DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 735]

57 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

My dude...throw in the towel. This is embarrassing. 

 

Maybe make the heads the same size.

[FLYJACK 735]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

Well, for one thing, my matrix doesn't value near-sightedness and bird lips. 

And sorry, I can't reveal the matrix...it's uhhh top secret for ummm, a project that I'll be working on for.... infinity...so I can't reveal it. But I'll just say you don't know what's on there because if you did, you'd be singing a different tune. Everyone out there just needs to trust me, all these other posters don't crap because they don't have what I have. Just trust me...and stuff. 

If Hall is #1 then your matrix is crap...

I have almost 200 items on mine.

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[georger 254]

4 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

If Hall is #1 then matrix is crap...

I have almost 200 items on mine.

And, at least you two are still talking. As things go in the Vortex, that is a win@! 

[CooperNWO305 155]

18 minutes ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

It’s not like he’s letting me sleep on his couch or something, now that would be an odd choice. You did numerous lives with EU on Facebook and not only let him sleep in your own house multiple times but you gave him a key! You don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to questioning somebodies judgement. I’m still living rent free in your mind like EU was at your condo. 

LOL. The guy isn’t OJ Simpson.
 

You have zero case credibility. You have had how many suspects? Changed your mind how many times? Now you’re going around sowing seeds of discontent about people in the Facebook groups who are actually legit researchers. You don’t belong on any show or suspect panel. But go ahead and deflect. For Ryan to choose you for his channel is not good for his credibility as an influential person in this case. You’re the Eddie Haskell of the DB Cooper case. You’re just a tool for people to use when they need you to go after people or agree with them. Sit this one out. Go back to Facebook. This is an adult conversation. 

[FLYJACK 735]

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

will you please shut up about "you don't know what I've got." You're like a 12 year old trying to win a debate. Either present the evidence or don't bring it up at all. 

Yawn. Your dude six months after NORJAK hijacking STILL doesn't look like any sketch or any consistent description EVER GIVEN of Cooper's facial features. Your guy is LITERALLY called "thin lipped" by a Newspaper. One of the witness descriptions in the paper call him having thin lips, because he does! He has objectively thin lips. You're attacking Skip Hall for freaking "severe eye wrinkles" when your guy has a fat nose, a symmetrically square head that isn't oblong at all, and has little bird lips. Plus he was a ranting and rambling fool. The guy apparently told people on the plane his most recent employer. Does any of this sound like D.B. Cooper to ANYONE on earth except someone suffering for history's worst case of Sunken Cost Fallacy. 

Didn't you say his weight fluctuated? Wasn't that an excuse of yours? Well these are all photos of him after being on the run in Honduras for a month. Doubt he was visiting buffets. 

No, I don't need to shut up, I explained this, I am not trying to win a debate you aren't worthy of getting my research. 

His weight did fluctuate the passport pic you keep using is older and he was heavier, then he was thinner when he was captured and heavy again later.. he did have a liver disease. He did think he was dying. 

I said he has thin lips,,, can't you read. That doesn't eliminate him as a suspect. He does have a pouty look and a protruding lower lip. His hair is a perfect match, his dark olive complexion, latin appearance, mixed race caucasian and native central American. Weight perfect, build match, Height is low end of range not dispositive. Eyes very dark are a match. Clothing a match, Sunglasses a match even prescription as Alice said. Turkey neck,, age match, No accent. corners of mouth match, grease product in hair and slicked back a match, he also dyes his hair, smoker, his wife said he drinks one highball only to loosen up...  and that is just the start...

He does match Cooper's description.. 

Some things he did differed from Cooper but they aren't dispositive. You wouldn't expect everything to be exactly the same... for all those things I can show many more unique things that do match. His hijacking was about 3X Cooper's time so he talked more, big deal, he flew all the way to Honduras while Cooper jumped soon after takeoff,  he told many lies but that isn't dispositive either. It wasn't his most recent employer. Many witnesses said his head was round and even triangular. 

