Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1251886 times)

Chaucer · « **Reply #6465 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:02:50 PM »

As promised, here is the transcript for the interview that I conducted with a scientist regarding the Tena Bar money find:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I'll let everyone draw their own conclusions, but here are three takeaways of mine:

1. Debris will usually end up on the shore from which it originated. That means that the money probably entered the river from the Washington side.
2. Debris deposited further up the river near the I-5 and I-205 bridges can reach Tena Bar and will not end up on the western bank of turn.
3. Debris can be buried, but it would be more likely from sediment deposits during spring flooding than wave activity.

I am sure some of his answers will not please everyone and may contradict pet theories, but I'll let the interview speak for itself. He was extremely helpful and emailed me after the interview and shared some interesting map data and other information that I will share later.

snowmman · « **Reply #6466 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:05:02 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

nice job. I always think more info is better. It's a lot better to sort out "something" than sort out "nothing".

snowmman · « **Reply #6467 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:11:28 PM »

reading chaucer's interview.
interesting stuff in there
"You also have Hayden Island that produces debris."
I was wondering why the guy said that?

apparently there was an historic unregulated landfill on Hayden Island from 1950 to 1970
is that what he's talking about? Or

some stuff about that here: (interesting comments about metals contamination, gasoline in groundwater)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

snowmman · « **Reply #6468 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:18:31 PM »

from the interview

"that the money was deposited kind of in the middle of the bar and not near the upstream or downstream end. That’s interesting."

that's a good point. One could argue that might mean bulldozer spreading may be a possible way to get it to the middle of the bar (in spoils being spread)

another good question/answer:
Q. Have you ever experienced finding buried paper—currency, magazine, documents, etc.—along the Columbia or any beach whereby it is apparent that the paper was buried by wave activity alone.

A. We haven’t come across much paper, honestly. Mostly, we find tires, we find styrofoam, and we find plastic. In the multiple collections that we have done, there has been very little paper at all.

snowmman · « **Reply #6469 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:28:07 PM »

I was thinking about his comments about money condition. And then later dredging.
He must not have seen any of the pictures of the money.

Here's a different way to think about money condition. Rather than think of it is "rotted" etc.
Think of it as "preserved"

i.e..What storage conditions (under water/sand/etc) are required to keep the money preserved in that condition from 1971?
(assume no human storage)

I would seem it would need to be deeply buried (or at bottom of Columbia) to be in as good condition as it was on discovery.

We don't have any testing of different preservation methods, but I'm guessing that shallow burial wouldn't be as good at preserving for 9 years?

I suppose Tom Kaye's work in burial over 33 months in a particular environment is some info, but it would seem we'd need a wider range of tests to be sure of anything.

Chaucer · « **Reply #6470 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:51:28 PM »

I did not provide him pictures of the money, but I did provide him the link to Tom's site.

Here's my takeaway:

If the FBI dropzone is accurate, then there is no natural way that the money gets wet in the Columbia 6 months later. If it wasn't natural means, then that means someone physically took the money to the river and soaked it at least six months after the crime. Why would someone do this? It's not logical to me.

So where does that leave us?

snowmman · « **Reply #6471 on:** September 11, 2021, 12:54:18 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I did not provide him pictures of the money, but I did provide him the link to Tom's site.

Here's my takeaway:

If the FBI dropzone is accurate, then there is no natural way that the money gets wet in the Columbia 6 months later. If it wasn't natural means, then that means someone physically took the money to the river and soaked it at least six months after the crime. Why would someone do this? It's not logical to me.

So where does that leave us?

Right.
So review why one would think the FBI dropzone is accurate.
It's a very thinly-tied-together set of information that says the FBI dropzone is correct.
I think the boundaries of possible drop zone is from where they first detected the airstair open (and last talked to Cooper) and the Columbia.

I don't think Cooper jumped after the Columbia, because of the money.
so airstairs open and Columbia, are bounds of possible jump.
anything more focused, seems based on a bunch of speculation or lighter set of "facts"

Chaucer · « **Reply #6472 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:11:58 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I did not provide him pictures of the money, but I did provide him the link to Tom's site.

Here's my takeaway:

If the FBI dropzone is accurate, then there is no natural way that the money gets wet in the Columbia 6 months later. If it wasn't natural means, then that means someone physically took the money to the river and soaked it at least six months after the crime. Why would someone do this? It's not logical to me.

So where does that leave us?

