Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 13:46:31 From: Rick Jones Subject: Bones search question I have a question for our scholars involved in the "Bones Search". Re-reading Fr Moleski's exhaustive "Final Report" makes me wonder if time is against us to the point that further inquiries would be fruitless and should best be left to serendipity. Or would, for example, an "awareness" campaign" or reward offering in primary locations be helpful, perhaps alerting follow-on generations to be on the "lookout". Thoughts? Rick J #2751 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 14:17:32 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones search question For Rick J I think I about half agree with you. I don't think that efforts at searching for the bones ourselves -- including both physical searching and consulting with people who may know something -- is necessarily fruitless, though there's no question that the number of people likely to have useful information is diminishing fast (increasing the urgency of the search). I do agree, though that "awareness" campaigns could be helpful in getting people to pay attention to stuff that might appear when they go through, for example, their deceased uncle's effects. On the other hand, the one effort we did make to post a reward, in Fiji, yielded absolutely zip. One problem is how to communicate the "awareness." We're not altogether sure with whom we ought to be communicating, so it's hard to figure out how to communicate, and the means of communication in a place like, say, Funafuti are not like those in the U.S. or U.K. They may be specific to particular groups. And they're time- sensitive; the recollection that a bunch of crazy Yanks are looking for some dead lady's bones is likely to erode pretty fast, and get transformed in strange ways. We've had "bones stories" pop up that we're pretty sure are weirdly transmogrified versions of our own searches. Any thoughts about how to spread awareness? LTM Tom ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 14:57:31 From: Tom King Subject: Seven Site analysis Some things have begun to develop in the course of analysis of Seven Site artifacts and faunal remains that may benefit from the Forum's attention. 1. In both of the burn features excavated this year, we found substantial deposits of ferrous metal, reduced virtually to rust. The shape of one deposit suggests that it was originally a rectangular object some 40 cm. (15-16") on a side. Pieces of other objects seem to be from circular or oval items. Fragments that retain shape suggest walled containers of some kind, some with rather thick walls (maybe 5 mm or so), and some of them thinner but with (maybe) stiffening rods on their edges. There's also evidence of at least one tubular object about 1 cm. in diameter. The more I look at them, the more they seem to me to suggest cookware -- maybe cast iron pans, pots, or skillets, and perhaps thinner items like bread pans. Unless we assume that the Coast Guardsmen were taking cookware out of their galley and abandoning it in campfires at their target practice site, there seem to be only two plausible sources for cookware: the colonial village, and the wreck of the Norwich City. We know that there were cooking utensils at the colonial village; the question is, why would anyone cart them down to the far end of the island and leave them there? As for the Norwich City, her galley must have had pots and pans, but what kinds? So here's the question for the Forum: what kinds of pots and pans would be found aboard a steam freighter in the late 1920s? So far I'm consulting with the staff of the Liberty Ship Jeremiah O'Brien in San Francisco (obviously later than the NC, but still perhaps relevant) and with a gentleman in England who the O'Brien crew say has a wealth of knowledge about all things related to vintage steamships. 2. There's also a lot of items from the Seven Site to which we've assigned the technical name "weird stuff," such as: Little flat pieces of rigid orange-red material. The tattered remains of some kind of film. Three little white washers(?) or gaskets(?) made of something like (maybe) asbestos. A tubular piece of something resembling bakelite or hard rubber A piece of what may be leather Some thoroughly mysterious light-weight, hard, black material. We need to get this stuff identified, which requires the services of an analytical laboratory. The Winterthur Analytical Laboratory has been helping us, and they're very good, but they have to be paid, and we're about out of money for analytical work. I'm paying for fish, bird, and turtle bone identification, but can't afford to cover other technical analyses, so another thing that Forum members could do to help with the project right now is to contribute money, and/or find others who will do so. Pat can advise about how to make contributions to the effort. LTM Tom King ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:08:36 From: Karen Hoy Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis Pat, you have my CC number. I'd like to start the Weird Stuff Technological Analysis with $100. LTM (who has plenty of weird stuff of her own) Karen Hoy #2610CE ***************************** Thank you, Karen. For those who would like to donate on line, the Niku V donation page is still up. Later today I'll add an analysis category but until then, just choose something arbitrary. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:02:38 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis For Tom King There is always the possibility pots and pans, or big food cans and whatnot improvised into pots and pans, could have been salvaged from the Norwich City cache (which was about 7 years old in the summer of 1937) taken to the 7 site by someone and later abandoned whilst still arranged in place where they were used and kept. LTM, who had a thing for kitchens. William Webster-Garman ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:03:53 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones Search questions > From Rick Jones > > I have a question for our scholars involved in the "Bones Search". Re-reading > Fr Moleski's exhaustive "Final Report" makes me wonder if time is against us > to the point that further inquiries would be fruitless and should best be left > to serendipity. Or would, for example, an "awareness" campaign" or reward > offering in primary locations be helpful, perhaps alerting follow- > on generations to be on the "lookout". Thoughts? Your guess is really as good as mine. There is a small chance--a very small chance--that there might still be a letter extant in the Western Pacific High Commission (WPHC) archives in Auckland, NZ. I read all of the indices to the archives line-by-line and could not find any file on the bones other than the one we know so well. There are two numbers on the jacket of the bones file that may or may not be cross-references to storage boxes or another file. 1228414 WPHC 4/IV 4192/40-4510/40 Bones file. Ballpoint pen under "Other Connected Papers": R39 B946 Looks careless. But who knows? Steve Innes doesn't recognize it as a call number. Natalie says the last note from Sir Harry looks like: "Seen. Pa." That matches the instruction from 1945 to use B.U. and P.A. for "bring up" and "put away." B. T. Burne, a fellow who worked in the archives in the 60s or 70s, said we should have checked inquest records in Suva. I don't know whether such records exist, but it is one stone that we left unturned. (The bones file does not mention opening an inquest.) Have we checked the Pacific Manuscripts Bureau? Hewitt? The file lists for Kiribati may have been microfilmed. [I seem to remember that there was a microfilm machine listed in the discussion of the Central Archives.] Some records may even be in Vanuatu. Paddy McDonald wanted to share the wealth when he broke up the archives. Roger and I had a great deal of difficulty getting bureaucrats to answer our questions. If Roger hadn't gotten the letter from the lawyer who handled Gilchrist's estate, we never would have found the fossils that he donated to the University of the Pacific in Suva. Once we had the letter, then people were forced to take our questions seriously--it proved that a collection HAD been donated. It was found within a half-hour of bringing the letter to the University. Up until then, everyone denied that it existed. There was no way to locate it at the University through their indices. Someone had to think of who would have known the business of the fellow to whom the letter was addressed (either dead or retired from the university). A lab assistant was found who knew where the fossils were stored. I saw the same phenomenon with the question of materials donated to the Native commission in Suva by Verrier, who had studied the native history as a hobby. I'm morally certain that he did, in fact, donate some materials to the commission, but the man at the desk denied it without doing any checking at all. He was morally certain that there wouldn't be anything in their collection from a non-native. I didn't pursue that lead any further on the assumption that Verrier's material almost certainly would deal only with Fiji and not with the kanawa box from Gardner/Niku. But it was a pretty impressive demonstration of how petit bureaucrats "work": "If it was here, I would know about it; I do not know about it; therefore, it is not here." We were rebuffed at the Fiji School of Medicine. The Indian doctor in charge wouldn't give us the time of day. The librarian was very nice, but she wouldn't let us look at any of the archival material ourselves. She asked a student to look through the records for us, such as they are. I can't imagine that the student would do the kind of search that we would do. It is doubtful that there are any leads there anyway. An acting Head threw away a lot of material that he considered junk in the 50s. The bones or any references to the bones may have gone out in that housecleaning. I don't see any of the resistance we met as signs of a coverup. I see it as indifference to the questions we're asking. Amelia is not an interesting character to people from other cultures. From their point of view, we are time-wasters. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:26:44 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones search question William Webster-Garman wrote: > ... there's no question that the number of people likely to have > useful information is diminishing fast (increasing the urgency of > the search). ... If we had gone to Fiji in 2002 instead of 2003, we could have queried Dr. Murphy about Denise's remembrances. Paddy MacDonald, longtime WPHC employee and archivist (1941-1978) probably died in the late 90s. I don't think we've tried to contact his daughter. And the list goes on ... > ... We've had > "bones stories" pop up that we're pretty sure are weirdly > transmogrified versions of our own searches. Yep. We saw that with Mrs. Smith, who thought that the announcement of the opening of the WPHC archives in Auckland was about the discovery of the bones (they used the bones file in the newspaper coverage about the archives). Then we had a con man consciously or unconsciously doing cold reading on us; I think he was half-remembering the 1999 newspaper coverage. I don't think he had any new information at all, but he had a bunch of people he wanted us to talk to. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 19:35:18 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Bones search question For Rick Jones Given a) the bones were likely thrown away as more or less unappealing and wholly useless junk during periodic post-war and colonial transition house cleanings in the 50s and 60s, b) the cultural indifference to AE in the Pacific and c) the sad truth that anyone who had personal knowledge of them, along with any reason to care enough to remember, seems to have passed away, sometimes within months of when TIGHAR had gotten hot on the trail... broadcasting (by whatever means) a call for bone artifacts could be a waste of resources. LTM, who had a thing for spring cleaning too, William Webster-Garman ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 19:35:39 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis For William Webster-Garman <> Yes indeed; that's a possibility. It's also possible that such things were salvaged out of the wreck itself. Either way, we need to know what the Norwich City was likely to have had aboard. LTM (who stews) Tom ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 19:36:15 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis Some odd ideas: Maybe they shot up radio transmitter parts? Maybe they were discarded metal office furniture? (sorry, I'm from Grand Rapids) Was there glass associated? Does anyone know if the metal frames that hold electronics, now mainly aluminum, were steel in that era? (They would be about the right size). I would think that cast iron, as in frying pans, would last at least 60 years, but maybe not in that relatively harsh (salty, warm, moist) environment. If there are fragments of intact metal, the lab should be able to tell cast iron from steel. Dan Postellon ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 19:36:39 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis It also makes you wonder if the islanders were processing bird carcasses by cooking, remember the pile of wing bones. maybe to get fat? for soap? Maybe not, with all the coconuts around. Dan Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 19:38:10 From: Tom Doran Subject: Re: Bones search questions > From Marty Moleski > > But it was a pretty impressive demonstration of how petit > bureaucrats "work": > "If it was here, I would know about it; I do not know about it; > therefore, it is not here." Maybe, though it sounds to me more like a bureaucratic, "I don't work for you, go away." I've been in and around bureaucracies all my life. A high percentage of the people assigned there in the US have that perspective. I've heard that in British (or British-descended) bureaucracies the tendency is even more pronounced. An elegant refusal to lift a finger is considered high art. It might take getting a prime minister enthused about the project. A celebrity might also help. Ideal might be a rich celebrity who hints at favors to the prime minister, say the guy that runs Virgin Airlines talks about airline service and resort hotels to the prime minister, and mentions, "Oh, by the way...." Tom Doran #2796 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 20:14:10 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones search question > From William Webster-Garman > ... broadcasting (by whatever means) a call for bone artifacts > could be a waste of resources. Publicizing TIGHAR's work is a good thing. It helps bring in more supporters and more money, without which we cannot do any technical work. I agree that we shouldn't waste money on long shots, but the more people who learn about TIGHAR, the greater the chance that someone may stumble across the next helpful lead and connect it with TIGHAR's work (as seems to have happened with the researcher who found the first bones file on Tarawa). Marty ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 20:15:27 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Bones search questions > From Tom Doran > >> From Marty Moleski >> >> But it was a pretty impressive demonstration of how petit >> bureaucrats "work": >> "If it was here, I would know about it; I do not know about it; >> therefore, it is not here." > > Maybe, though it sounds to me more like a bureaucratic, "I don't > work for you, go away." Yup, that's a reasonable interpretation, too. What impressed me was the speed and certainty of the man's judgment. All he did was look inside his head and give me assurance that there was nothing of the sort in their collection. But Verrier's work on the history of the tribal groups in Fiji is EXACTLY the kind of thing that the tribal commission exists to study. It's a matter of huge social and economic importance. I imagine (without proof) that the person who told me that some of Verrier's research went to the commission was right and that the man at the desk was wrong. > I've been in and around bureaucracies all my life. A high > percentage of the people assigned there in the US have that > perspective. I've heard that in British (or British-descended) > bureaucracies the tendency is even more pronounced. An elegant > refusal to lift a finger is considered high art. Ah. I can see how that fits. Don't get me wrong. I think the legacy of the British bureaucracy is one of the greatest gifts that Britain gave to her colonies. I can sympathize with the need to dismiss folks like us quickly and efficiently. None of the questions we were asking had any payoff for the folks with whom we wished to speak. > It might take getting a prime minister enthused about the project. > A celebrity might also help. Ideal might be a rich celebrity who > hints at favors to the prime minister, say the guy that runs Virgin > Airlines talks about airline service and resort hotels to the prime > minister, and mentions, "Oh, by the way...." Yup. Even a large-scale TV show might help open doors, since those who cooperated would be portrayed favorably on TV. The trouble is that TV producers like to spend their millions on a sure thing. I'm not convinced that 100% cooperation from the folks who would not talk to us would change the outcome of the investigation. I don't think I could make a successful pitch for the project. Marty ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 20:27:45 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Bones search question Marty Moleski wrote... > Publicizing TIGHAR's work is a good thing. Always and forever. I was only thinking about someone having to comb through the opportunists (who would pop up no matter where such a call went out). ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:58:16 From: Mike Piner Subject: Re: Seven site analysis Dan Postellon wrote: > Maybe they shot up radio transmitter parts? ... > Does anyone know if the metal frames that hold electronic parts... > were steel in that era? Back in the forties, I had an old Philco radio that would pick up short wave. I even strung up an antennae,and listened to some voice and a lot of Morse which I couldnt read.There were large tubes which contained metal steel as shielding and containers to hold heat.The chassis was steel, and resistors made of ceramic, some items filled with carbon, other parts with bakelite. As I think about it some tubes had parts similar with artifact 2-6-S-43, and 2-6-S-21F, although I can't positively identify either artifact as part of a radio tube. Mike Piner ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:58:42 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones search question For William Webster-Garman "Likely" and "could be" are the operative words in your missive, I think. It may be that the bones were tossed, so yes, looking for them could be a waste of time. But until we have some evidence that they're gone for good, I think it's worth continuing to look. LTM (who counsels patience) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:59:26 From: Ted Campbell Subject: The finds at the Seven Site To: Tom King Will you give us some idea of where the items of interest were found i.e. were they stacked such as to suggest that they were carefully put away for their next use or were they left scattered as if someone left in a hurry. My thinking is: If left stacked, the party would have thought that they would be back but because of (?) they didn't return. If left scattered, something caught their attention and they never returned. I keep trying to put myself in the place of the castaway to see if the actions thereof can be seen in any clues you folks uncover. Ted ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:31:42 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis For Mike Piner Interesting. Can you remember about what the dimensions of the steel chassis were? Rectangular, I presume? Length, width, thickness? LTM (who's listening intently) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:32:11 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis For Ted Campbell The one ferrous object whose shape and dimensions we can reconstruct (now just a patch of rust) was lying between a fire feature and a cluster of large clamshells. The other ferrous material in the fire features has all been in the form of small chunks and fragments, heavily oxidized, scattered through the features. Other ferrous objects are scattered on the surface, which is also where things like the glass, the pocketknife, and the zipper have been found. A few pieces of glass were found in a tight cluster. Nothing neatly stacked, however. LTM (who is herself....never mind) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:33:03 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Bones search question For Tom King who wrote, > "Likely" and "could be" are the operative words in your missive, I > think. It may be that the bones were tossed, so yes, looking for them > could be a waste of time. But until we have some evidence that they're > gone for good, I think it's worth continuing to look. Oh I agree (also very much about my use of "likely" and "could be"). I was only talking about the notion of putting out "a call for bones" in Fiji (I was writing almost in shorthand and should have been more clear, sorry about that) and truth be told, only pondering what might be the most helpful paths towards finding the bones if by some lucky fluke they still exist in some traceable location. I'm not surprised more human bone fragments haven't turned up yet at the 7 site, since they seem to have been partially scattered by the time Gallagher saw them and he likely (there's that word again!) sent whatever they could find to Fiji. LTM, who had her bones to pick. William Webster-Garman ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:34:14 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Bones search question In thinking of ways to involve islanders in the bones search, I would like to ask those who are familiar with the Pacific Islander's culture(s), if an educational or research grant to facilitate graduate level (if that exists) research on this subject would be productive. If so, would it have to be done in several locations? Would local bureaucrats cooperate with local universities/schools to this end? Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:19:58 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones search question For Rick Jones If we had the ability to finance a research grant for, say, graduate students in history at the University of the South Pacific, to support an historical/oral historical study of the Western Pacific High Commission and its people, it would be very much worth doing. The WPHC is very much worth historical study in its own right, Earhart or no Earhart, but in the course of such a study it might very well be possible to pick up the trail of the Niku bones. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much more grant support for the study of obscure British colonial administrations than there is for the pursuit of extinct aviatrices. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:54:11 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Bones search question For Tom King Then let me ask you another question. If it were possible to create some sort of "matching" grant, where would a co-grantor most easily be found? Britain? US? Oceania? And what total amount (US$) would be needed? (Just a horseback estimate.) Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 17:52:56 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones search question For Rick Jones I'm deeply inexpert in this sort of thing, but I would guess that: A. A co-grantor would most likely be found in the UK, or perhaps Australia/New Zealand, among academic research foundations. B. Horseback guesstimate, assuming a grant via an institution like the USP -- say US$35,000. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:43:31 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis I busted up a few abandoned TV sets in my day as a kid, sometime just to watch the picture tbe implode. I'm not sure what else would survive this long, but I would bet that the glass would. Dan ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:44:00 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Seven Site analysis I don't think that rules out old electronic equipment, then. What does the glass look like? Old vacuum tubes should be relatively distinctive, and haave some bakelite fragments in the same area. Daniel Postellon. > From Tom King for Ted Campbell The one ferrous object whose shape > and dimensions we can reconstruct (now just a patch of rust) was > lying between a fire feature and a cluster of large clamshells. > The other ferrous material in the fire features has all been in > the form of small chunks and fragments, heavily oxidized, > scattered through the features. Other ferrous objects are > scattered on the surface, which is also where things like the > glass, the pocketknife, and the zipper have been found. A few > pieces of glass were found in a tight cluster. Nothing neatly > stacked, however. LTM (who is herself....never mind) > ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:11:31 From: Mike Piner Subject: Re: Seven site analysis Mr king > ....dimensions of the steel chassis were? This was a hefty chassis maybe small amount less than 1/16 in. thick about 10 or 12 inches by about 14 inches. The height was slightly over 2 inches.It had some large condensers underneath. There may be some of these around even after sixty plus years. Thinking back, I remember listening to people talking fading in and out, just as Betty described. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:12:08 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Seven site analysis Glass is inert, fragments can last thousands of years unless they're melted or mechanically ground to dust. Valve (vacuum tube) glass from the 1930s would be very thin, light and clear, fragments would always be curved and often be very slightly rippled (since the "tubes" were made with glass blowing techniques). Identifying numbers and logos were silk-screened onto the glass but I think these could erode/wear/ react away rather quickly. As for the metal innards, these were mostly *not* ferrous and thus would be more likely to oxidize into white powder rather than red rust. The bases were indeed most often bakelite (an early resin made from phenol, formaldehyde and wood powder), that stuff is durable and lasts awhile, bits could easily be lurking about after 70 years. LTM, who has a thing for that wasteful, mushy analog glow, William Webster-Garman ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:26:16 From: Chin Koon Fun Subject: Re: Seven site analysis Do we have a sketch or a plan showing where these objects are found at the site? The spatial relationship between them and the Seven site as a whole may shed some clues as to what they were, how they ended up where there were found and how the site might have been used. I doubt they are leftovers by the servicemen from the Loran station from the occasional excursion or camp fire in the bush. Or may be they are just litter from the station that somehow were dumped there. (pure speculation) :-\ Chin Koon Fun #2689 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:52:50 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Seven site analysis For Chin Koon Fun I don't think Forum postings will support graphics, but I can supply them to anyone who's interested who'll send me an address to post them to. Right now we have a general plot of the fire features on a KAP image, and I'm working on an overall site map. It would be easy enough to do sketch maps of the individual fire features; we just haven't yet translated the rough field sketches. Most of the artifacts found in both '01 and '07 were associated with fire features, suggesting that they were used by whoever was using the fires to cook bird, fish, and turtle. Others were more or less scattered over the crest of the surge ridge and its SW slope. Some items and clusters of items are clearly of Coast Guard origin (M-1 shells, clip, gun oil cap, crockery sherds with CG logo). One cluster of M-1 shells is spatially associated with a fire feature, but I don't THINK the association is anything but coincidental (We're working on determining whether this is so). Some items are much more clearly associated with the fires (e.g. burned and melted bottle glass). It's hard to imagine why the Coast Guardsmen would just be dumping stuff on the site, and those we've interviewed don't indicate that they did. Both oral history and archaeology suggest Coast Guard use of the site for informal target shooting and popping at birds. Some of the bottles on the site probably resulted from this activity, as probably did the one broken vacuum tube found in '01. There's been some discussion of glass. Most of the glass on the site is in the form of bottle fragments, most of which most likely result from use as targets by the Coast Guardsmen. Others (e.g. the burned bottle in the WR-1 fire feature) probably result from someone/ something else. Other than bottles, we have the one vacuum tube, several pieces of a large flash bulb (found near the tank), the matching thin flat beveled pieces found in '01 and '07, and a shart from a fishing float. Certainly nothing to indicate a whole radio rig or anything similar. TK ******************************************* We can certainly put up graphics and maps on the web site. I can scan them or take Photoshop or Illustrator documents and set them up for the web. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 15:03:38 From: Eric Beheim Subject: Re: Howland island > From William Webster-Garman > > Obliquely related to both AE and FN, the Japanese bombed Howland > Island on 8 December 1941 (putting craters into the airstrips) Coming so soon after Pearl Harbor, this would tend to indicate that Japan was not only aware of this airstrip, but apparently attached enough military significance to it so that it made the A-list of places to bomb first. Hmmmm. LTM (to whom Howland Island had no significance what so ever.) Eric ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 16:52:31 From: Terry Thorgaard Subject: Re: Howland island Or, if the carrier group that had finished striking Pearl Harbor, withdrew in that direction (and I have no idea if it did or not), Howland was hit because it was a target of opportunity. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 20:27:32 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Howland Island The Japanese clearly already knew about the airstrips on Howland (which is no surprise, they had been widely publicized) and attacked them as a part of their general battle plan in early December 1941. Jarvis Island was also part of the DoC colonization project. When they arrived in 1935 the four young Hawaiian colonists, like those on Howland, had also been instructed to "clear" an aircraft landing area on the island. According to their diaries (which show hints of sarcasm) the Jarvis colonists rather half-heartedly measured off and manually cleared stones and other rubble from a flat on the northwestern side of the island. Over on Howland, whatever manual "clearing" done during 1935 and 1936 was minimal and likely of little use. As we know, the DoC installed three graded airstrips and one or two little support structures there in 1937. On Jarvis, like Howland, the most they accomplished was little more than moving some rocks around. Nevertheless, a few days after the Pearl Harbor raid, a Japanese submarine surfaced off Jarvis. The colonists at first thought it might be an American submarine and were terrified when it began machine gunning and shelling their little encampment ("Millertown"). The only other part of the island shelled by the submarine was the northwestern flat where the colonists had previously worked on clearing a "landing area." Post war maps of Jarvis clearly mark the cluster of craters left there by the Japanese shelling. The Jarvis "landing area" had never been of any use for aircraft landing but the DoC had launched the colonization project with much publicity, declaring the four islands involved would all have airports as part of an American network of aviation facilities in the central Pacific. The Japanese would have heard all about this. They clearly knew the Howland strips were developed and capable of handling modern aircraft: They sent 14 bombers over the island and managed to damage the airstrips with craters (two colonists were killed). Apparently the Japanese only sent a single submarine to Jarvis but the shell craters on the northwest side of the island clearly indicate they'd later heard something specific about the colonists' activities there (perhaps through something mentioned in a Hawaiian newspaper). LTM, who had her own word for "blowback," William Webster-Garman ================================================================================ Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 08:11:12 From: Tom King Subject: Niku on R&L blog Rowman and Littlefield, publishers of Amelia Earhart's Shoes, have put up a precis of the 2007 expedition on their blog at http:// rowmanblog.typepad.com/rowman/ LTM (an avid reader) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 11:59:27 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: R&L blog Thanks, Tom, for the link to the excellent synopsis. It goes without saying that our appetites are piqued for more information....but patience must prevail. The first glimpse of the KAP overhead photography looks very impressive, as does the overall success of the expedition. Rick J # 2751 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 12:17:11 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Niku on R&L blog Tom's recap includes the comments, "[in the village] they collected a number of bronze bushings and other parts that just might have been salvaged from an airplane... At the Seven Site... we found some things - a zipper, a snap perhaps from an article of clothing, part of a small pocket knife, a piece of beveled glass that may be from a small mirror - that aren't easily associated with use of the site by Gilbertese colonists and U.S. Coast Guardsmen" Wonderful post, Tom! LTM, who wished she'd brought her compact (with its mirror) to start a campfire. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:24:43 From: Mike Piner Subject: Earhart file From Mike Piner: I am always googling something. LTM (She would not approve); however, if you google "Amelia Earhart file at Purdue University" you would read something mother would have never approved. You "old members may have already read this. Mike ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:56:09 From: Karen Hoy Subject: Re: Earhart file Google (aka the Librarian's Secret Weapon) doesn't like extra words. Try "Amelia Earhart" Purdue. Google adds Boolean search terminology automatically. LTM, (who thinks Google's first name is Barney) Karen ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:56:35 From: Mike Piner Subject: Re: Earhart file > google - " Amelia Earhart file at Purdue University" This is to amend the prev post. look for item # 213. entitled "Meredeth Hall files show Earhart a women's lib buff" . In this newspaper clipping, AE is quoted about the operation of the LEAR compass's reliability. Mike ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:26:18 From: Suzanne Astorino Subject: Re: Earhart file This is the URL for the page that Mike Piner is discussing: http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/ earhart&CISOPTR=1182&CISOBOX=1&REC=6 here's a tiny URL in case the URL breaks up: http://tinyurl.com/2tffd7 It is also interesting to browse through the "George Palmer Putnam Collection of AE Papers" http://www.lib.purdue.edu/spcol/aearhart/ where you can see AE's prenuptial agreement: http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/images/earhart.newdocs/earhart.prenup.jpeg ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:16:11 From: Tom King Subject: Blathering in Atlanta I'll be spending quite a bit of time in Atlanta, GA in the course of 2008, teaching two and three-day classes in historic preservation for the Georgia Dept. of Transportation. If any Forumites in that area would like to host one of my ever-popular Ameliaschpiels (Powerpoint- aided talks on TIGHAR's AE search project, updated regularly -- typically about two hours long including Q&A), I'd be delighted to try to set one (or more) up. There's no charge, though of course contributions to TIGHAR are welcome. Contact me at Tom@tighar.org if interested. LTM (who encourages exhibitionism in her children) ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:05:04 From: Rick Jones Subject: PVH Weems' papers The Tennessee State Library and Archives holds audio tapes of the Weems family, mostly regarding PVH Weems. They also hold PVH Weems' papers in their archives. If anyone has seen these papers, I'm wondering if they are detailed enough in nature to shed any light on the association between Weems and FN, specifically in regards to FN's "Preventer" sextant. (I feel there may be a possibility that FN's sextant could have been a C. Plath, which was marketed by Weems early on.) Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 15:40:54 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Spectral analysis of Niku V 7 site artifacts Making one of my regular "look and see" visits to the TIGHAR website this evening I noticed that preliminary spectral analysis of artifacts from the 7 site has been done and interestingly, doesn't eliminate an AE origin for any of the artifacts (though the beveled glass doesn't carry any measurable evidence of ever having been a mirror). The bottle-bottom seems to be from a type manufactured in Illinois in 1933 and seems to have contained either rapeseed oil or a mix of linseed oil and lanolin, meaning some kind of skin cream or oil. However, the link to the bottle analysis page doesn't work. The URL is coded as: http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/NikuV/Bottle/ NikuVanalysisbottle.html ...but after snooping around the directories I found it to be: http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/ Bottle/NikuVanalysisbottle.html LTM, who like most pilots, had navigation worries from time to time ************************************ I'll get that URL fixed pretty quick here, thanks. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:59:42 From: Rick Jones Subject: Bottles Thank you for posting that link, William W-G. I would like to pass along a web site that is helpful in the identification and use of bottles. http://www.sha.org/bottle/index.htm Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 20:00:30 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Photo Analysis of 1938-39 Gardner Island I've done some interpolation enlargement and focus restoration of some of the early survey photos taken in the 1930's and later. The only copies I have are the ones from the Tighar site. What I found is interesting, but not at all conclusive. The photos and info are posted at http://depletedcranium.com/analysis/ I'm not crazy about these e-mail based forums, so I put together that little site. It might be nothing or just photo noise. The photos are just too low- resolution to actually be able to know much for sure. If anyone knows of better quality versions that would be appreciated. I can be reached at packard.stephen@gmail.com ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:14:03 From: Pat Gaston Subject: Rollin Reineck Just a note to let veteran Forum members know that Col. Rollin Reineck, 87, died last Tuesday in Hawaii, where he had lived for some 30 years. He was a decorated veteran of the air war in the Pacific, flying or navigating countless B-29 missions over Japan before finishing his military career at the Pentagon. When I visited Rollin and Esther at their home in Kailua five years ago, he confessed that he had "fallen in love" with AE as a teenager, and that boyhood crush led him eventually into the ranks of Earhart researchers. While in later years Rollin became enamored of the Irene Bolam fantasy, I always suspected that was because he couldn't bear the thought of his beloved AE simply plunging into the ocean -- or dying alone under a Ren tree, or being shot on Saipan. He wanted to bring her home safe and sound, and in his mind he did. Rollin was, above all, a true gentlemen. Though our disagreements were many, he never became disagreeable. And he was always ready to help with questions about navigation, 1930s technology, and a variety of other subjects regardless of which camp the question came from. He was a former TIGHAR member, and a frequent contributor to this Forum until the gulf between his convictions and the Niku theory finally became unbridgeable. So ave atque vale, Rollin. I hope you and AE (and Irene) are having a good laugh about now. Do have a Vat 69 with Fred for me. Pat Gaston ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:15:00 From: Paige Miller Subject: photo work Stephen Packard writes: > I've done some interpolation enlargement and focus restoration of > some of the early survey photos taken in the 1930's and later. > The only copies I have are the ones from the Tighar site. What I > found is interesting, but not at all conclusive. The photos and > info are posted at http://depletedcranium.com/analysis/ I'm not > crazy about these e-mail based forums, so I put together that > little site. It might be nothing or just photo noise. The > photos are just too low- resolution to actually be able to know > much for sure. Absolutely fascinating work. Thanks! Has this area of Nikumaroro been thoroughly searched by TIGHAR? ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:15:33 From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Photo Analysis of 1938-39 Gardner Island Some really interesting work Stephen. However, the hypothesis you raise regarding the bright spot being an aircraft seems to me to be a little too illogical. Reasons: If it was an aircraft I wonder how the initial search flyover in July 1937 missed it. Also, the photo shows the expeditionary boat at anchor just off the Norwich and nothing in their report mentions the aircraft. I just can't get it out of my head that AE's 10E had to be gone from sight by the time the Colorado crew flew over the island and same with subsequent visits. Maybe bits and pieces were laying around but I find it hard to believe that anything large enough to be identified as an airplane was visible shortly (4-5 days) after they landed. I would like to see what would happen to the early photos of the "seven site" if you subjected the pictures to the same analysis. Keep up the good work. Ted Campbell ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:17:30 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: Bottles Not sure if you've seen this photo or not, but maybe of use? http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/ earhart&CISOPTR=279&CISOBOX=1&REC=2 ************************************* Yes, we are familiar with the Purdue collection. The bottle fragment we have is much smaller. Pat Thrasher ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:18:44 From: John Barrett Subject: Re: Photo Analysis of 1938-39 Gardner Island A couple of questions about the photo enhancement... What is the relation of the location on/near the beach to where the "Wheel of Fortune" was supposed to be? Is it possible that the object was indeed the Electra and that the wheel was ripped away when the plane was washed off the beach? If the object was the plane, what would the water level at that location be if the plane was on its gear or on its belly? Would the tide at that location affect the batteries/radio? LTM- John Barrett, TIGHAR member who can't remember his number > From Stephen Packard > > I've done some interpolation enlargement and focus restoration of > some of the early survey photos taken in the 1930's and later. The > only copies I have are the ones from the Tighar site. What I found > is interesting, but not at all conclusive. The photos and info are > posted at http://depletedcranium.com/analysis/ I'm not crazy about > these e-mail based forums, so I put together that little site. It > might be nothing or just photo noise. The photos are just too low- > resolution to actually be able to know much for sure. > > If anyone knows of better quality versions that would be > appreciated. I can be reached at packard.stephen@gmail.com ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:37:41 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Re: Photo Analysis of 1938-39 Gardner