You keep using hyperbole and assumptions,,, to discredit him.

You even use things that are irrelevant to discredit him like the brand of cigarettes he demanded or using the back stairs...  as if that means anything.

I don't have sunken cost fallacy, I have tried to eliminate him and haven't so far,, maybe that will happen in the future but I am not going to eliminate based on assumptions. That is a rookie error you make.

Stew's,, Hahneman vs Cooper..  strangely similar behaviour and nothing like your hyperbolic description. I could list 200 things that match.. 

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 735]

Many witnesses said Murphy was the best likeness to Cooper in sunglasses and a hat..

thin Hahneman and fatter Hahneman vs Murphy.. pretty close...   

What did Ryan say,, the worst suspect match in the world or something like that.

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 522]

46 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

I have tried to eliminate him and haven't so far

So you eliminate Hall because of severe forehead wrinkles when he raises his eyebrows and "severe eye wrinkles" and a small mole, but won't eliminate your suspect who doesn't have Cooper's only real notable feature and doesn't even remotely have the same head shape. Nobody even needs to get to forehead wrinkles to eliminate Bill. And hell, I don't see any wrinkles AT ALL on Hahneman, yet Cooper definitely had some, or is that something you've conveniently overlooked? Skip's forehead is actually a damn sight better than Botox Bill's. 

 

 

[olemisscub 522]

16 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Many witnesses said Murphy was the best likeness to Cooper in sunglasses and a hat..

thin Hahneman and fatter Hahneman vs Murphy.. pretty close...   

What did Ryan say,, the worst suspect match in the world or something like that.

Let's try it without your poor parlor trick. It's uncanny...truly. How many times are you going to fail in one day? 

Edited February 16 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 735]

12 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

So you eliminate Hall because of severe forehead wrinkles when he raises his eyebrows and "severe eye wrinkles" and a small mole, but won't eliminate your suspect who doesn't have Cooper's only real notable feature and doesn't even remotely have the same head shape. Nobody even needs to get to forehead wrinkles to eliminate Bill. And hell, I don't see any wrinkles AT ALL on Hahneman, yet Cooper definitely had some, or is that something you've conveniently overlooked? Skip's forehead is actually a damn sight better than Botox Bill's. 

 

 

This is an excellent example of your abysmal analytical skills...

Hall has two large bumps near his mouth and severe forehead lines, he has severe eye wrinkles.. you try to minimize claiming it is because he raises his crooked eyebrows..

In many pics and that video he shows those severe lines clearly, to claim that those would never be noticed is absurd..

And then you claim Hahneman has no wrinkles because you can't see them in that image,, he does have forehead wrinkled four mild ones according to witnesses. 

And to accuse me of missing that sums up your ability to just make up nonsense.

So you are wrong X3 in one post,, feel better. 

Anything else you want to be wrong about..

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 735]

5 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Let's try it without your poor parlor trick. It's uncanny...truly. How many times are you going to fail in one day? 

It isn't a fail, split them and join them, better to put Hahneman in sunglasses. That is fat Hahneman..

[olemisscub 522]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

If Hall is #1 then your matrix is crap...

I have almost 200 items on mine.

Well, I actually meant to say that mine has 792 items...

I'm going to guess some of yours are:

Wore Mr. Magoo glasses - +5 points

Had no thick lower lip - +25 points

Had a square head - +82 points

Had a fat nose - + 17 points

Told the crew information about his family - +8 points

Missing noticeable teeth - +7 points

Let's passengers go out the aft stairs - +10 points

Tells hostages who his most recent employer was - +25 points

Wore gloves some of the time but not all the time - +15 points

Had noticeable growth on nose - +27 points

Used a pistol - +72 points

Smoked Benson and Hedges, not Raleighs - +15 points

Told crew that his identity would be found in his baggage after he left - +14 points

Asked for newspapers to read about himself - +18 points

Crew describes hijacker as mentally unbalanced - +25 points

My own suspect - + 8,427 points

 

I mean, really, Flyjack, I think you've got it man. It really is JUST LIKE COOPER

[olemisscub 522]

6 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

This is an excellent example of your abysmal analytical skills...