Right.
So review why one would think the FBI dropzone is accurate.
It's a very thinly-tied-together set of information that says the FBI dropzone is correct.
I think the boundaries of possible drop zone is from where they first detected the airstair open (and last talked to Cooper) and the Columbia.

I don't think Cooper jumped after the Columbia, because of the money.
so airstairs open and Columbia, are bounds of possible jump.
anything more focused, seems based on a bunch of speculation or lighter set of "facts"

Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

snowmman · « **Reply #6473 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:22:49 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

There's no evidence to suggest a no-pull, right? that's just speculation. Just as likely he pulled.

Unless you're saying someone would have seen a canopy if deployed that night near Columbia?
I'm not sure about that

Robert99 · « **Reply #6474 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:23:01 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
I did not provide him pictures of the money, but I did provide him the link to Tom's site.

Here's my takeaway:

If the FBI dropzone is accurate, then there is no natural way that the money gets wet in the Columbia 6 months later. If it wasn't natural means, then that means someone physically took the money to the river and soaked it at least six months after the crime. Why would someone do this? It's not logical to me.

So where does that leave us?

Right.
So review why one would think the FBI dropzone is accurate.
It's a very thinly-tied-together set of information that says the FBI dropzone is correct.
I think the boundaries of possible drop zone is from where they first detected the airstair open (and last talked to Cooper) and the Columbia.

I don't think Cooper jumped after the Columbia, because of the money.
so airstairs open and Columbia, are bounds of possible jump.
anything more focused, seems based on a bunch of speculation or lighter set of "facts"
Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

Chaucer, I know you will deny it, but most of what you have posted above supports what is now called the Western Flight Path.

Chaucer · « **Reply #6475 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:26:37 PM »

The flight path does not have to be to the west for my hypothesis to work.

Robert99 · « **Reply #6476 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:26:53 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

There's no evidence to suggest a no-pull, right? that's just speculation. Just as likely he pulled.

Unless you're saying someone would have seen a canopy if deployed that night near Columbia?
I'm not sure about that

There is nothing to "prove" either a pull or no-pull. You have to look at all the possibilities to develop a likely scenario.

Chaucer · « **Reply #6477 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:32:16 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

There's no evidence to suggest a no-pull, right? that's just speculation. Just as likely he pulled.

Unless you're saying someone would have seen a canopy if deployed that night near Columbia?
I'm not sure about that

No “proof” of anything really. I think a no-pull is more likely because as Keith said in the interview an open canopy would get hung up in the river and would be more visible. A no-pull would be more likely to remain out of sight.

Chaucer · « **Reply #6478 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:34:54 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

Agreed. The timing of the jump is weakest of the evidence. I believe Tosaw was right all along and that Cooper jumped closer to the Columbia. He no pulled near the riverbank. His body and/or the money lay there all winter undetected and then was picked up by flood water the following May/June.

There's no evidence to suggest a no-pull, right? that's just speculation. Just as likely he pulled.

Unless you're saying someone would have seen a canopy if deployed that night near Columbia?
I'm not sure about that

There is nothing to "prove" either a pull or no-pull. You have to look at all the possibilities to develop a likely scenario.

As I have said before, Bob, our respective theories are virtually identical. The only difference is where along the river Cooper landed.

Robert99 · « **Reply #6479 on:** September 11, 2021, 01:46:59 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The flight path does not have to be to the west for my hypothesis to work.

Yes, it does.

I have to disagree with the fellow you talked with about what happens when the river makes a sharp turn as it does just west of the I-5 bridge. First, what makes the river water stop going west and start going north? It is the Oregon bank that turns the water to the north and that means there is going to be a lot of pressure and erosion on that bank. That is also the probable reason the shipping channel is on the Oregon side of the river. The water depth would be greater on the Oregon side and dredging the shipping channel to its 40 foot depth would not require as much digging.

It is interesting to note that the fellow also indicated that very little paper made it to the beaches from the river water. And based on my visits to Tena Bar, very little debris of any kind accumulated there. I have other comments on this subject but I think you already know most of them.

My comments on the river flow are based in part on my experiences as a pre-teen during which I spent several summers swimming in a tributary of the Columbia River (about three miles from the Columbia itself) and about 200 miles upstream of Tena Bar.

Poll

How did the money arrive on Tena Bar

Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1251886 times)

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

snowmman

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Chaucer

Re: Tena Bar Money Find

Robert99

Re: Tena Bar Money Find