olemisscub

At a certain point you can’t keep falling back on this argument as a crutch, Jacque. “You don’t know what I have” is a terribly unfair tactic to win an argument or stop debate. You’re promoting a position that cannot be attacked. What if every response to your Vordahl attacks were ducked by me saying “ok dude, you just don’t know what I have.” You see how lame that is? Let me guess, your top secret dossier explains why Hahneman appeared four inches taller to witnesses and still had a mouth full of teeth on Nov 24, 1971? I know you’re going to defend the fact that Hahneman was missing SEVERAL visible teeth on BOTH sides of his mouth with some nonsense, but everyone reading this is going to realize how you’d be the first in line to attack a suspect (justifiably) who was described as having several visible missing teeth.

You're still stuck in the old mindset of proprietary ownership of suspects. I've literally never claimed Vordahl was Cooper. Have I gone to the news media about him like Eric with VP? Have I added him to the Wiki page? Nope. I brought him forward as a person of interest to check into. I think if there is any truth in the TiSb alloy, then he's so far the best suspect that can yet be derived from that lead. If it turns out to be a bogus lead, then so be it. I have several other suspects who I'm communicating with family members about. I've even sent one of these to you privately. If I was the "Vordahl guy" then why would I be constantly investigating other suspects? If I was convinced Vordahl was Cooper and was making that claim, why would his webpage have so many disclaimers at the bottom of it stating his issues as a suspect? If you had a Hahneman page, I doubt you'd have a section where you discussed his numerous flaws as a Cooper suspect. This is a new era in the Vortex, at least that's how I approach it. Your aggressiveness toward others indicates that you view this as a competition. I genuinely don't care if Vordahl is Cooper or not. I'm not suffering from the sunken cost fallacy like Colbert with Rackstraw or Blevins with Kenny. I just want to know who Cooper was, so the more suspects that can be investigated the better. A researcher IS allowed to bring up MULTIPLE new suspects. Again, you are operating under the traditional rules of the Vortex where if someone brings forth a suspect then they must be proclaiming their undying allegiance to that suspect. That's bullshit. It's not a productive way to be. There are two other new suspects out there who haven't been made public that I'd also like to make a page on my site for at some point soon. Am I going to be "that guy" for three different people to you? I've created 83 new topics on the Facebook group since December 6th. Only ONE was about Vordahl, and it was literally me posting about the fact that I found out there was a Rem-Cru bowling team called the "Duckpins" and Vordahl and his wife were the low scorers of the group. 83 new topics about the Cooper case and only mentions Vordahl, and was a goofy post about bowling. So I'd genuinely appreciate it if you'd stop conflating (there's that word again) the behavior of previous suspect pushers with me. There's no need to come at me with such hostility as you discuss Vordahl. This isn't a contest to me. I'm basically exercising in the gym shooting hoops by myself and you run up, snatch the ball from me, dunk it and then flip me off. It's bizarre and just unnecessary. Seriously. Knock that shit off with me. That may be your experience with others in the past, but that's not how I roll.

Heck no. Feingold gave a lengthy interview after getting off the plane to the assembled media. He didn’t say anything about actually seeing Cooper.

Curious why you think the particle would need to match a final patent exactly? When I'm mixing a cake and have 3 ingredients, I might mix the first 2 and then add the third one. Attack it all you want, that’s fine, but it’s ignorant to think the particle would have to be a complete 1 to 1 match. That particle could have gotten on that tie at any part of the creation process. That’s an extremely weak argument for you to be thumping your chest over. All that matters is that only two places were known to be alloying Ti and high Sb together in the 60’s. You’ve had damn near a year to find someone else who was doing it and obviously you haven’t been able to. Were other people alloying Ti and Sb in the 60’s? Maybe. But maybe not. Only a few people really knew how to alloy Ti with high Sb. It was a very difficult process apparently, which is why no one was doing it. Sn is what they use now with Ti alloys and it’s what they were using then as well. With Sn you get the same benefits you would from Sb, so there was no reason to go through the difficult process of alloying Sb if you could get the same effect with Sn. Did that particle come from Rem-Cru? Who the hell knows. Did it come from TIMET and land on the tie of a disgruntled janitor when Vordahl was there and was messing around showing some young techs how it was done? Or maybe it came from Sprague?

The ad from Look Magazine that Cameron was referring to showed a C-130, not a jet.

We've discussed this with Tom and a couple of metallurgists. Tom says it may account for some residue on the tie but not for the more exotic elements. He says the residue would likely be in the form of carbon soot. The metallurgist said that there would be titanium alloy, stainless, inconel, and nickel in jet exhaust, plus all the fuel particles. He said it would account for some of the bits on the tie, but not all. It's an intriguing development to be sure.

Georger, you'll appreciate this Hail Mary, I'm sure.