 

Dude, you think WILLIAM FREDERICK HAHNEMAN was D.B. Cooper.... 

[FLYJACK 735]

11 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Dude, you think WILLIAM FREDERICK HAHNEMAN was D.B. Cooper.... 

TBH, that is a difficult question..  

I can't put him on the plane so there is some room for doubt but I haven't found anything legitimate that eliminates him and while there are a few differences from Cooper they are are not dispositive.. and I have found many many more things that do match, things only I know.

However, I am still trying to put him on the plane.. I am working on something to do that. I hope I can... then I don't have to deal with this nonsense.

What I do know is that all your complaints, distortions and faux analysis that ridicule him are not serious, not dispositive and not honest.. nothing you have presented is dispositive. Many of your claims are irrelevant or just inaccurate.

Dude, you lied about his evidence. What serious researcher lies about the evidence.

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 735]

30 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Well, I actually meant to say that mine has 792 items...

I'm going to guess some of yours are:

Wore Mr. Magoo glasses - +5 points

Had no thick lower lip - +25 points

Had a square head - +82 points

Had a fat nose - + 17 points

Told the crew information about his family - +8 points

Missing noticeable teeth - +7 points

Let's passengers go out the aft stairs - +10 points

Tells hostages who his most recent employer was - +25 points

Wore gloves some of the time but not all the time - +15 points

Had noticeable growth on nose - +27 points

Used a pistol - +72 points

Smoked Benson and Hedges, not Raleighs - +15 points

Told crew that his identity would be found in his baggage after he left - +14 points

Asked for newspapers to read about himself - +18 points

Crew describes hijacker as mentally unbalanced - +25 points

My own suspect - + 8,427 points

 

I mean, really, Flyjack, I think you've got it man. It really is JUST LIKE COOPER

Nice, did Nicky write that for you. Childish.

No, my matrix is nothing like that. Nope, none of those things. 

Most of those are false or irrelevant. I notice you have learned nothing.

and some of those things really make no sense to try to discredit Hahneman.

But if that is how you create a matrix,, I can see how Hall is #1...

 

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 155]

10 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Nice, did Nicky write that for you. Childish.

No, my matrix is nothing like that. Nope, none of those things. 

Most of those are false or irrelevant. I notice you have learned nothing.

and some of those things really make no sense to try to discredit Hahneman.

But if that is how you create a matrix,, I can see how Hall is #1...

 

My issue with matrices in this case are that they are built and then referenced as close to gospel or as official measurements like a thermometer or something. It’s akin to me making a checklist and then using the checklist as a tool to justify my stance. “He came out number one in the suspect matrix”. Every matrix will be different. If you think he was special ops, then that guy is higher than someone who was just a regular guy, a pilot, etc. It’s an interesting tool, but if you get one or two things wrong, then it’s totally useless. And right now we don’t know what is right or wrong. In my opinion, using the matrix in conversation is a good tool to try and win an argument with people who are not too bright, but it is currently being used to create this false authority. In itself then the way it is being used is a fallacy of appeal to authority. It gives an appearance of favoritism when the creator of the matrix rates the suspect of one of his closest friends as number one. That’s just my observation. 

If I make a ruler with my own measurements and then use that ruler to measure, then there is an issue. Here we are giving objective measurements to something inherently subjective. 
 

A basic checklist for me would be eye color, general height, age, personality, some aviation background, resemblance to the sketch, etc. But then again any of those could be wrong and we would be looking in the wind. It’s a good framework to consider, but quoting it like people do is just not realistic. Ask 10 people to make a matrix and you’ll get 10 different spreads of suspects rankings. 
 

