General Category > DB Cooper
Tena Bar Money Find
georger:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginIf the money entered the Columbia River near Tomahawk or certainly Government Island, I can tell you that it's a long trip down to Tena Bar--I believe at least 10 miles. I've boated from Tomahawk to Tena a few times and it's a long slow journey.
Also, the Columbia is a river with a deep channel--about 40 feet--with relatively shallow shoulders closer to the beach. Meaning, if the money entered the Columbia near the center of the river it would sink to the bottom of the channel and eventually be covered under feet of sediment--after all, that's why they dredge regularly.
I simply think that such a scenario is impossible. I believe you could throw a 20 lb bag of cash in the water near Tomahawk a million times and zero times have three separate packets end up buried at Tena Bar for 8 years.
--- End quote ---
Again, I'm not suggesting the money entered the water and floated along the top by itself, or rolled along the bottom underwater. I'm suggesting it traveled downstream with some other mechanism such as a log, tree branch, or Cooper's body. Assuming an average current speed, that kind of flotsam would probably take 10 to 12 hours to travel from the area between I-5 bridge and the I-205 bridge to Tena Bar. Considering the flood conditions at the time, I don't think it's farfetched to have debris that has sat on the edge of the foliage all winter to be picked up and transported elsewhere downstream.
It's merely a hypothesis. I have no evidence yet to back it up, but I think it as reasonable and logical as others.
When I first began researching Cooper I had the idea that the Salmon Creek could have been a vehicle to bring the money to Tena Bar, but I have spoken with locals who have told me that it isn't big or strong enough to carry debris from the Battle Ground area to the Columbia, and it would take some really funky hydraulics to pull it off.
--- End quote ---
Good work exploring intelligent options.
Concerning Tom's diatom work, the species of diatoms found suggest exposure for one season (spring to summer). Perhaps into fall. But no particular year can be assigned. Tests that might suggest a time frame have never been done, so far. For example, several dates would be nice to know. (a) the date at which the bundles of money ceased to be exposed to the atmosphere, re- C13 exposure. (b) any breaks in the C13 chain! Cessation of exposure followed by a dead period followed by re-exposure! (c) date for the diatoms on the bills. (d) neutron testing see You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login and (e) other tests.
For example, in a recent post at DZ, FJ speculated that the Cooper bills arrived and settled on the beach during a June flood when the water level at the Ingram site was six feet over the bills resting on the sand sex feet below - and thence that is how the bills got exposed to diatoms. I had to chuckle reading that because, diatoms live in surface columns only, usually no deeper than 3 ft. Why? Diatoms require a rich supply of oxygen. Diatoms live the shallow surface column only. .......... Its small details like that that can make or break people's theories! ;)
EU:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
For example, in a recent post at DZ, FJ speculated that the Cooper bills arrived and settled on the beach during a June flood when the water level at the Ingram site was six feet over the bills resting on the sand sex feet below - and thence that is how the bills got exposed to diatoms. I had to chuckle reading that because, diatoms live in surface columns only, usually no deeper than 3 ft. Why? Diatoms require a rich supply of oxygen. Diatoms live the shallow surface column only. .......... Its small details like that that can make or break people's theories! ;)
--- End quote ---
Now this from GEORGER I find valuable.
I forgot about the detail regarding diatoms living near the surface. Indeed, this is critically important and narrows down the exposure date--if one believes as I do about the retrieval--to probably a one or two-day time period twice (because the water had to rise as well as recede), whether it be the 1972 flood event or 1974 flood event.
EU:
Regarding the diatoms, I just spoke with Tom and he verified that diatoms can live deep in the water not just near the surface. It is in sand where they can't live deep.
georger:
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginRegarding the diatoms, I just spoke with Tom and he verified that diatoms can live deep in the water not just near the surface. It is in sand where they can't live deep.
--- End quote ---
Yes diatoms can be deep (even 800 meters in ocean floors!) but lets focus only on the fresh water diatoms Tom found. Those are fresh water diatoms. Tom's diatoms are indigenous in the area at TBar. We know the money was exposed to basically a full season of those particular diatoms, for at least one year (season). I still have questions. (1) do those same diatoms exist everywhere along the Columbia? I think the answer is yes. I dont think Tom's 'toms' are specific to TBar only. (2) Do Tom's 'toms' actually represent more than one season? I think they might, or, I think that has to be examined. How many seasonal 'stages' of Tom's species are represented in his sample? I think Tom made a remark about that but I forget what he said, exactly. I'm just curious that we may be seeing more than one year's production of those diatoms? (3) What year do those 'toms' represent? Im not sure that can even be nailed down without other tests, if it can be determined at all?
The vital point is: its Tom's diatom species we are concerned with; not ocean diatoms that can exist to 800 meters! ;) Tom's diatoms could be living in the sand at Tbar even as the sand is periodically covered over by 12feet of water! Did the money get exposed to diatoms by exposure to 'toms' in sand, or only by water, or both? Its a complex issue -
*** also we are dealing with at least 5 species of toms. each species has its own time table in a single season. ........ does Tom's sample represent only one year for all five species? Important question.
georger:
More on Tom's diatoms:
1. Tom examined three bills for Carr and found no obvious signs of diatoms. Tom then examined 377's Cooper bill and found diatoms. Tom has the serial numbers for the bills he examined. There is a list of Cooper bill/bundles serial numbers. Have the four bills Tom has examined come from the same bundle (or packet if you prefer) or different bundles?
2. Tom has identified 4-5 species of diatoms on the 377 bill. Are all of those species seasonally compatible on 377's bill?
3. Of the species Tom found on 377's bill, does anyone have water or sand samples from the Ingram find location (from any year) that document those same species are Present at the Ingram site? Or someplace else in the TBar area? Or someplace else in the region of say Hayden Island to the Lewis River?
4. Fanning out vs other deposition theories: FJ at DZ is now speculating that the Cooper bills were exposed to diatoms when they 'fanned out in Columbia water', somewhere. Under that theory all bills that fanned were exposed to diatoms and should display diatoms. In equal proportions perhaps? All bills that fanned out in a single bundle should show diatoms in equal proportion. Bills in bundles that did not fan out could only be exposed to diatoms on their end bills. I guess FJ is saying today that the money arrived on TBar by water flow pressure? FJ has previously subscribed to a plant and termite theory! ;)
If bundles of bills were deposited on the beach after surviving a high pressure dredging pump tube, would bills in bundles ever fan out? The 'fanning out' option may not exist in a dredging scenario ?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version