You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Georger,

Now that you will have some spare time, you can wipe the egg off your face concerning the placard.  But you could at least give a hint as to what your aeronautical qualifications are.  You do have some, don't you?

No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.

I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go!    I see no point in beating a dead horse.

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything!        

*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.

Georger,

I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work".  I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing.  So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it.  I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever.  So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.

EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem.  But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead.  EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct.  In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.

If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit.  I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.

Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications.  Your modesty is overwhelming.

Submit your west path analysis, or, your analysis of the FBI/NWA/USAF search path map - to an accredited peer review journal in your field. Pending the outcome you may get 'standing' to make further requests in the DB Cooper case.

Or, take whatever standing you have and go to Court, maybe? Consult an attorney.

You could have done this years ago! 

Otherwise you are whistling Dixie in your bath water.

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

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate.

How utterly tone deaf and narcissistic. To think that you or anyone else thinks that they get to decide whether the Western Flight Path gets "accepted" or is accurate.

There is only one "real" flight path whether people agree or not. The true flight path, whatever it may be, is not less true because it doesn't pass a popularity contest.

R99 and I largely concur on a Western Flight Path. We're either right or wrong.

Who cares whether you agree or not? It's meaningless.

I'm very comfortable with the science and analysis on our end that calls into question the veracity of the FBI Flight Path and points toward the Western Flight Path. Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.

Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.

Trust you?  That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably.     

R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes?  R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!   

It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. 

Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.

 

The above is just more baloney from Georger.  For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path.  And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them.  The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not.  They simply select sides.

Ah, the perils of peer review in forums and bars.  The stories of barking dogs!

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

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate.

How utterly tone deaf and narcissistic. To think that you or anyone else thinks that they get to decide whether the Western Flight Path gets "accepted" or is accurate.

There is only one "real" flight path whether people agree or not. The true flight path, whatever it may be, is not less true because it doesn't pass a popularity contest.

R99 and I largely concur on a Western Flight Path. We're either right or wrong.

Who cares whether you agree or not? It's meaningless.

I'm very comfortable with the science and analysis on our end that calls into question the veracity of the FBI Flight Path and points toward the Western Flight Path. Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.

Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.

Trust you?  That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably.     

R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes?  R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!   

It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. 

Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.

 

The above is just more baloney from Georger.  For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path.  And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them.  The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not.  They simply select sides.

ADDENDUM:  The same goes for Georger's post #2730 above.  And #2732 below.

So - why didn't you go for peer review right from the start - clear back when Sluggo posted your material on his website? You start by submitting your material not to some website on DB Cooper, but to a peer review journal in your field, and see if it gets accepted for publication. Acceptance for publication means that some group of peers see merit in the work, enough for public exposure and discussion. Try JSTOR! 

Of course all of that takes time and planning and a lead time. I guess you and Ulis are in a hurry? You want immediate acceptance like: 'Aint Nothin But a Hound Dog' which went viral?

That aside, a number of people have noted that your initial basis for a west path begins with a series of assumptions at the Toledo Intersection vs. actual data. Your claim for 305 taking a straight path from Toledo to Canby is not 'data' but 'preference'. Your preference! You have stated your preference in several similar statements: (a) that is what I would do, (b) that is what pilots would do, (c) that is what pilots wishing to avoid PDX with a bomb on board would do, . . . and the like. Your west path claim begins with this assumption, then you try to make things fit by analysing and manipulating data. Then you are forced to bring in the placard position. Your placard analysis then claims to prove '305 flew a straight path between Toledo and Canby, right over Tena Bar which then explains why money was found on Tena Bar (you say).

It all goes back to the original assumption you have made at Toledo. 'That is the path I would take, or good pilots would chose that route, etc etc...'

A simple question to the pilots might have solved this issue: "Did you fly a straight line between Toledo and Canby to avoid PDX and Portland because you had a bomb on board?"  Yes or No.   
 

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

Georger,

Now that you will have some spare time, you can wipe the egg off your face concerning the placard.  But you could at least give a hint as to what your aeronautical qualifications are.  You do have some, don't you?

No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.

I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go!    I see no point in beating a dead horse.

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything!        

*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.

Georger,

I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work".  I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing.  So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it.  I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever.  So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.

EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem.  But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead.  EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct.  In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.

If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit.  I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.

Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications.  Your modesty is overwhelming.

It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ !  However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !

Kermit,

I don't know what your math skills are but here is something that I am sure you will be able to explain. 

How could the airliner travel 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles in the very next minute while flying at a constant airspeed?  That is just one problem with the FBI flight path but please explain how this could happen.

I understand that Georger is a peer reviewer for JSTOR so I am sure he will be able to help you get a paper published there.

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

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Georger,

Now that you will have some spare time, you can wipe the egg off your face concerning the placard.  But you could at least give a hint as to what your aeronautical qualifications are.  You do have some, don't you?

No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.

I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go!    I see no point in beating a dead horse.

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything!        

*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.

Georger,

I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work".  I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing.  So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it.  I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever.  So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.

EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem.  But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead.  EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct.  In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.

If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit.  I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.

Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications.  Your modesty is overwhelming.

It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ !  However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !

Kermit,

I don't know what your math skills are but here is something that I am sure you will be able to explain. 

How could the airliner travel 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles in the very next minute while flying at a constant airspeed?  That is just one problem with the FBI flight path but please explain how this could happen.

I understand that Georger is a peer reviewer for JSTOR so I am sure he will be able to help you get a paper published there.

My Math skills are actually extremely good but obviously nowhere near as good as yours of course!
Most brilliant Math geniuses like yourself will quickly realize why but I’ll just let your mind work at it ! 
I’m awaiting your new calculations ! Is this your best shot at once again trying to discredit everyone that was ever involved ? Kinda weak but I doubt that will slow you down ! Carry on ! Cooper was a no pull over Tina Bar and that’s the truth ! If anyone doesn’t buy in..... well ......

My mind did work on that 3 Nautical Miles one minute and 6 Nautical Miles the next minute while flying at a constant airspeed problem and the result is the western bypass of Portland (roughly Malay to Canby) flight path.  There are other problems with the FBI flight path but I am sure you, as a true believer, would not be interested in explaining them.

I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.

Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!

Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? Or hear of him? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar. 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.

Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!

Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.

Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.

What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?

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

I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.

Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!

Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.

Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.

What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?

Kermit and Georger are good at patting each other on the back.

At the same time they are supporting the FBI flight path, they are making posts that Captain Scott's daughter said the airliner flew west of Portland and over Tina Bar.  Kermit has made several posts just above ridiculing an overflight of Tina Bar.

So congratulations to Kermit and Georger.  I don't know if they are the biggest BS's to have ever been on this and the DropZone site, but they are definitely contenders.  And that is quite an accomplishment.

I expect that they will now claim that Scott didn't know where he was, and then will deny making that claim in subsequent posts when it serves their purposes.