put old differences aside and continue to see how this plays out. Jude and Chris both have unique backgrounds and experiences and I am interested to see what they learn. Jude has an app and Chris is a professor. Both will have access to people who can evaluate the letters. 
 

I definitely want to understand Marty’s steps. I have the program downloaded and running. It’s pretty quick and simple. I just want to duplicate what he did. 

6 hours ago, olemisscub said:

I guess that’s where I’m somewhat intrigued by it. It’s a 97% match to a person who is already a known DB Cooper bullshitter. 

As someone who thinks Gunther probably made it up, do you really believe it is a 97% match? Programs are wrong. Data input can be wrong, mistakes are made. The program interprets input. I’ve already identified a major mistake in input, and I’ll get more into it when I reply to Chaucer. 
 

Eric was 98% sure that Sheridan is Cooper. Granted he did not use a program. 
 

The Signature program does not come out and say “these two letters are a 97% match”. Statistics are more than that. It takes interpretation. 
 

I’m good to see this simmer and see what ideas people come up with. 
 

This is a field that I work in, and I’ve seen so many incidents of people making mistakes and assumptions. Good, honest people. Myself included. It happens. 
 

When analyzing data it is vital to understand context and to still do a smell test. Looking at both letters will tell you they are different. 
 

7 hours ago, olemisscub said:

The Forman’s wrote the book 20 years after discussing this with Barb. Maybe they are misremembering what Barb said. Perhaps she actually said that she jumped near Woodland and they misremembered it as Woodburn.

Check out page 53-54 in the book. It’s clear that it was Woodburn. They mention Aurora and there is a map. They also visit the spot later in the book. 
 

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Not me! I'm still leaning toward complete fiction. 

I do have a question though. This is what makes me scratch my head the hardest when it comes to Gunther researchers, with you and Marty being the top two. Gunther says Clara never gave him Cooper's real name. Gunther wrote that he just calls him "Dan LeClair" because he has French-Canadian background. So why did you guys seek out connections based on a name that the author admits is fictional? Even if Clara DID give Gunther the real name of Cooper, there's no way Gunther would have just thrown the real name out there nor does it seem like he'd supply a name that was close to Cooper's real name. So shouldn't Dan LeClair/Dan Clare, etc., be a complete non-starter. 

So to research anything concerning Dan LeClair must mean that you think two things: 1. Clara actually gave Gunther Cooper's real name (why in the hell would she do that?), and 2. Gunther decided to publish the real name or something extraordinarily similar to it (and why the hell would he do that?). 

Am I wrong? 

I can see the logic. Whether true or not, I suspected that the caller/writer wanted to tell someone of the crime. He could not do it in a public way and give all the true info. So he brags to Gunther. He gives a name that is close to someone he knows well and uses much of that guy’s life as his own. This is very common in novels. I just got done with a great John Grisham book and he writes how it was loosely based on a real story, at least parts. Lee Child does it. Michael Connelly. It happens. We write about what we know. Now maybe Gunther knew a LeClair. It just seemed odd that there was a Dan Clair in the military records who was born in Canada and moved to Newark and joined the Army. And that his wife shared the same birthday with Clara. And the guy was born like 60 miles from the real LeClair’s birthplace. Canada is a big country. 
 

That was my logic. Marty helped with the military records when I was still learning the Ancestry interface. 
 

His notes to Ralph could be edited. He may have more notes. In the Ralph notes the name is Collins. LeClair is not really that common of a name. The notes don’t match up exactly with the book. Someone could probably list those out. Like in the notes it’s Gettysburg college and in the book it’s Rutgers. 
 

Someone can say it’s not Dan Clair. Ok. I’ve made my points and it’s not worth debating anymore. But if someone says people don’t make up stories using people they know, I’ll call BS on them. 
 

I can see how there is debate. I’ve stated in the past that one scenario is that Gunther made it up, or at least parts. But I’m finding that harder and harder to believe. 
 

I still like the approach that some folks are taking to look at records and try to find out who these people were. In 1972 and 1982, no one dreamed that the internet would make all of this easy to find. Or sort of easy. 
 

Edit. Of note. All the info came from Clara for the most part. I don’t think if Cooper had jumped that Clara would have seen the chute. I can’t see him carrying it. It’s a simple mistake to think the captain came back to talk to Cooper. Cooper did talk to the cockpit. To me, those are weak ways to discount the whole book. 

Just now, CooperNWO305 said:

It looks like it was Ron who came up with the idea that Barb was Cooper. 

