Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 150308 times)

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7083
  • Thanked: 573 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1845 on: April 18, 2019, 05:43:25 PM »
My placard test wasn't really meant to show exactly how the card went straight down. it shows different characteristics. it's very possible tumbling is not the only option. sure it will still drift. how far. I don't know. will it act differently damaged? I'm trying to find out. is it light enough to tumble like the pamphlets released from planes once they exit?

I haven't weighed my cards or thickness. they are thin but might weigh over an ounce. we don't know the actual weight, right? getting it to spiral did call for me to throw it into the air but that's how it was basically introduced going out the back of the plane.

I was 40 feet up and the card tumbled about 125 feet. that should be somewhere around 5 miles. wind was around 7-10 mph.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2019, 07:00:26 PM by Shutter »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1846 on: April 19, 2019, 12:16:47 AM »
For all -

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...

 A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 12:18:02 AM by georger »
 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812

Offline Robert99

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1847 on: April 19, 2019, 12:26:52 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For all -

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...

 A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.

Excellent!  Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found.  The placard and money are facts (data).
 
The following users thanked this post: EU

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 96 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1848 on: April 19, 2019, 01:13:10 AM »
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.

 
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1849 on: April 19, 2019, 02:10:53 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.

I agree, you 'shouldn't have to explain my theory' -  because you have no theory. A theory is based on some data. So where is your "data" ? Numbers and such. Facts.

You may have a weak hypothesis. Otherwise all you have is an idea or a claim or a sermon ... but you have no theory. You apparently dont know what a "theory" requires. The way you throw the word around it could mean anything! Fortunately we have about 4000 years of civilisation to back up what a "theory" is. You arent telling science anything new. Only zealots and crazy people do that, on DB Cooper internet forums!  Just the facts Mam ;)

 
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 03:11:41 AM by georger »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1850 on: April 19, 2019, 02:22:37 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For all -

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...

 A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.

Excellent!  Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found.  The placard and money are facts (data).

And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?

Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.

I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 03:08:33 AM by georger »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7083
  • Thanked: 573 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1851 on: April 19, 2019, 06:43:11 AM »
Quote
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.

Of course one should have to explain a theory. especially when it's based on assumption vs fact. not one thing found after 47 years has been ruled as fact in it's placement. "explaining" is part of theory?

If you feel you don't have to "explain" anything. everyone should be in agreement with your logic?

Here is what you want most to believe as fact vs theory.

The map is wrong based on markings on the map that appear to have no reason. 
The map is wrong based on a card found 7 years after it's exit from an unverified position.
The map is wrong because it flew over a portion of Portland. it appears to have been justified with flying over Seattle, Vancouver and other cities along the path.
The radar data (multiple) was inaccurate (extremely faulty) in the planes location except from Seattle to Toledo, and south of Portland. the radar was again working in perfect condition.
The money was planted on the beach.
The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path. (placard, radar data, pilot testimony?)

How could the above be exempt from explanation, or further review?
 

Offline fcastle866

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1852 on: April 19, 2019, 09:24:01 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.

From EU: "Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."

Part of me is thinking this is getting old, but another part enjoys the fact that we on this group still find things to talk about, so I'm good with seeing this dialogue. 

One comment: If you are in the 1% minority of believers, then I don't see how the other 99% need to explain their theory. It is the prevailing theory.  Are we in a courtroom with EU as the defense attorney and only need to prove reasonable doubt?  I believe you are close to getting there, in terms of reasonable doubt. However, we are not trying to convict here.  One hole in the prosecution's argument in court might be a win for the defense, but finding one slight problem with the flight path or missing comms from the plane does not mean that the prevailing theory is wrong.  And even if it is, it does not mean another theory is correct.  I feel like we are in a statistics class doing hypothesis testing here.  Rejecting the null etc. 

We know where the plane was generally.  What if it did fly over Tina Bar?  So what? What does that mean?  Maybe that he landed in water, therefore increasing his chances of death.  The flight path would have been real useful right when he jumped, and the landing zone as well.  47 years later it does not carry as much weight.  It's interesting, but is it impactful?  Even Himmelsbach said that "following the money" meant to look for people who had a significant change in lifestyle.

Good discussion though, good to see new theories.
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 96 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1853 on: April 19, 2019, 10:24:56 AM »
I like the way that fcastle analyzes this situation. But I think there is a flaw there too.

Whether 99% or 1% subscribe to a certain belief is irrelevant. Just because you're in the 99% crowd does not mean you are immune from justifying a certain belief. After all, as it stands right now we don't know what happened to DB Cooper. And at some point even the 99% need to consider that maybe they're wrong.

I have put forward a theory. I have explained the reason for the theory, the evidence I use, and my methodology. What else can I do? Not theorize at all? Not question that which should be obvious by now: i.e., Something doesn't add up.

An analogy is looking for my car keys. I swear I remember walking in through the garage and placing them on the kitchen counter the last time I drove the car. Yet, after 30 minutes of looking all over the kitchen counter, and on the floor, I cannot find them. 99% seem satisfied with saying, "I remember walking in and placing them on the kitchen counter. And, me being a witness to my own actions lends  credibility to my belief and me." Yet, eventually, after what is now an hour of looking for the damn car keys I'm going to stop and actually ponder the notion that I made a mistake. Perhaps my memory of what happened is wrong based upon what I usually do or because I got distracted or for some other reason. Perhaps, just perhaps, I actually left the keys in the ignition, or in my jeans, or in the office, or threw them in the trash. Yes eventually, even me, a solid 99%er, who knows I left the keys on the kitchen counter, is going to have to ask myself, "Why do I think I left the keys on the kitchen counter? Is it possible I am wrong? Where would I have made the mistake?" After all, I want to find my damn keys.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 10:25:32 AM by EU »
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline fcastle866

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1854 on: April 19, 2019, 11:03:31 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I like the way that fcastle analyzes this situation. But I think there is a flaw there too.

