Cola

-Coopers Height- Over next 2 weeks I invite anyone who would like to contribute to help compile an exhaustive reference list on all official records and verifiable statements concerning height. Over the next 2 weeks, I'll not respond to debate, conjecture, theory - what have you. The recorded facts of the case are what I will specifically collect and respond to and hopefully in the end we'll all have one concise reference list. I'll follow up late this evening with the first ref list and look to update it roughly every 3-4 days or sooner if necessary. If this proves to be a productive exercise possibly we could organize ourselves to together attack other areas of the case in this manner.

Touche... I conceded. I'm not 100% up with the background on your post. I'm all for members exploring and making mistakes on candidates. When I talk of critical thinking - honing skills I'm thinking of my own experience, I get better, my thinking evolves - seeing the good, bad and ugly in here. I can appreciate members exploring new candidates. I can appreciate exploring bad candidates. I even appreciate members who are overtly pushing flawed candidates or flawed deductions.(ie Reca, Barb, McCoy) I've watching others like you,Fly... battle it our over the years and this has pushed my own thinking allowing me to weigh aspects of the case. I like NB, for me I have him down as additive. In my book he's a dogged sleuth, a go-get-ter for how he dived in to Vordahl. We want enthusiastic members in the vortex, people that are willing to roll up their selves put energy into the case to push it ahead. He's young enough that he may see this to its conclusion. Seismic shifts - Agreed there do not appear to have been any seismic shifts from my view also. seismic personalities, yes! love em, they keep it spicy. Expert it is a comparative term...expert to what, to whom. I'm not sure what qualifies as an expert. Is it never falling for a candidate? Is it never expressing a flawed deduction? Is it memorizing and referencing 95+% of the case details? Is it the critical thinking, understanding and interpretation vs recall? Is an expert qualified by the case only or must they also know the copycats? How many top of the game expert experts are out there? 4-5 How many experts are there?= 15-20 maybe Maybe there are 100 lurkers that have it fairly well dialed in. Who knows?

Agreed- with caveats. I think this a fair assumption for "the general population" that the interior of a plane is an unusual space and yes it distorts visual perceptions of height, at perspective* relative to more common spaces. (*proximity) However, there is an experience level here in the stews. I believe this effect would not hold as strongly with the stews. I have to think that the stewardesses spending years in the cabin would naturally adjust for this visual distortion. Also this visual distortion is lessened by proximity. The stewardesses were in the closest proximity to Coops when they interacted with him any visually distortion would have a lower effect with a closer perspective. If we stand nose to nose/ face -to- face on a plane the perspective is the same as if we stood face to face in a common area. The visual distortion is lessened with proximity. I give the stews more weight on height estimates. I have wanted to see us become more organized than reactive with our post. I think we should continue to work through height over the next 2 weeks, and kill this one once and for all in the forum. Let's get everything out there on height now rather than in a year, a year and a half, hashing out height again in a swarm of post. I'll post what I have on height from the records on Monday and anyone that wants to join kick in, or critique, it feel free. After height maybe we can move onto something else or ideally schedule topics bi weekly or monthly to hash out. I like the affirmation EU use to say in closing his daily DB. something like.. No one gets to say 100% what the fact are, only Cooper dose. Meaning, more or less each of us can be completely convinced in our opinion of some minor detail or angle but only Coops will verify the facts and our assertions.

Flight path, you don't owe an apology.!!! Your post was the most insightful post I've seen on height tonight. You right -- "6 feet isn't just a measurement.. it's language. it means tall" - this is very true. 99.5 % of height estimates are estimates of individuals in shoes. Fly's correct in asserting that the Agency needed to account for a reduction in sole height for their range of considering suspects. I'd never considered that or questioned the self reporting aspects of discoverable heights.

I think we should allow a change of mind and some evolution in our theories- conjectures. It's ok to pick a favorite candidate and work on them, use them to sharpen your critical thinking skills, and improve your understanding of the case. Some candidates are attractive and some are repulsive. I think it takes time for a sleuth's taste to mature to a point where they can see the good from the bad. Years ago I would have considered candidates that were 5'6 - 5'8 . There was a time when I did not know, Coops height. I had not committed to a candidate qualifier of 5'11- 6'1. But show me a 5'9-10 candidate that is so convincingly Cooper and I'll back off -my mind is malleable on a 6 ft height qualifier. But try to show me a candidate that's 5'6 and this I will not accept. I think we most all agree that 5'6 is nonsense, outside of reason!!! What do you all think, is there a difference in-classification between a Sleuth, a Researcher, an expert?

Agreed. I think the DZ has worked but what I've observed of our use is that we keep reacting to post and cycling through the same 20 points here year after year. It would be nice to have another central place to serve as a sort of creative commons where research topics have dedicated threads. A place to organize and upload records, references, 302's, transcripts ect.. which I presume most researches already splice up records by topic and organize their records similar to the Agency hierarchy. This is beyond my skill set, but I can dream.