1 hour ago, georger said:

I disagree. On its face we have a person having an Identity crisis, which is real. People in that condition do a lot of testing out of different roles. She/he tells the Formans she is Cooper, whether or not she is. If the Formans are being truthful and complete in their statements, then Bob Dayton attached himself/herself to the Cooper hijacking for some reason. Its less likely Dayton will claim to have been Einstein or Moses or Eisenhower! Dayton picks an unprovable  by way of claiming personality traits-identity Dayton wants to have poeople think she is associated with. The Formans have no way of proving anything! Dayton might as well stand up in some church and claim she is Jesus. But Dayton will not do that - her confession is only private made in a safe environment where they cant be any consequences that matter. Dayton's identity formation is incomplete. But Dayton is also going some distance making extraordinary claims with her friends and supporters! There is no instance of Dayton going to the FBI and confessing she/he is Cooper! That would have consequences and leave a record. But, Dayton is making extraordinary claims ... probably to a variety of people ... for some reason related to an identity crisis. Did Dayton ever recant her claim to the Formans?   If so when? It would not be out of place for this person to contact some author who has no way of knowing who or where she is - then letting the whole matter go before any real consequences can materialise!  

It looks like it was Ron who came up with the idea that Barb was Cooper. 

1 hour ago, Cola said:

That is a good visual - but in my book that item alone does not hold a candle to Marty's overall contributions to the Vortex.

For me, I don't require a spreadsheet or any fancy programs to "know" that Barb's not Cooper. Mentally I can do the math on that candidate and it doesn't add up to our guy.

I find it fun to ask myself often WWCT of all this?

 

 

 

 

It sounds like there might be some confusion. As much as we all disagree about things in the Vortex, I don’t think any of us believe Barb was Cooper. There may be one or two outside the Formans. This all has to do with whether or not she is Clara. 
 

For all the people who were convinced that Max made the whole thing up, they sure did change their minds quickly. 

Comparison of word use between the Clara and Barb letters. 

15 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

???

You talk about the need for a different program besides Signature. I AGREE with you and share some for you and others to use. 

Then you take some kind of passive aggressive dig at me? Why? Haven't we moved on from the days when the Vortex was nothing but agendas and vendettas and petty jabs? 

You see, This is the problem. In your post, you made good points. There ARE questions about sample size. There IS a question about the reliability of older programs vs. new ones. There IS a need for peer review.

Then you go and make it personal and undermine your own argument talking about some ridiculous "Cabal" and taking shots at me for something that I said weeks ago - things that are true by the way.

Look, none of this is personal. Critiquing WJS is not a personal attack on you. Questioning Gunther is not some kind of conspiracy to ruin you. Discussing the idea that Barb was Clara is not some kind of personal affront directed at you. Suggesting such makes you look like a hypocrite who can dish it out but can't take it. You want to be able to "call people out" and "speak the truth", but when people disagree with then it's some conspiracy to discredit your work on WJS? C'mon...not every discussion is an argument. Not every debate is a fight. 

Worse, making this personal clouds your understanding of who is an ally and who isn't. My post was intended to HELP you and create space for further investigation into this, and somehow you thought I was piling on and attacked me for it.

When you see enemies behind every tree, the forest becomes a dark, lonely, scary place. 

Chaucer: I've been waiting for you to gaslight, and you did.  That's your MO.  I know how you argue.  You are trained in logic, and I find that approach from you to be pretty legit, but not gaslighting. Get a new line, you are using classic gaslighting to make it look like I'm crazy.  You've done this with Fly too.

I did not find the post helpful.  Why would you suggest an article on stylometry to me that I quoted in my post on stylometry?  I just got done telling you that I've researched it, and you can insinuate from my post that I did some current searches too.  I just told everyone what programs to use.  Nice try.  Whether you meant it or not, it comes across as you thinking there is a simple way to do this.  There isn't.  But I think you should try.  

7 hours ago, DanCooperHimself said:

Couple of questions.

What agenda do you think I have? I don’t have “a guy” I have always been in the dead camp. Anyone alive after 24/11/71 was a no from me and this has never changed.

Why do I have no business talking about this? What more right do you have to be here than anyone else?

When it comes to me being a self-proclaimed novelist il put this to you and as a military man I’m sure you will appreciate it, how about we compare resumes and il flip you for it? 