Whether 99% or 1% subscribe to a certain belief is irrelevant. Just because you're in the 99% crowd does not mean you are immune from justifying a certain belief. After all, as it stands right now we don't know what happened to DB Cooper. And at some point even the 99% need to consider that maybe they're wrong.

I have put forward a theory. I have explained the reason for the theory, the evidence I use, and my methodology. What else can I do? Not theorize at all? Not question that which should be obvious by now: i.e., Something doesn't add up.

An analogy is looking for my car keys. I swear I remember walking in through the garage and placing them on the kitchen counter the last time I drove the car. Yet, after 30 minutes of looking all over the kitchen counter, and on the floor, I cannot find them. 99% seem satisfied with saying, "I remember walking in and placing them on the kitchen counter. And, me being a witness to my own actions lends  credibility to my belief and me." Yet, eventually, after what is now an hour of looking for the damn car keys I'm going to stop and actually ponder the notion that I made a mistake. Perhaps my memory of what happened is wrong based upon what I usually do or because I got distracted or for some other reason. Perhaps, just perhaps, I actually left the keys in the ignition, or in my jeans, or in the office, or threw them in the trash. Yes eventually, even me, a solid 99%er, who knows I left the keys on the kitchen counter, is going to have to ask myself, "Why do I think I left the keys on the kitchen counter? Is it possible I am wrong? Where would I have made the mistake?" After all, I want to find my damn keys.

I'm with you on the 99% vs 1% thing, given that the case has not been solved yet.  The 1% could be right.  I personally feel that suspects like Reca, Rackstraw, McCoy are the 1% and have so many non-starters and glaring flaws that it should be those camps that prove to us why they are DB Cooper versus us having to disprove them all the time.  Rackstraw and McCoy were only 28.  We all know the holes in Reca's story.  However, with the flight path, there just does not seem to be glaring flaws or non-starters, therefore the prevailing theory still stands in my mind.  Flyjack has done some good work on the placard in the plane and what it was made of etc, how Cooper might have ripped off the access door.

I've stated before that I never really spent much time thinking about Tena Bar, I was more into the drop zone and how he would have escaped and spent the money.  For us who are into the little details, it would be great to find parts of the briefcase or the money.

I think some of the money went into circulation, and if it were 1971, this group here could find at least one bill. 
 
The following users thanked this post: EU

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 96 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1855 on: April 19, 2019, 12:37:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I'm with you on the 99% vs 1% thing, given that the case has not been solved yet.  The 1% could be right.  I personally feel that suspects like Reca, Rackstraw, McCoy are the 1% and have so many non-starters and glaring flaws that it should be those camps that prove to us why they are DB Cooper versus us having to disprove them all the time.  Rackstraw and McCoy were only 28.  We all know the holes in Reca's story.  However, with the flight path, there just does not seem to be glaring flaws or non-starters, therefore the prevailing theory still stands in my mind.  Flyjack has done some good work on the placard in the plane and what it was made of etc, how Cooper might have ripped off the access door.

I've stated before that I never really spent much time thinking about Tena Bar, I was more into the drop zone and how he would have escaped and spent the money.  For us who are into the little details, it would be great to find parts of the briefcase or the money.

I think some of the money went into circulation, and if it were 1971, this group here could find at least one bill.

Very well said.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1856 on: April 19, 2019, 12:37:55 PM »
The placard was found at:

46°14’38.4″N  122°41’01.3″W

until Elvis plucks his magic twanger on his cell phone and claims another location.

Elvis' numbers are ? _______________________________________________ ?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 01:04:13 PM by georger »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1857 on: April 19, 2019, 01:30:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For all -

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...

 A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.

Excellent!  Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found.  The placard and money are facts (data).

And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?

R99 REPLIES:  You should read those previous publications.  Maybe you could learn something.  Please cite chapter and verse for your comment, "Previously you said that your data could not 'prove' a west path."  I was pointing out flaws in the FBI flight path 10 years ago. 

Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.

R99 REPLIES:  Indeed, stubbornness is not a theory!  And I trust that you are receiving appropriate treatment for your "social-physcological stance" (whatever that is).

I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.

R99 REPLIES:  You need to read the original posts about this on Dropzone.  And they started in early 2009.

R99 replies are given above.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 01:31:35 PM by Robert99 »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1858 on: April 19, 2019, 02:52:44 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For all -

Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...

 A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.

Excellent!  Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found.  The placard and money are facts (data).

And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?

R99 REPLIES:  You should read those previous publications.  Maybe you could learn something.  Please cite chapter and verse for your comment, "Previously you said that your data could not 'prove' a west path."  I was pointing out flaws in the FBI flight path 10 years ago. 

Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.

R99 REPLIES:  Indeed, stubbornness is not a theory!  And I trust that you are receiving appropriate treatment for your "social-physcological stance" (whatever that is).

I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.

R99 REPLIES:  You need to read the original posts about this on Dropzone.  And they started in early 2009.

R99 replies are given above.

Sad. Newton turned to Alchemy too! He never recovered -  :rofl:

Will you have an office at Graceland? How much for an autograph?  :bravo:

Your replacement is Robert M Blevins!
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 03:02:43 PM by georger »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Thanked: 99 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1859 on: April 19, 2019, 03:40:30 PM »
NEW - BASIC - NON CONTROVERSIAL:

What victor did 305 take from PDX to Seattle ? What was the regular route for this flight? Anyone know for sure?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 03:41:58 PM by georger »
 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812