Just me talking speculating out of my ass because there is a video of him eating left handed and with what appears to be a cigarette resting in an ashtray near his left elbow in the same video. But then again, in the same video he is seen drinking right handed. Odds are that both Cooper and Vordahl were right handed since 90% of people are. My speculation about Cooper being left handed is mostly just derived from him keeping his dominant hand inert most of the time, resting in the briefcase. Just seems logical that you'd want your dominant hand to be free to reach into the aisle or whatever. I don't think there is any dispositive evidence one way or the other on which he hand he used. Sometimes the FBI files for hijackers will state their handedness. For example, the FBI files regarding the hijacker for Flight 175 in May 72 state that he (who turned out to be Hahneman) was right handed.

“insane” "lost your minds" “worthless credibility” "not rational" “baseless opinions” “waste of time” “beyond ridiculous” “a pile of crap” “incoherent gibberish” “straw man crap” “idiocy” “absolutely insane” “100% clueless” “illogical mess” intellectually dishonest” “paranoid” “warped imagination” “irrational” “your own paranoia” "Ulis/Blevins level"

My problem is the ugliness and negative vibes you present to people who disagree with you. It's not healthy. Everyone can get along in this community. Not much was ever able to get accomplished in the Vortex because of the toxic nature of the actors on the two boards. That was a terrible thing. This can be a cooperative effort. It's not a contest to see who finds Cooper. At least that's not how I view it. Again, I go back to the way that you must read people's messages. Either you have a personality flaw or you have scar tissue from a decade of posting on toxic message boards. I'm going to assume it's the latter. If I disagree with you I'm not attacking you or questioning your research skills. It's a disagreement among colleagues and friends, that's how I view the Vortex. I think you take this too seriously. At the end of the day, it's just a hobby. I don't need all this negativity. I think you've heard my voice enough to know that I'm not some ultra aggressive dickhead, so I don't know why your go-to response to me questioning you or disagreeing with you is to take it as a personal insult. If you posted that second Gene Cooper reference solely because of its better clarity, then I apologize for assuming otherwise.

Yes, Merlin Gene Cooper. And the one you already posted says it came from a file too.

You posted a REDUNDANT fact. But you decided to post it in a different format for some reason.

This is idiotic. He SAW the FBI file you posted on Friday. He made REFERENCE to it when he said: "There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event." What else was that a reference to other than the freaking Merlin Cooper reference? He was off by two years, but it was clear that's what he's referring to. He's asking the exact same question that I'm asking. What is the provenance of this statement? Is that so much to ask? If a file suddenly showed up saying that Cooper had missing upper teeth in the FBI files in 1988, wouldn't you want to know where that originally came from? Which witness said it?

This is literally has NOTHING to do with Milton freaking Vordahl. You know that. I know you do. Crossed the line? Dude, you really need to chill out.

He's clearly referring to the ORIGIN of this cigarette stains issue i.e. where is the original witness statement claiming this unique characteristic? What is the provenance of this statement? I can show you the provenance of literally every single descriptor in that Cooper description. Literally the exact verbiage from the witness statements were put into the description. So where on Earth does this statement come from and why is there not a single solitary reference to it anywhere else in the FBI Files except this one incident from 1988?

How could he have claimed there was no reference when an FBI file mentioning it was already posted and is what he was referring to when he said: "There are a couple of mentions of cigarette-stained fingers, with the first one being made 15-years after the event."

Sure. So why not just post what has already been posted instead of seeking out a different looking version of the same description? Why did you go to that effort if it wasn't intended to mislead people into thinking it was a separate incident?

you posted that to act like it's a separate and unique instance of cig stains being mentioned in the FBI Files than what has already been posted.

We both know the FBI Files as well as the other. Be better than that.

and we're the ones who are intellectually dishonest? You know exactly what you did here.

If you want the DZ to be even more dead, then you got it. There's no need for you to behave like this. None.

What the hell is wrong with you? None of this is worth this hostility and ugliness. No one is being hostile toward you or mocking you. Seriously. You have no reason to be so insulting toward us. I'm not sure why you treat every disagreement on the DZ like a personal battle. Maybe you're so used to people over the years genuinely being hostile with each other on here that it has given you PTSD, but I assure you that neither I nor MOI are taking that tone with you. That's not the type of people we are. We're just buddies sitting around shooting the shit. Try to keep that in mind as you move forward when interpreting the tone of our messages.

You're really worked up about this. I'd just like to see a pre-NORJAK reference. Then I'll gladly switch sides on this topic.

I just want to see a pre-NORJAK reference to Cooper's fingers being stained. That's all. The issue with posting those book references is that NORJAK was published before those books and was the only Cooper book out there at the time aside from Tosaw (who never mentions these stains). Thus, The Real McCoy and McPheters could be relying on NORJAK and post-NORJAK media quotes from Ralph talking about the stained fingers.

When is that Himmelsbach quote from?