I'll answer.  You're deflecting from the question by making it seem that because you don't have a suspect that it means you don't have an agenda.  Nice try.  You do have an agenda and you've had one for a while.  Didn't you do a video that essentially claimed Gunther made up the whole thing, yet now you quickly come back saying that Barb was Clara, and instead of focusing on that, you made sure to tell us that her being Clara disqualifies Smith. You failed.

Unless you can show me some background in stylometry or programming, I still say you have no business talking about it.  Did you do the analysis on the plagarism? What program was used? As usual, you insert yourself unnecesarily.  You jumped the gun and now you and others have egg on their face.  You used Marty's good heart and tried to take advantage of it along with others.  You're using emotion here, trying to make it look like you're being bullied.  You're not, I never said you don't have a right to be here. So that's two for two where you have used a different question than the one I asked.

Three for three.  When did I ever say I am a novelist?  I'll save you the coin flip, I'm not.  I said you are a self proclaimed novelist.  Ernest Hemingway is a novelist, John Steinbeck is a novelist, Stephen King, etc.  You are clearly different.

You've made it clear that you don't like me, you've told a number of people that.  That makes you biased.  You've targeted my research on Gunther and Smith and have now come out looking foolish.  No need to reply, I thought I had you on mute anyhow.

24 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Here is a list of free downloadable stylometry programs in case you wish to run the analysis again with a different one:

https://guides.temple.edu/stylometryfordh/programs

Download those Chaucer and let me know what you come up with.  We have one Clara letter that is 200 words, you're better off doing a visual comparison.  Clara could type and spell, it does not look like Barb was too good at it.  But next I'm sure someone will say that Barb dictated to someone.

Have at it.  That is one of the sites I quoted from. It lists three programs, and just because you can download does not mean someone knows how to use these.  One is Signature, which we've already determined is suspect.  The second is JGAAP which has not been updated since 2013.  It takes some training to use Java, but it is not as widely used anymore.  Data scientists have graduated to R and Python and other coding platforms.  The third one mentioned is R Stylo.  Good luck learning that one It takes time. I've taken courses in R, and have used R Stylo.

The Formans are some of the nicest people in the Vortex, and that is probably why people give them leeway on the Barb story.  If someone reads the book, believe me they would not be investing time in Barb for anything.  It's a fun story and gets viewers, that's it.  They want her to be Clara as much as they want her to be Cooper.

Let me know if disagreeing with Barb is making fun of a trans person like you claimed I was doing with women, an autistic guy, and an admin for Facebook when I disagreed with them and called them out.

Posted on FB.  Putting it here for you guys not on there.

Well, as usual the Vortex has jumped to conclusions, jumped on the bandwagon, and got overly excited about something that for all practical purposes is wrong.  I’m referring to the recent podcast that makes an overly optimistic claim that Barb Dayton was Max Gunther’s Clara/Dan LeClair and used a concept called stylometry to “prove” it. The Vortex leaks like a sieve, and although people like to talk about how they trust each other, there is not much trust, as I had an idea of what was coming, it’s not that hard to figure out.  I’d like to say I expected something better from the Vortex, but I’ve been too de-sensitized by things now.  DNA is about the only thing left worth talking about.

I admit that I waited a little bit to see who would chime in, and I was no disappointed, as the usual suspects made sure to quickly jump on the bandwagon and criticize what they do not know about and are not educated about.  Most of you in the Vortex are not part of this, so don’t take it personally. However, I can say with confidence that most of the people in the group have never heard of stylometry before this week.  I have, I’ve used it.  Even four years ago on the DZ I brought it up.

This is a long post.  Some of it is more staccato than harmony, but I’ll try to clean things up a bit when I write the paper.  Some of these are just bulleted thoughts.  Directions to a file with the Barb and Clara letters are at the end.  Due to some of the complexity of explaining things, I will summarize here and then do a paper with more details.

I want to say that Martin and Darren have always acted in a neutral fashion and this post is meant to be critical of their process and not critical of the individuals. Although, I do have criticism for a number of other individuals.  Darren has been criticized in the past for asking softball questions, and I do think he could have dug deeper into questions on this podcast.  I think Martin and Darren’s hearts are in the right place, as are the Formans. In the end, I think a group of the usual suspects pounced on Martin’s work and attempted to use it to advance their own agenda.