 

[CooperNWO305 155]

8 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

My issue with matrices in this case are that they are built and then referenced as close to gospel or as official measurements like a thermometer or something. It’s akin to me making a checklist and then using the checklist as a tool to justify my stance. “He came out number one in the suspect matrix”. Every matrix will be different. If you think he was special ops, then that guy is higher than someone who was just a regular guy, a pilot, etc. It’s an interesting tool, but if you get one or two things wrong, then it’s totally useless. And right now we don’t know what is right or wrong. In my opinion, using the matrix in conversation is a good tool to try and win an argument with people who are not too bright, but it is currently being used to create this false authority. In itself then the way it is being used is a fallacy of appeal to authority. It gives an appearance of favoritism when the creator of the matrix rates the suspect of one of his closest friends as number one. That’s just my observation. 

If I make a ruler with my own measurements and then use that ruler to measure, then there is an issue. Here we are giving objective measurements to something inherently subjective. 
 

A basic checklist for me would be eye color, general height, age, personality, some aviation background, resemblance to the sketch, etc. But then again any of those could be wrong and we would be looking in the wind. It’s a good framework to consider, but quoting it like people do is just not realistic. Ask 10 people to make a matrix and you’ll get 10 different spreads of suspects rankings. 
 

 

Looks like they solved the case over on Facebook. Some nice Valentines Day photos on there too. It’s a social group. Which is fine. It gives people something to do. I have my own groups I like. But for case discussion, not so good. 

[olemisscub 522]

11 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

Dude, you lied about his evidence. What serious researcher lies about the evidence.

You know... repeating a thing doesn't make it true.

A misstatement in the middle of talking for three hours straight or while responding to someone on Reddit isn't a lie if I genuinely believe it to be true. So please do forgive me sire for saying that Mr. Magoo was missing teeth in his upper and lower mouth when he was only missing visible teeth in his upper mouth (because that makes it so much better...) or for mistakenly saying that he was from Allentown when he was from like 10 miles away from there (huge difference of course...)

[FLYJACK 735]

23 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

You know... repeating a thing doesn't make it true.

A misstatement in the middle of talking for three hours straight or while responding to someone on Reddit isn't a lie if I genuinely believe it to be true. So please do forgive me sire for saying that Mr. Magoo was missing teeth in his upper and lower mouth when he was only missing visible teeth in his upper mouth (because that makes it so much better...) or for mistakenly saying that he was from Allentown when he was from like 10 miles away from there (huge difference of course...)

It wasn't a misstatement..

You said he was missing half his teeth, then you said upper and lower.. recently you said noticeable... sounds really serious. If I didn't know the facts that would be extremely damaging to Hahneman.. 

His FBI file doesn't say that. 

That is a lie... an intentional distortion.

I found an image of his upper teeth showing and there are no missing upper teeth visible. 

It was two missing upper down the side that are commonly removed for braces, it was the upper bicuspids. One witness out of about 50 who apparently knew teeth really well commented on it.

 

So, you misled everyone by distorting the evidence. You lied to discredit him because you had already formed that narrative. Ironic, since you claim to be unbiased and want to get the facts right..

It is how you roll... you are more interested in supporting a personal narrative rather than the facts..

You never corrected the record. You actually doubled down. 

What impact does your dissemination of misinformation have on the case,, what else have you got wrong and disseminated as "evidence"... 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 522]

38 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

 

A basic checklist for me would be eye color, general height, age, personality, some aviation background, resemblance to the sketch, etc.

 

This is LITERALLY what mine is. Just a series of things that I think make sense.  You can get plus or minus points or just a neutral. For example, I don't know if Cooper was actually a pilot or not, so I wouldn't dock a point for not being a pilot, but it doesn't hurt to be a pilot, so I'll give you a point for pilot training. 

Smoker?

Drinker?

Aviation Background?

727 knowledge?

Parachute training?

Olive/Dark complexion?

Neutral Accent?

Age 40-50?

Pilot?

Opportunity?

Familiar with PNW?

Would know McChord?

Any reason for odd chemicals to be on your clothing?

Demolition training?

Height 5'10 to 6'?

