The FBI originally thought he jumped around Lake Merwin. That's where their search was conducted. The terrain in the drop-zone there is very rugged, and the chance of a bad landing is very likely.
The pilots later said that he jumped over the northern suburbs of Portland/Vancouver. They claimed that this is where they were when they felt the bump of the tail-door snapping back up after Cooper's weight was removed from it. The drop-zone here would be either urban, or (much more likely) farm land. Probably still a bit of a hike, but not as bad as 'wilderness'.
I think he must have survived. Granted, he took the worst parachute; but it was still a serviceable one. And given the drop-zone based on the pilots recollection, if he had perished someone surely must have found him by now.
The last reason is that if he had perished, either in the wilderness that the FBI was searching, or in a neglected bit of the later drop-zone, it is highly unlikely that the three bundles of money could have ended up where they did without someone moving them later. Firstly because (with the exception of Lacamas Creek) the watersheds don't move things that way (Clark County has a very good map of all its watersheds). Secondly, the flooding and dredging histories of the Columbia river make it unlikely that the money was in the water all that time.
That's just my 2 cents
People tell me I'm weird because I wear mine on my dominant hand. So I doubt this would be a worthwhile attack; I honestly don't know anyone else who is does wear it on their dominant hand (granted, small sample size).
On a personal note, I'm not worried. I figured out how to type my pin without any visible movement of my hand (the unavoidable movements being covered by my other hand). This was because there were a number of cases of people installing cameras near ATMs to steal PINs. I just checked, and my non-smart watch doesn't move more than a milimetre in any direction. If I upgrade to a smart watch, they're still not getting anything.
Baa, baa, black sheep, have you any wool?
Yes sir, yes sir: three bags full
One for the master and one for the dame
And one for the little boy who lives down the lane
I assume that you will be able to distinguish the rhyme above from the actual argument I am making here. The argument has nothing to do with black sheep or the feudal system that was prevailant at the time that rhyme was written. I say you should be able to distinguish the rhyme from the argument because they take different forms. In particular, the rhyme has a meter, and (as the name suggests) the ends of each pair of lines rhyme. But I could have included a descriptive analogy which would have a more similar form to this and you still would have been able to distinguish it from from a factual argument. Humans are smart that way (at least, when they want to be).
As to who gets to say which is which; you get to decide which is which. But if you make unreasonable declarations, don't expect people to take you seriously.
As to 'a translation of translation of a translation', that hasn't been true for more than 400 years (not that I'm saying it was true before that; just that I've never thought it important enough to investigate the translation process of non-extant translations – but now I'm kind-of curious). These days it's translated from the earliest known manuscripts. These reach back to before 100CE for the NT (that is with 35 years of when some of them were written) and back at least 100BCE for parts of the OT. And comparing the older manuscripts with newer ones show the only changes over time have been in the spelling of words (particularly names).
But are you saying that translations have to be 100% accurate to be useful and trustworthy? Because for most cases, nobody would expect them to be (because it is somewhere between impossible and impractical). If, however, you are determined to never trust a translation, feel free to go back to the original languages (Hebrew and Ancient Greek). You can buy bibles published in the original language. In fact, a lot of the original manuscripts are available online. There are courses which will teach you how to read those languages. You don't have to take anyone's word for it.
Of course, I don't expect you to listen to any of this. You know you're 'right' and you'll come up with some lame excuse to discount it all.
Have a good day.
The M5 East tunnel in Sydney is a great example of why that information would be useful for a navigation system.
The tunnel was completed in 2001 with enough capacity, as stated, to last 20 years. It started to exceed its capacity within 5–10 years of completion.
The position my Garmin is usually fairly accurate. This is probably because the slowing of traffic begins before the tunnel while the device still has signal. When the traffic is at its worst, however, the Garmin decides that since I was moving at 25km/h when I entered the tunnel, I should have been out of the tunnel by now and thus there must be something else blocking the GPS signal—when in reality I'm still stopped somewhere in the tunnel waiting for the traffic to move again.
If the stated information was available to the navigation calculations, it would know that I had slowed, stopped, moved a bit, stopped, inched forward a bit more, stopped, stopped, still stopped, grown incredibly impatient and started to curse the government which built a tunnel with very a short life expectancy and without any thought for expansion, etc.
I'm skeptical of the peaceful nature of a religion founded by a warlord; but at this stage we don't know that it's not some nut-job who is trying to capitalise on the ISIS popularity.
(I'm writing from one of the buildings currently in lock-down because of this situation)
Can we not find a better way?
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro..." -- Hunter S. Thompson