I was hoping that more people would ask some of the basic questions before jumping to conclusions, such as quality of the software program, age of the program, peer review, skill level with current software programs, awareness of available software, recent course work, and continuing education.  Martin and I have talked many times, he is smart and is educated, however I do think this current work needs more peer reviews.  Something of this “magnitude” should have been peer reviewed in advance, and not by a lawyer (Ryan) and a self-proclaimed novelist (Jude).  Jude has clearly demonstrated bias in the past, and I was hoping as a lawyer, Ryan would have asked some harder questions, I know he would have if he was defending a client.

A few people have made some comments questioning this podcast/use of stylometry, and a few have messaged me, but for the most part it seems like people have just taken what they’ve been told and parroted it.  I frankly am not surprised given how people have jumped on the bandwagon on Rackstraw, McCoy, Boeing, RMI, Tektronix, RemCru, Vordahl, and most recently John L’s suspect.  Group think is alive and well in the Vortex. 

Over 4 years ago I mentioned stylometry on the DZ, but I had actually started to research it as early as 2018 and was introduced to the tools that I used as early as 2012.  I’ve used the program to analyze the Cooper Forum posts to see who might be double posting, I was completely underwhelmed by the Signature program and needed to use other methods to identify who I believed to be a couple of people over the years who had double posted or had posted on other sites.

Signature is the name of the program Martin used.  It came out in 2003 and has not been updated since.  That is 21 years ago. People were using flip phones when this came out.  A Temple University article states “There is no evidence of Signature 2.0 coming out, so this is likely not a sustainable platform.”  It is good for a classroom as a concept but not great in practice.

There are actually much better programs out there like R and Python.  Those take skills to learn and actual use to stay relevant.  I’m trained in both of those of programming languages, but more importantly, I have access to peers who teach those programs and some who are PhDs who are much better at it than me.   R and Python are the best for data science and research. I’ve reached out to peers, PhDs, linguists, etc.  Some to get their overall thoughts on these letters, some to discuss using current software and programming like R and Python to analyze the letters.  The early response is that the letters are just too short.

Nicky and the others have thrown out terms like 97% accurate and that controls were used. Fancy terms, but garbage in garbage out, the letter loaded was a corrected version, not the original one with spelling errors.  The letters are too short.  Normally stylometry is used for books and long passages.  If something is 97% accurate, I expect to be able to bet my life on it.  Whenever I hear the term “statistically significant” I think of someone trying to pull the wool over my eyes. Yes, I’ve been schooled in statistics, but statistically significant is not the same as practical significance.  The letters are clearly from different people.

My job title in the Army is “Operations Research and Systems Analyst”, ORSA for short.  A short blurb on this describes the career field well: “ORSA officers use analytic methods and mathematically based procedures to enable leadership decisions in a constantly changing global environment. The ORSAs introduce quantitative analysis to the military decision-making processes by developing and applying probability models, statistical inference, simulations, optimization and economics models.”  The most important thing is that I work everyday with ORSAs software engineers, data analysts, etc.  I have a great network to pull from, even if I can’t do the work myself.

Eric actually asked Nicky, and Nicky clearly admitted that he does not know about Stylometry.  He called it AI, which is not true, it is not AI.  Jude has made his usual fantastic claims on the DZ inserting himself into things he really has no business talking about.  These were the two guys among others who were claiming Gunther made the whole thing up.  Nicky clearly is parroting what he hears and has no concept of the underlying data, themes, software, or application. He constantly changes suspects and stances, and has created a maze for himself that he will never get out of.

I’ve worked with Martin Andrade for many years, and he was one of the first people I talked to in the case. So, I don’t want this to come across as critical of him as a person.  He has integrity.  However, I do think that there is a group out there that enjoys bashing William Smith and my research, and this group seems to overlap with the Anti Eric Ulis group, they are the same people. I call it the anti-EU faction, the best term I’ve heard is The Cabal. That makes me laugh.  I’m glad to be lumped in with Eric, I don’t always agree with him, but he does stand up for what he believes. I was happy to see him ask Nicky the hard questions last night.

I’m open to evaluating letters from William Smith and his wife.  Although I’m sure the family will not provide those, no more than they have been able to provide pictures of Smith from the 1970s.  That is a different item, and I continue to do my research on that.  William Smith continues to be a very viable and interesting person.  Even if Smith is proven to not have written the letters, he still stands alone as a good POI given his background.