 

That's literally it. About as basic as it gets. Claiming to have a 200 item matrix is preposterous on a topic where none of us really know shit. How could there even be 200 things on a matrix for this topic?? He's lying and will continue to hide behind the lie to try and provide the illusion of superiority. 

Anyways, when I plug the named suspects into those, the top 5 are Hall, Braden, Leigh Seller, Langseth, and Rackstraw (gross). Braden only lost to Hall because he lost a point for falling out of the FBI's official height range (spare me your bottom range stuff, Fly, no need to repeat it), he had neutral points for complexion, and neutral points for not having a realistic explanation for chemicals on his clothing. So it's hardly some sort of bias for Hall when he happens to check every box. It just is what it is. 

And Dave, please note that only ONE of us between Flyjack and myself is actually willing to open himself up for criticism when it comes to this sort of stuff. Flyjack is being intellectually cowardly by goading someone into showing THEIR matrix while at the same time hiding behind excuses for not revealing HIS matrix. So I'll post my matrix and open myself up to HIS criticism, because I'm a grownup, but he won't dare do it because he's actually afraid of criticism. And again, who tries to win arguments by saying "well, you don't know what I know!" That's what a fifth grader would say to try and win an argument. 

[olemisscub 522]

16 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

It wasn't a misstatement..

That is a lie... an intentional distortion.

lol, again, you're expecting me to have perfect recall of Bill Hahneman's FBI file?

So you're saying that I KNEW for 100% fact that his FBI file said he was missing upper teeth and that I decided to claim ON PURPOSE that he was missing upper and lower?

Get a grip on yourself. You're so rustled. It's comical at this point. 

[FLYJACK 735]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

This is LITERALLY what mine is. Just a series of things that I think make sense.  You can get plus or minus points or just a neutral. For example, I don't know if Cooper was actually a pilot or not, so I wouldn't dock a point for not being a pilot, but it doesn't hurt to be a pilot, so I'll give you a point for pilot training. 

Smoker?

Drinker?

Aviation Background?

727 knowledge?

Parachute training?

Olive/Dark complexion?

Neutral Accent?

Age 40-50?

Pilot?

Opportunity?

Familiar with PNW?

Would know McChord?

Any reason for odd chemicals to be on your clothing?

Demolition training?

Height 5'10 to 6'?

 

That's literally it. About as basic as it gets. Claiming to have a 200 item matrix is preposterous on a topic where none of us really know shit. How could there even be 200 things on a matrix for this topic?? He's lying and will continue to hide behind the lie to try and provide the illusion of superiority. 

Anyways, when I plug the named suspects into those, the top 5 are Hall, Braden, Leigh Seller, Langseth, and Rackstraw (gross). Braden only lost to Hall because he lost a point for falling out of the FBI's official height range (spare me your bottom range stuff, Fly, no need to repeat it), he had neutral points for complexion, and neutral points for not having a realistic explanation for chemicals on his clothing. So it's hardly some sort of bias for Hall when he happens to check every box. It just is what it is. 

And Dave, please note that only ONE of us between Flyjack and myself is actually willing to open himself up for criticism when it comes to this sort of stuff. Flyjack is being intellectually cowardly by goading someone into showing THEIR matrix while at the same time hiding behind excuses for not revealing HIS matrix. So I'll post my matrix and open myself up to HIS criticism, because I'm a grownup, but he won't dare do it because he's actually afraid of criticism. And again, who tries to win arguments by saying "well, you don't know what I know!" That's what a fifth grader would say to try and win an argument. 

Is that it...  seems overly simplistic.  Mine is about 200 items, far more complex and detailed..

You always claim I am lying when you don't actually have that knowledge.. kind of weird..

I do agree that it gets tough as some things are unknown for suspects and that makes it less valid skewing some suspects.... 

Let me do Hahneman...

Smoker?  Y 1

Drinker? Y 1 (wife said he drinks only 1 highball to loosen up)

Aviation Background? Y 1

727 knowledge? U 0 not directly that I know he did fly a-lot and expressed extensive knowledge for his hijacking.

