Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by georger on Today at 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.
2
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by georger on Today at 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 ;)

 
3
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by EU on Today at 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.

 
4
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Robert99 on Today at 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).
5
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by georger on Today at 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.
6
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Shutter 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.
7
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Shutter on April 18, 2019, 05:32:57 PM »
I think several people have told you about things that are wrong with the theory and you return with not agreeing or try and discredit the facts.

Variables of the placard.
Shift the path at Toledo.  R99 is going by a mark made on the map. you just moved it?
nothing in the 302's about parts explained.
Ignoring the amount of people involved in different parts of the case. (one guy)
Using what you believe is an old worn out map that's wrong to support a theory.

Just a few things mentioned above. the same pattern occurs with suspects. descriptions are often wrong. yes, when the crime is only seconds long. they are against the description but proudly post the suspect beside the sketch?

I can't tell you how the placard got where it was found. you can? plenty of variables have been given, and ignored. 47 year old weather data probably from one guy! see, I can do it too....
8
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by EU on April 18, 2019, 05:08:11 PM »
I think I finally understand the conflict here.

You think I'm trying to convince people I'm right. That is simply not the case.

I am telling people what I think and giving them the reasons why. Whether it's the flight path, Tena Bar, placard, or Sheridan as DBC, I am giving my thoughts and explaining my rationale. If some are convinced by my logic, that's great. If some are not convinced, point out something, and cause me to rethink something and learn something new, that's even better.
9
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Shutter on April 18, 2019, 05:02:14 PM »
Quote
If something else is found--parachute, attache' case, money--I wonder how likely it is that it will be where it "should" be according to the FBI and the flight path? If I had to hazard a guess I'd say 1%.


Based on radar data from Portland, Seattle and McChord, along with radio transcripts and flight data, chase planes, and, pilot testimony. what percentage would you give with the path being wrong in one area?

Your question surrounds assumption, as usual...
10
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Shutter on April 18, 2019, 04:52:53 PM »
You can't be claiming you are looking for answers while posting exactly what happened? that's what you are doing. theories are one thing. you are promoting this theory as fact and downplaying everything possible to make it float.

If I found something supporting any theory. I would gladly post it. who ever it is. why do you think I did the simulation. because I believe the path, or live by it? why would I test the placard? why would I be involved in the case. because Cooper survived? I'm looking for answers. not assumptions. how many of you guys can be right?

it's like people trying to cram 2+2 = 5 sometimes. it doesn't work.



Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10