So:  What does this mean?  Well, Barb is not Clara. Barb has zero connection to the book. Zero.  And frankly this is a ridiculous claim.  The letters were postmarked New York City, she has no connection there.  One editor was told to take a call at a phone booth in the PanAm Building in NYC, not something Barb would have been able to know about.   I can’t see Max thinking Clara was a completely different person than LeClair and how he would be fooled by a man who became a woman.  Also, why would Barb tell everyone she was Cooper and not tell them she was LeClair and Clara?  The list goes on and on.  So, she read Max Gunther, so did a lot of people.  Of course, LeClair would contact editors in the New York area, he was from the area.  Barb was in the Northwest when this was going down.

Next steps: I am in the process of doing a deeper analysis on the letters to prove they are from different people, but anyone can see just by looking at the letters.  Even using basic Microsoft Word for readability statistics will tell you the letters are different. 

There are two letters in the Gunther book from LeClair, one letter from Clara.  There are three letters in the Forman book from Barb.  I plan to look into all of those.  However, it is clear that Barb is a completely different writer than LeClair and Clara.

Nicky continues to be the spokesperson for the anti-Gunther and anti-Smith group and has focused all his efforts on discounting William Smith.  No one seems to be asking him any questions about this.  That would take integrity to do so. 

This recent news is not groundbreaking as Nicky stated, and it did not break the Vortex, and it is not the best of Darren’s podcasts. Darren has had over 70 podcasts since 2018, there are many ones that are better.

Ryan stated that stylometry has been used in court. I agree, it has.  However, this set would not be used in court based off such short letters.

I’ve heard it compared to the Unabomber manifesto.  That manifesto was 35,000 words, the Clara letter is about 200.  Also, the Unabomber manifesto was read by Ted Kaczynski’s brother (after his wife), and they had a similar sized paper to compare it to.  Those were almost exactly alike.  The Barb/Clara letters are so very different.

Some will say that this is Facebook, and we are just hobbyists.  However, I think this group is different. This is not a group that meets to discuss flat earth, it is legitimate, and it ruins it for all of us when we tolerate trolls, or when we act like a bunch of school children jumping on the latest fad.

If you want to see the letters, go to my site www.dbcooperhijack.com and go to FILES and you’ll see NEW: Clara-Barb Letters.  Enjoy.

11 hours ago, ParrotheadVol said:

But they only "found" a chute, not the chute. Surely to God they realize that.

I'm not sure what to think about any of this. Something has moved the needle with the FBI and I can't imagine the Dan Gryder bullshit was enough to do that. I liked the first video he did, by the way. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Didn't buy any of it, but I enjoyed it. The next one not so much. That chute discovery was a bit hokey. I find today's WWE to be more believable.

If they have managed to acquire a better DNA sample than what they had used years ago, I don't see that coming from the tie. The cut parachute lines perhaps? A recently found hair slide perhaps? I suppose it's good news that the FBI is at least showing some level of renewed interest. Hopefully it doesn't start and end with McCoy.

It would be great if the FBI tested the spindle or the lines. I can see them doing the spindle because of all the press, but the lines discussion was mainly within the Vortex, and I wonder if the FBI would have gotten word that DNA would be on the lines where Cooper held to make his cuts. It would be amazing if they did find that slide through OleMiss’s FOIA. 
 

It is odd that Rick McCoy gave his DNA. I hope that is due to new testing. 
 

Here is my issue. If the FBI has new DNA and they do the old STR testing, then we are reliant on sending in a suspect’s DNA or their family member’s. This is essentially a needle in a haystack approach. We basically have to find a suspect within the male population and right age range and hope they are the guy. Unless we are very lucky and actually have the guy, this just may never get us anywhere, unless by some stroke of luck he’s in CODIS. I bet Cooper is not in CODIS. 

It would be good if they do the SNP testing and then they can load it into the genealogy databases. I don’t know of any non murder or rape cases that have used SNP yet, but this was a violent crime and should qualify. 
 

The DNA is all great, but if it is not Cooper’s DNA then we have to hope the DNA is someone he knew and at least gives us a person and a location.

I can see the tie not being his, but given there may have been a tie pin with a logo removed, that would indicate to me that maybe he felt the tie could identify him.

I remain a little skeptical that Gryder’s YouTube  or Eric’s lawsuit are the reason for this activity.  I hope I’m wrong.

Some good conversation on the DNA over on Facebook for those who haven’t looked. Richard McCoy’s son weighed in. It seems that he gave the FBI his DNA, why they asked is still speculation though. It could be because Dan Gryder “found” that parachute and that was the catalyst to move to the next step. The FBI has always said they would consider things if someone found a chute or a $20.