Parachute training? Y 1

Olive/Dark complexion? Y 1

Neutral Accent? Y 1

Age 40-50? Y 1

Pilot? U 0 he was on an air crew and claimed to be a pilot he did give very detailed flying instructions for his hijacking.

Opportunity? Y 1

Familiar with PNW? Y 1

Would know McChord? Y 1

Any reason for odd chemicals to be on your clothing? Y 1

Demolition training? Y 1

Height 5'10 to 6'? this is your bias, The FBI used 5'8" and explicitly said not to eliminate based on height to 5'8" Y 1

 

We have 13 out of a potential 15,, good enough to get him into law school

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 735]

56 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

lol, again, you're expecting me to have perfect recall of Bill Hahneman's FBI file?

So you're saying that I KNEW for 100% fact that his FBI file said he was missing upper teeth and that I decided to claim ON PURPOSE that he was missing upper and lower?

Get a grip on yourself. You're so rustled. It's comical at this point. 

His FBI file said several upper side you posted an image of the file and used it to mock Hahneman..

Then you said he was missing half his teeth,, clearly an exaggeration..

I corrected you.. with the fact that it was the bicuspids and only one witness.

then you said upper and lower... still false...

So, are you actually interested in getting the facts right... it sure doesn't appear that way. 

I am not rustled in any way,, I know the facts and am just pointing out to others that you can't be trusted to get them right. Anyone in hearing your distortion would reasonably form a false opinion. You don't take responsibility you attack me.

I would think a legit Cooper researcher would want to get the facts right..

To disseminate false info that can be reasonably used to eliminate a suspect is a pretty serious error.

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 522]

43 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

I would think a legit Cooper researcher would want to get the facts right..

 

A legit researcher who isn't suffering from the world's worst case of confirmation bias would know how totally ridiculous this is. Spin it however you want, but literally EVERYONE else who sees this knows how absurd this would be.

 

 

Edited February 16 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 735]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

A legit researcher who isn't suffering from the world's worst case of confirmation bias would know how totally ridiculous this is. Spin it however you want, but literally EVERYONE else who sees this knows how absurd this would be.

 

 

You keep repeated that but it still doesn't make it true...

It has become clear you are a rank amateur at this.. I admit I thought you were smarter.. 

All you do is disseminate false info, really bad irrational arguments, baseless accusations.. and personal attacks.

 

The FBI said sketch B was the best likeness. 

Tina never saw his face straight on.. Flo said none of the sketches were very good.

The Cooper image I have looks closer to B..

YOU never interview 3 witnesses together.. they influence each other..

B is closer to the very first sketch making A the outlier.

B matches Murphy... who was liked by witnesses well before B was even created.

Sketch A's nose is absurd. I almost think the stews intentionally got it way off.

 

Sketch B was best likeness,, A should be ignored.

 

You have an obviously irrational draw to sketch A, I would guess that you have an undisclosed suspect you are softening the ground for.. 

I have notice that you use the tactic to accuse others of what you are actually doing... Confirmation Bias is you..

 

 

 

 

Edited February 16 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 735]

For anybody who reads this now or in the future..

 

I have new data completely independent from Soderlind's analysis and it matched his time at 8:11..

DB Cooper jumped at 8:11, a few seconds before or after. The data isn't precise to the exact second. Late 8:10's or early 8:11's... 

This data is absolutely clear. Cooper did not jump after 8:11.

Ryan and others 50+ years later are claiming Orchards as a fact, the burden of proof is on them.. and they can't do it.. there is no evidence indicating Orchards. To begin, they need to use the real FP map.. not Cunningham's altered one.

Ryan even lied to claim the FBI now believes Orchards for cred.. no Larry's opinion doesn't speak for the FBI.

The jump time is important but doesn't identify any suspect. It does give a better LZ and that includes North of the Lewis R..

I would share my data but I really don't like some of these dishonest people. Some others have seen it.