We are 100% in agreement on this. The above are plausible. However, we don't know what parts are true or fabricated and without proof we can only speculate. For me... I'm in the survived camp. Gunther's book has not influenced me on this thinking. I think the case knowns support survivability. I'm also into the fairy tail ending. The version where Coops walks away unscathed, with the ransom, into the sunset of life. Maybe he lost a bit, but he kept to the outlaw code of silence. East Coast - I'd consider it standard MO for any criminal to lie about location. I'd agree, if he did reach out to Gunther via Clara in 82 he was alive. If its real, I think his motive was to bring closure to the investigation or muddle things up.

Yes, I do not think it will help if Cooper or Clara were real or not. I have to think that the narrative as told by Clara would never have been the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She did not want to reveal her identity or his and face questioning by authorities, by her family or his. I can only assume the narrative, if real, has been corrupted by intentional misstatements and fabrications to obscure his and her identity. I'm willing to accept that if Clara was real within her narrative there may be unique assertions that eventual overlay with whom the real Cooper is/was. The 302's may yet reveal something that gives me/us greater confidence in Gunther's work. However, I think it would take identifying the real Cooper to verify any/some of Clara's assertions. Unfortunately as it is now, I do not have confidence in the narrative as truthful. Right now, we are unable to separate what assertions of Clara's are truth or fabrication. Therefore, I don't see a way of anyone getting to within proximity of the real Cooper with Gunther's work. In the end the best I see Gunther's work being accepted as is a work of "plausible half-truths". ref: https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/

I've always dismissed the Gunter book as more of a fun side-adventure than something which may advance the case. It's hard to credit Cooper, Clara, and the story as being genuine or accurate. For me Jude's (DanCooperHimself ) Youtube analysis on Gunther was insightful and worth my time. This video was the first time I'd encountered Gunther's literary synopsis/notes via - https://dbcooperhijack.com/files/ Although, reading the literary synopsis/notes has not changed my thinking on the Gunther text. I'm a non-believer because... Is it relevant if Cooper and Clara were real or not? If they were real, I still would question the authenticity of the text. If they were real then why would they not muddled their story with half-truths to avoid being identified. If they were hoaxers then there is no truth to the text. I believe Gunther's sources at-best could have provided half-truths. I think there is no validation of Gunther's work without identifying the real Cooper. If the real Cooper were identified, I think Gunther's text would then only ever rise to a level of "plausible half-truth". Ultimately, I do not think Gunther's story will prove detailed or accurate enough to "definitively align" with whomever the real Cooper was. Believing the sources are half-truth's at best, I don't see how the book can be used as a lead to get within proximity of the real Cooper. Summation - The book will not take us to Cooper. The real Cooper may surprise us and validate aspects of the book as true. However, the sources, if real, likely muddled the truth and Gunther's accounting of "a story as heard" will likely not raise the work above the level of a "plausible half-truth".

WOW…..thank you for posting NB. Olemisscub this is amazingly well done!!! The way your narration overlays the visual media is just incredible. Great writing! Thank you for putting a definitive death nail in McCoy as Cooper once and for all. A few of us have such a thirst for this type of content. Can't wait to see what you do next.

First post in the Vortex. I have been holding out for years, waiting for enough exposure to the case to hopefully be additive here. FlyJack - I have always admired how you reference your assertions. I'm a big fan and grateful that you have always tried to keep the facts in focus… You and a number of others have really pushed my thinking on this case over the years. I very much appreciate everyone's contributions, the good and the bad. On this one, I think Cooper's initial intent was to have the airstairs lowered after takeoff. As you have referenced: 1) This was the initial instruction relayed by the crew. 2) G.H confirmed this in specifically writing down “aft stairs lowered in inflight”. I think further support of Cooper’s intent for having airstairs lowered after take off could be implied by the following: Cooper had presumed the airstairs were lowered by the flight crew. Having that presumption, I think Cooper had given Florence, Alice and Tina the impression that Tina would be leaving the plane before take-off. Cooper would have no further need for Tina after takeoff if he was relying on the Cabin to operate the stairs for him. Florence is noted as asking Cooper the plural of can the “stewardesses” exit the plane. Florence told Tina “he said we can go” This leads me to believe Tina was included in Flo's request for the stewardesses to exit. Tina anticipated exiting and assured Flo that she would be with them in a second. After Flo and Alice reached the car, Al Lee further radioed the cockpit and said Cooper didn’t really care if Tina got off or not. This is what Flo and Alice were telling Al Lee at that time. Flo and Alice expected Tina to join them for the ride out of there. Summation - I think Cooper initially intended to have airstairs lowered inflight. On the ground he may have decided to have them lowered then out of precaution or he may have been responding to the Crews offer to have them partially open. Ref- Tina Interview 2 Pg. DB-26977 Ref- Tina Interview 2 Pg. DB-26977 Ref- 5:59-6:59 Reel -305 – Flight transcripts Pg.178