Island Stephen Packard writes: > I've done some interpolation enlargement and focus restoration of > some of the early survey photos taken in the 1930's and later. > The only copies I have are the ones from the Tighar site. What I > found is interesting, but not at all conclusive. The photos and > info are posted at http://depletedcranium.com/analysis/ I'm not > crazy about these e-mail based forums, so I put together that > little site. It might be nothing or just photo noise. The > photos are just too low- resolution to actually be able to know > much for sure. Paige Miller asked: > Absolutely fascinating work. Thanks! Has this area of Nikumaroro > been thoroughly searched by TIGHAR? The area was thoroughly searched by TIGHAR during the 1999 expedition. Prior to our most recent trip, Stephen also provided us with some leads to check out near the Seven Site. We very much appreciate his efforts but the anomalies he has identified are all photographic "noise." It can be quite difficult to distinguish these flaws in the developing or copying process from actual objects and features. In the absence of "ground truth" investigation, you really need two nearly simultaneous photos of the same area to be sure that there was really something there. We do have such photos for some of the island from a 1953 aerial mapping survey and there does seem to be some light colored metal debris on the reef in Tatiman Passage at that time. Unfortunately, the Seven Site was not covered in that survey. Ric Gillespie Executive Director TIGHAR ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:43:07 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Re: Photo Analysis of 1938-39 Gardner Island John Barrett asks, > A couple of questions about the photo enhancement... What is the > relation of the location on/near the beach to where the "Wheel of > Fortune" was supposed to be? The two locations are about a mile apart. The "Wheel of Fortune" was reportedly seen near the south-side lagoon outlet of Tatiman Passage. > Is it possible that the object was indeed the Electra and that the > wheel was ripped away when the plane was washed off the beach? In the original photo, the white anomaly on the beach in the 1938 photo is quite clearly a flaw in the photo. > If the object was the plane, what would the water level at that > location be if the plane was on its gear or on its belly? Would the > tide at that location affect the batteries/radio? The plane would be high and dry on the beach in that location even at high tide. Ric ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:11:51 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: Photo analysis I thought that the white area on the beach photo seemed to be too "good" to be the aircraft, because it stood out so much it would have been noticed. However I figured I'd run it by. However there is something in the 7 site photos I'd like to draw attention to. This photo was taken in 1938 and is cropped to an area above the 7-site and toward the lagoon. http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/ 1938crop.jpg There is an object which has very hard edges, appears to cast a shadow and has two or three distinct dark areas on it. What makes this interesting and definately not a photo defect is that it can be seen on the 1941 photo as well, although moved slightly and not as clearly: http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/ 7_1941_crop.jpg http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/ 1941rotatebig.jpg The highlighted area near it appears conical. This is seems to be a geological feature. It's just a slightly pointed rock or outcropping. In recent photos from the same area the "conical" rock is still visible but there is no indication of any terain that would account for the "spotted box" or whatever you want to call it. It looks something like a box but depending on the lighting can almost look somewhat "bean" shaped. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:59:07 From: Jim Tierney Subject: Re: Rollin Reineck To Pat Gaston--Nice obituary/eulogy/summary of Rollin Reinecks life. He was obviously a nice man whose thoughts conflicted with ours. Your comment on AE/RR/IB enjoying a dram in the heavenly pilots lounge was brilliant. Jim Tierney ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:19:11 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Photo analysis Very impressive technique, Stephen. Could this type of analysis make the zipper pull in this Purdue photo clear enough to compare it with the one found at Niku's 7 site? (I can't imagine a pair of slacks having anything but an unobtrusive shaped zipper pull.) With the economic conditions of the time being what they were, it would not surprise me if these very slacks were still in AE's wardrobe at the time of her flight. http://tinyurl.com/preview.php?num=3dc5u Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:37:36 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Photo analysis Here is a corrected tinyurl: (Purdue photo, AE's zipper) http://tinyurl.com/3dc5u7 Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:49:23 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Re: Photo analysis Rick Jones asks: > Very impressive technique, Stephen. Could this type of analysis > make the > zipper pull in this Purdue photo clear enough to compare it with > the one found > at Niku's 7 site? As I'm sure Stephen will attest, this kind of enhancement technique does not provide any more information than is in the original image. It takes the information that is there and makes assumptions about what is missing in order to provide a clearer image. I went through all of this with Jeff Glickman of Photek when it first came up. Ric ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:08:28 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Photo analysis Stephen, what's the context of the location imaged? Is the linear light area within which the peculiar object appears to sit the top of the "Seven?" And are the two bright spots in the dark area below and to the left flaws in the film? Thanks -- Tom ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:07:47 From: Tom King Subject: Ameliaschpiels in Atlanta Several folks have expressed interest in having me blather about the project during one or more of my forthcoming stays in Atlanta, and a couple of people have asked for my schedule (Don I, your return email address didn't work). Here it is. I don't yet know what part of town I'll be in. If people want to just get together for a talk, that would be fine, or if anyone knows an organization that would like to have me do the schpiel, that would be good too. I have a Powerpoint presentation that runs about an hour, and then Q&A. Tom Tom's Atlanta 2008 schedule January 22-25: February 26-28: March 11-13: April 1-3: April 22-24: May 13-15: June 3-6: June 11-12: July 15-17: August 12-14: August 26-28: September 16-18: December 11-12: ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:09:48 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: Photo analysis Well, first of all the interpolation enlargement is not going to add any detail. It can help you determine the shape of something by making a good guess as to where an edge is based on the pixel information around it. There's some interesting mathmatics that goes on, but when it comes down to it you're turning "blocky" lack of detail into "smooth" lack of detail. It helps a lot in interpertation, but it can't be relied on too much and it does not add any information to the image. You can also refocus images. The best software I've seen for this is focus magic. It's good at turning badly out-of-focus images into slightly out-of-focus images. But turning slightly out-of-focus images into in-focus images is something that's generally difficult/ impossible with any current techniques. What impressed me about the image of the area "above" (somewhat north north-west) of the seven site is that the apparent object appears in the 1938 photo and seems to be in the 1941 photo. The shoreline and the "pointy" rock formation make for some very good refrence points to make sure you're in the same area. The object is apparent on the original sized image without any refocusing or enlargement. it appears to be the profile of a box or possibly a "bean" or "kidney" shapped object. There are uncharacteristically dark pixels on the edge of it. The interperation of it by a number of methods tends to agree that it is a hard-edged object with a highlighted top and two or three dark regions or possibly indentations. Here you can see that depending on focusing and the profile radius and constraints of various methods, the object comes out a bit different. www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/alternative.jpg But generally, it seems that it's a light colored, hard-profiled object with dots or indentations on it. What convinces me it is not a photographic defect is that it seems to appear in the 1941 image in the same general area but moved slightly. The 1941 image does not show it in as good detail, but there's definitely something of the same approximate size and shape there and moved only slightly. The "spots" are actually more apparent in the 1941 image. The 1937 image is just too hard to tell. There are a couple of possible objects in that area, but the only one that could be the same item is not nearly clear enough to tell much about. I'm not sure if it's the lighting or the film of the 1937 image, but unfrotionately the gradiants are just not very good. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:36:31 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Photo analysis OK, now I understand (I think) that what you're looking at is the really bright object near the left-hand edge of the image. Right? I'm still puzzled about where this is. Can you put up larger chunks of the '38 and '41 airphotos with the location indicated somehow? Thanks ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 19:48:35 From: Peter Boor Subject: Re: Photo analysis Zippers - my memory is that all of my pants in the 30s had buttons in the fly - pmb. ********************************* Zippers were brand new, more of a style statement than an accepted fastener. Schiaparelli, who made clothes for Earhart, was a big promoter of them. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:54:14 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: Photo analysis There's not much that can be done with the photo provided of the zipper. Aside from mess with the contrast and brightness to make it easier to see. That's it. It's not the sort of thing that's going to make a difference if you interpolate it. It's already in good focus and there's too much grain and not enough definition to do any meaningful sharpening or anything. Here's the item pointed out in the 1938 photo, full, uncropped and unenlarged. http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/7_1938.jpg ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:27:12 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Photo analysis Ah, so we're talking about the lagoon shore quite a ways northwest of the Seven Site. An area we've looked at cursorily but certainly never inspected in close detail. Wish we'd had this bit of information before the latest expedition; it would have been easy enough to check it out. It's not far from where Ric and his team went ashore to cut through to the "Arrowhead" area, but a bit farther to the northwest, right Ric? ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:35:27 From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Re: Photo analysis > From Tom King for Stephen Packard > > Ah, so we're talking about the lagoon shore quite a ways northwest > of the Seven Site. An area we've looked at cursorily but certainly > never inspected in close detail. Wish we'd had this bit of > information before the latest expedition; it would have been easy > enough to check it out. Stephen did give me this information before the latest expedition. I spent quite a bit of time examining various versions of the 1938 photo and discussing it with Jeff Glickman of Photek. Jeff, as you know, is a board-certified forensic imaging specialist. As much as I wanted to believe that the anomalies that Stephen pointed out are objects on the ground, it was quite apparent that they are flaws in the photo and I made the decision not to devote expedition time to chasing them. The anomalies don't appear at all in the version of the photo processed by Jeff in which the "trails" are apparent. The dark areas that he interprets as shadows beside a bright spot are also present on other anomalies in the same area, but fall on the opposite side of the bright spot. The sun does not cast shadows in different directions at the same time. Stephen says, "What convinces me it is not a photographic defect is that it seems to appear in the 1941 image in the same general area but moved slightly." This is backwards reasoning. The image is far too indistinct to say that it is the same object in both photos. The fact that the anomaly does not appear in the same place in both photos is a strong argument that it is not real. > It's not far from where Ric and his team went ashore to cut through > to the "Arrowhead" area, but a bit farther to the northwest, right > Ric? We had several false starts in trying to pin down the spot where the "arrowhead" appears in the 1938 photo. The net effect is that we had people all through the area both north and south of the arrowhead, and frequently in trees, trying to get our bearings. If the anomaly Stephen pointed out was an object on the ground it would have to be several meters across and tall enough to cast a "shadow." It's hard to see how we could have missed it. We had a similar situation in 1999 when Jeff Glickman identified a man-made object in the 1941 photo. We went in on the ground and succeeded in finding the water tank - an object considerably smaller than Stephen's anomaly. I have learned (in some cases, the hard way) that forensic imaging is a complex science best left to professionals. Ric ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:58:32 From: Tom King Subject: Earhart expedition blog For whatever interest it may have.... T *********************************** From Altamira Press: Hi Thomas, Thank you for sending along the information about your most current expedition. We have posted it to R&L's main website as a blog entry. The permanent link for this blog is below. If you would like to post to a personal website or the TIGHAR website, please feel free to do so. http://rowmanblog.typepad.com/rowman/2007/10/in-amelia-earha.html All the best, ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:12:09 From: Tom King Subject: Atlanta Ameliaschpiel The Georgia Dept. of Transportation's Office of Environment and Location (sponsor of the historic preservation classes I'm doing in Atlanta) has offered to sponsor an Ameliaschpiel in their 90-person capacity conference room. How does the evening of February 25 seem as a date? LTM (who can always get a date) Tom ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 19:31:35 From: Paige Miller Subject: Re: Photo analysis Stephen Packard says: > However there is something in the 7 site photos I'd like to draw > attention to. This > photo was taken in 1938 and is cropped to an area above the 7-site > and toward the lagoon. http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/ > 1938crop.jpg Then Tom King says: > OK, now I understand (I think) that what you're looking at is the > really bright object near the left-hand edge of the image. > Right? I'm still puzzled about where this is. Can you put up > larger chunks of the '38 and '41 airphotos with the location > indicated somehow? I have to agree with Tom. Unless we can see some context, these pictures are meaningless to me. Creating something like your earlier effort, where you had arrows pointing to the objects of interest and text to describe what you are seeing, would be extremely helpful in this case. I realize that's a fair amount of work, much more so than simply putting more jpegs on the website. Regardless, your work is fascinating. Thanks. Paige Miller LTM (who was always seeing things) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:51:11 From: Jerry Hamilton Subject: PVH Weems papers In my Noonan investigations I managed to meet Weems' grandson. At the time he was living in his grandfathers' home in Annapolis (the furnishings looked like they had been suspended in a 1930s time capsule) . He also had a basement full of papers from his grandfather. He was kind enough to let myself and Dennis McGee spend an afternoon going through them. Unfortunately, nothing directly related to Noonan was found. My hope was to find some correspondence. His grandson believes their is some someplace. I don't recall him mentioning Tennessee. Dennis also had a look at the sextants at the Smithsonian which are part of the Weems collection. My recollection is that no smoking guns were found. It would be interesting to find out what Tennessee has. Much of it may relate to the Weems family history which goes back through the civil war. But you never know until you get eyes on it. blue skies, JHam ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:51:51 From: Dennis McGee Subject: Re: Rollin Reineck Pat Gaston: Nice obit on Rollin. Thanks. I, too, had a few words early on with Rollin. In the early days of this forum (2000/2001?) things occasionally got a little heated and he and I exchanged some not too nice comments regarding our views on the AE/Nike theory. I forget the particular dispute but in the end he called me "Ric Gillespie's lap dog," which I thought humorous because at the time I was a solid 250 pounds. Lap dog, indeed! More like a Great Dane actually. I'm sorry to hear he passed away but I'm pleased to note that he and Ric never took their disagreements beyond a few murmured and muttered expletives. I wish his family the best. LTM, who no longer casts the first stone Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:00:53 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: PVH Weems papers Jerry, what is in Tennessee and where? I have family there. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:39:23 From: Tom Doran Subject: Re: Bones search questions > From Marty Moleski > > I don't see any of the resistance we met as signs of a coverup. I > see it as indifference to the questions we're asking. Amelia is > not an interesting character to people from other cultures. I wonder if a desire to seek resolution in missing persons cases is a peculiarly American trait. People not only want to know the fate, they want the body. We have the example of the great national interest in MIA's from Vietnam. Before that it was Korea, WWI & WWII. Combat casualties are still occasionally recovered and repatriated from those conflicts. The British, on the other hand, bury their soldiers where they fall. If the British want to visit their son/brother/father's grave they'll have to go to the Falklands, Malaysia or wherever. It occurred to me while watching the recent Ken Burns series on PBS, that there were millions of casualties on all sides that simply went missing. No one took notice of the bodies of their opponents. It doesn't seem that anyone could or did ID the countless dead civilians. Some armies seem to have made little accounting of their own dead. There were a couple of scenes in the Burns series of bodies being bulldozed into a mass grave by one side or another. All ages, men and women, military or civilian, they were just debris to be disposed of. In this country we spent millions of dollars performing DNA identification on random chunks of flesh after 9/11. Tom Doran, #2796 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:31:36 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Weems' papers For Alan Caldwell Alan, "Sources for US Naval History Homepage: Repository List for Tennessee" http://www.history.navy.mil/sources/tn/tns.htm , says this: "Weems, Philip V. Papers, 1833-1965 The collection includes material on the Weems System of navigation. 15,000 items" The archives they refer to are here: Tennessee State Library and Archives 403 Seventh Avenue North Nashville, TN 37219 Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:32:21 From: Tom Doran Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels > From Tom King for Atlanta-area forumites > > The Georgia Dept. of Transportation's Office of Environment and > Location (sponsor of the historic preservation classes I'm doing in > Atlanta) has offered to sponsor an Ameliaschpiel in their 90-person > capacity conference room. How does the evening of February 25 seem > as a date? Sounds great to me. Are there other Atlanta-area TIGHAR members? Tom D. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:32:43 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones search question For Tom Doran <> We're not entirely alone in this. Japanese organizations, for instance, have spent lots of money sending "bone collecting" expeditions to the Micronesian islands of their former mandate, recovering and either repatriating or respectfully cremating remains, including some of those Ken Burns portrayed being bulldozed into trenches on Saipan. Historic preservation authorities in the Marianas and Palau have actually had to put pretty strict controls on these groups to keep them from digging up prehistoric cemeteries. But it doubtless is a desire that's variable across cultures. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:33:09 From: Rick Boardman Subject: Re: Bones search question Having visited Normandy many times with my Dad, and therefore having seen a few BIG graveyards, I'm not surprised the military mentality during (or immediately after) a conflict is to get bodies buried as quickly as possible, It's such a high priority that opposing units have been known to call short truces just to tidy up the carnage, before continuing the battle. Why? Because theirs a real fear of disease and vermin creating more casualties among the living, and in a combat zone, you don't have the luxury of time to behave in a more civilized manner with the dead. I don't think this, or for that matter DNA profiling of 9/11 fatalities, has much to do with the bones hunt process. The reasoning is far removed from the 1937 need to dispose of some obscure (to them) bones found on a small atoll. By which I guess I mean it was ultra important that every possible means was used to ID fragments (literally) of 9/11, wheras pressure of time caused mass graves to be used in WW2. There was no reason to worry much about burying a set of old bones, once they'd been (falsely??) ID'd as not belonging to our heroin Rick Boardman ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:35:36 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Weems' papers Thanks. I'll be there in December for the holidays. Alan ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:12:37 From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Re: Bones search question Some notes from an amateur military historian (me!) regarding truces... There are, and were, other reasons for calling a truce during battles to reclaim the dead and injured, other than medical. (1). In past years, looting of bodies for coins, money, weapons, etc., was a very common practice. Holding a truce would prevent theft of property and weapons by the enemy by retrieval of each side's victims. (2). Wounded and dead on the battlefield seriously impairs the ability to mount attacks on horse or foot. Cleaning up the battlefield with a truce enables both sides to continue the battle afterwards with a cleaner "playing field". (3). Recovery of weaponry by each side was a high priority prior to the introduction of firearms, and to some extent, afterwards. Arrows were in short supply, and retrieval of arrows for re-use was a high priority during the 100 Year War, for example. Similarly, retrieval of muskets, rifles, and associated ammunition from the dead would replenish the living soldier's supply of weaponry. (4). Battles were fatiguing; there's no doubt about that. A truce was often held to allow each side to catch their breath, drink ale/wine to regain courage, and for the commanders, allow redistribution of troops to better affect the future outcome. It wasn't until the 1850's or so that knowledge of disease and vermin on the timescale of a battle (one day) would cause injury to those still fighting. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:12:56 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: PVH Weems papers For Alan Caldwell Here is the description listed by TSLA for the Weems papers: "Philip Van Horn Weems Papers, 1833-1965. 31 linear feet. TSLA. This collection of retired U.S. Navy Captain, author, former partner of Weems System of Navigation, inventor and teacher, Philip Van Horn Weems, contain accounts, correspondence, diaries, biographical and genealogical data, inventions, photographs, materials on naval and navigation, records of Weems System of Navigation, and student records and courses taught in schools of Weems System of Navigation" Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:28:56 From: Hilary Olson Subject: Re: Bones search question To Tom Doran, I realize what you are driving at with the Amelia search but in defense of this British Lasses family and many many others , we are still searching for my Great Grandfather John and his Brother Peter's remains who were burried in mass graves in Ypres Salient on Hill 60 after being killed by Mustard Gas on13th May(John) & 8th July (Peter) 1915 WWI . The CWGC are told daily of human remains found . They have our DNA and yes we do visit Menin Gate. With searching for Amelia it is a passion based on respect ,intrigue and a readiness to exhale.... Searching for my family we know how they died we know they were brave and we know there are thousands and thousands of people buried with them in a very vast area . Paschendale was horrific. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:29:28 From: Hilary Olson Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels I am in Mooresville NC but would definitely travel to attend Dr Kings Atlanta Ameliaschpiel. Hilary #2633 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:30:33 From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels Yes, there is at least one other TIGHAR member in Atlanta, me. I have given Tom's schedule to the local EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) chapter at the Lawrenceville airport (about 25-30 miles NE of downtown Atlanta) to see if they would be interested in hosting Tom and his presentation. I expect to hear back in a little while. They have quite a turn out (100-150) when they put on their monthly breakfast and from time to time some speakers on aviation matters (history, flight rules, old bomber pilots, etc.). Once I hear back from the EAA I plan on sending Tom an email to see if he would be interested in proceeding with a presentation. Or they may contact him directly. Ted Campbell ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:08:05 From: Tom Doran Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels > From: Ted Campbell > I have given Tom's schedule to the local EAA (Experimental Aircraft > Association) chapter at the Lawrenceville airport (about 25-30 >> miles NE of downtown Atlanta) to see if they would be interested > in hosting Tom and his presentation. If they can bring out 100 people for their own events, would that indicate some potential for a more substantive event? Something public on a weekend with static displays and a table to sell hats, maps, books, memberships, etc.? Some of those EA guys might have the potential to be donors. Tom Doran #2796 ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:42:55 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels It looks like February 25th will work for the GA DOT as the date for an Ameliaschpiel. I'll make more information available, and/or they will, as it develops. I'd be happy to do one for the EAA, too, maybe later in the year, and if anybody wants to organize a bigger and fancier show, that's fine with me. LTM (who taught her children to be accommodating) ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:42:34 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: Photo analysis I'll try to document it better. A can now see that the images which were of the norwhich city area were at best "wishful" the images were low resolution and it was only a hypothysis. I'll try to get some more done with the ones of the 7-site area. I disagree that it's "backward reasoning" but I suppose were all entitled to our opinions. The area north of the 7-site is very clearly relatively bare. This is not unusual. The island had been in a state of drought. There are several items in that area which I am very confident are items on the ground. As to whether these are just rocks or branches and such. That is subject to interpertation. I'll put up another page in the next few days. > From Paige Miller > > Stephen Packard says: > >> However there is something in the 7 site photos I'd like to draw >> attention to. This >> photo was taken in 1938 and is cropped to an area above the 7-site >> and toward the lagoon. http://www.depletedcranium.com/analysis/ > 1938crop.jpg > > Then Tom King says: > >> OK, now I understand (I think) that what you're looking at is the >> really bright object near the left-hand edge of the image. >> Right? I'm still puzzled about where this is. Can you put up >> larger chunks of the '38 and '41 airphotos with the location >> indicated somehow? > > I have to agree with Tom. Unless we can see some context, these > pictures are meaningless to me. Creating something like your earlier > effort, where you had arrows pointing to the objects of interest and > text to describe what you are seeing, would be extremely helpful in > this case. I realize that's a fair amount of work, much more so than > simply putting more jpegs on the website. Regardless, your work is > fascinating. Thanks. ======================================================================== Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:57:36 From: Barry Robinson Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels Count me in for an Atlanta event by Tom King! Barry Robinson TIGHAR 2114 Clemson, SC ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 08:59:25 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels If everyone interested in the proposed February 25, 2008 Ameliaschpiel at the Georgia DOT in downtown Atlanta will send me their contact information (name and email), I'll make sure you're notified as plans firm up. Please send to Tom@tighar.org Thanks, Tom ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 10:05:52 From: Tom King Subject: Rectangular ferrous box? Here's a question for the all-knowing Forum. One of the ferrous objects I'm trying to piece together from the Seven Site -- from pieces of rust never more than 3/4" across -- is something that had the following characteristics (I think): Base (or at least, the part on the ground) was square or rectangular, about 40 cm. (say 16") on a side. Other dimensions unknown. Ferrous metal, now (in rusted, exfoliating form) ranges between about 2 and 4 mm. thick. Rounded corners/edges. Small bumps like rivet heads, but I don't think they're really rivet heads, in a row near at least one edge. I'm thinking I've seen tin boxes, like biscuit or tea boxes, that more or less fit this description, but I certainly can't find an example illustrated anywhere on the web. Of course, it's not necessarily a box at all; it might be some sort of flat plate, or maybe a rectangular skillet, or...??? It was found near one of the fire features at the Seven Site, next to one of the concentrations of Tridacna clam shells. Ideas are solicited. LTM (who hates to be boxed in) ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:31:00 From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box? Tom, could it have been an ammo box? Alan ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:31:27 From: Karen Hoy Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box? Tom, I've just spent some time Googling different things, and looking for pictures of tin tea and biscuit boxes and big iron things. The only biscuit/tea boxes I could find were small--like pencil cases--or made in unusual shapes. Is there any surviving evidence of enameling on this 16" object? I found bread pans of that size, with the traditional blue (sometimes black) enamel finish. Weren't enameled items often used in ship galleys? LTM (who has an enamel bread pan) Karen Hoy ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:32:00 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box Looking through the Luke Field Inventory for a starting place I saw item #70, Bauer & Black first aid kit that might be a candidate. http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Documents/Luke_Field.html There were several vintage first aid kits, the B&B ranging in size from 3-4 inches to the one pictured in the link below (E-bay). A Burroughs Wellcome tabloid kit, also on the inventory, was also on E-bay, but is a pocket sized kit. http://tinyurl.com/yq8vno It did have round corners, and is similar to a cookie or tea tin. Other candidates from the inventory might be lub/grease cans (items 55-57 on the Luke inventory), and possibly item 25, a tool kit could be of ferrous construction. As a sidebar, inventory item #67, a bottle of collyrium, often came in a bottle shaped like the one Stephen Packard brought up last week. http://tinyurl.com/23p7cw http://glswrk-auction.com/mc09.htm This is an eye balm or wash, and it was common to have an eyecup attached as part of the stopper. Whether or not any of the artifact glassware found is similar in shape I don't know. Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 17:25:45 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box Thanks for the ideas -- all good ones, but.... <> The thickness of the metal may be about right, but if it was sitting on its base when it rusted away it would have been a square container about 40 cm. on a side, which doesn't match any ammo box I've seen. If it were lying on its side, though -- maybe. But then there are the rivet-like bumps -- sort of faux rivets, I think, which don't seem right for an ammo box. <> No, and again, there's the problem of the bumps. <> Maybe, but as you say, the one you found on EBay appears way too small. 40 cm. on a side seems big for a first aid kit, but maybe not. The bottle Rick points out, by the way, is about the same shape as one of those from the Seven Site, but appears bigger. What's likely to tell the tale on that one is chemical analysis of the residue in the bottom, which we haven't yet had the money to have done. LTM, who is appreciative and encouraging as a mother should be. ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:19:07 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box Tom, do the rivet like bumps along one edge look like some sort of stiffening or strengthening method, or do you think they served someother purpose--e.g. to accommodate the contents. If the max size of the rusted remains was about 3/4", then these "dimples" would be fairly small, right? Is there any way to post a photo? Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:20:55 From: Tom Hickcox Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box A friend was able to come up with a couple of pics of WW2 vintage ammo boxes: eBay Item number: 180171137623 (Go to eBay and search for item # . . .) .50 Cal Neither of these have rivets or rivet-like features. Also http://users.skynet.be/jeeper/page62.html Tom Hickcox #2725 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 12:01:42 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box I browsed through some war surplus websites thinking of things like metal mess trays (12x17), jerry cans or holders, etc, then ran across this mortar base plate on e-bay. Are the "rivet" bumps similar or more pronounced? This, I am sure, is a contemporary item and I don't know if the Coasties had anything similar. http://tinyurl.com/386n36 Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:48:00 From: Rick Jones Subject: Niku V KAP photos up See some of the Kite Aerial Photography results for Niku V here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/flickrdave/sets/72157601511040476/ Rick Jones. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:48:23 From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box? The first thing that comes to my mind is a container from the Norwich City cache; maybe a water can? That would be something worth lugging to your base camp. Are the bumps on the "bottom" - that is, the side which was on the ground? When you say rounded corners or edges, does that mean that the sides bend up (as opposed to an attached or 90 degree side), or the square/rectangular part on the ground is rounded at the corners? A picture on the website would be immensely helpful. Seems to me that as ferrous metal objects oxidize, the metal can appear to "swell", which might suggest that the actual material was somewhat thinner than it is now. Jon 2266 ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:49:54 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: rectangular ferrous box? Your description is intriguing but I'd be interested to see some images or even just a drawing. That would help put the terms "rounded" and "bumps" in context ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:50:19 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Fire remains? I'm a bit unclear on something. Have there been any charred areas or the remains of a possible fire pit found anywhere in the seven site area? I thought I recalled that there was an apparent fire but I don't see that now that I am going back to look. Gallaghar did mention on in his assessment of the site where he stated the bones were found. Also is there a good and up-to-date diagram of the placement of the items found at the seven site? ideally one which shows the "seven" since that's a good unchanging point of refrence. I'd assume that a firepit would have a good chance of still being evident, as they often are found in camp sites from centuries past, but if it were a small fire and there wasn't much of a "pit" dug that might not be the case. ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:34:36 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Rectangular ferrous box Thanks to everybody for the ideas. The mortar base looks KIND OF similar to what I'm looking at, and I'll have comments on several other ideas, but I'm on the road at the moment with somewhat limited email access, so it'll probably be next week before I can respond in detail. And I'll discuss with Pat and Ric putting something up on the website, which I know would be desirable. Understand, though, that I'm working with VERY small fragments -- like 3/4 inch on the side max, so a lot of questions about bump spacing and such are pretty hard to answer. Indeed, the bumps are easier to feel than to see, and easier to see than to photograph. I can see them when I scan the pieces and blow them up in Photoshop, but it's not easy. I should say that I don't think they're rivets; there doesn't seem to be anything going through the metal, and there also are no "dimples" on the other side, so it doesn't look like they're pressed. I think they're sort of applique, ersatz rivet heads, but I could real easily be wrong. Again, we're talking about tiny pieces of very oxidized metal here. One more thing; I said yesterday that the bump-pieces don't show evidence of being enamel. That's still true, but after I wrote it I started looking at pieces of ferrous from the other fire feature we dug this year, and it looks like they very well could have enamel on at least one side. And no bumps. LTM (who's intrigued by things that go bump in the site) ======================================================================== Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:35:05 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Fire features Yes, there are at least five "fire features" or "burn features" at the Seven Site -- three excavated in 2001, two in 2007. Each is between a meter and 2 meters in rough diameter, and contained charcoal, ash, and burned and unburned bone -- bird, fish, and turtle, in varying percentages. Each goes down about 10 cm. from the "surface," but at the Seven Site "surface" isn't a very stable concept, because the site is made up of rubbly coral, through whose uppermost levels things tend to sift. Still, virtually everything in all five features has come from the 0-10 cm. level. We haven't found any more such features (as we expected we would), but whether that means they're not there or that we simply didn't find them under the rubbly surface is debatable. Preparing a detailed topographic site map is one of my main jobs, but it's taking me awhile; I need better software than I have for converting our total station elevations to map form. We could, I think, fairly promptly put up a good non-topographic map showing relationships. The map of the site in "Shoes" is fairly accurate, and actually shows all five features (since we FOUND them all in '01, but only excavated two of them this year), but it does contain some inaccuracies, and is very incomplete in its depiction of things like the distribution of ferrous metal on the surface. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:22:46 From: Stephen Packard Subject: What about a reward for the bones and box? This might sound like a crazy idea, but I have been thinking recently about the box and bones that went MIA such a long time ago, and I'm wondering if the way to do it would be to post a reward for their retrieval. I have been to Fiji, where I did a lot of scuba diving in 2003. I wasn't aware of the research of Tighar at the time or I would have at least tried to see if i could help when I was there. Fiji is not exactly lawless, but it's hardly the kind of place where there's good consistant protocals for things. Generally things are a bit rough and the locals are quite easy to deal with, but on occasion I had them try to sell me something for a lot more than it was worth. It's a barter/finders-keepers/verbal-contract kind of place. Personally, based on what I know of Fiji, it would not surprise me to find out that such items ended up being displayed in some touristy shop as "Real relics of cannibalism" or being sold to someone or kept as a souvineer. It's a place with that kind of shrewd economics. Where the bones might be now, if they have not been destroyed, is anyone's guess. They might be in the attic of a home or in the backroom of an archive at the FSM or under a cluttered desk in an anatomy classroom or sold to someone as a novelty. So what about offering some money for anyone who might know? Or to get some interest? A few posters around FSM or the area stating that a reward is offered for anyone who has information leading to the recovery of the bones and/or other items. It might jog someone's memory "My great uncle's neighbor used to have a box with some bones in it that he said were from the medical school." or "When I was working at the archive a few years ago I think that there was a box like that in one of the lockers." Okay... it's a long shot, right? But you don't have to actually pay the money unless something is found. Nothing really to loose, and a lot to gain if it pans out. Worst case senerio is that it might lead to some false leads. And besides... the exchange rate is pretty favorable. Seems like a couple grand as a reward would be small price to pay. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:24:58 From: Ted Campbell Subject: Nikumaroro I have been revisiting the reports, etc., on the island and a couple of questions come to mind about its inhabitancy over the years since July 1937. When I read about the hassle you guys go through with the underbrush just to get around I wonder how a castaway could end up making "trails." Does this underbrush have to be cut or would routine walking on/over eventually wear it down into a trail? Concerning the "fire pits" is it fairly easy to dig a hole with hand tools (a spoon, a scoop of some type, etc.) that would be visible some 70 years later? Do the holes penetrate the underlying coral? Do we have any idea if the islanders, or others, ever had live stock on the island? I am wondering if the trails could have been made by grazing livestock instead of a castaway. Finally, do we know if the islanders "got away" from the hustle and bustle of village life from time to time to camp out near the 7 site? Build a fire and cook a few mussels, claims, crabs and the like over a nice open fire with a friendly companion! All the hard work you go through on each expedition just to gain access seems to me a bit tough for a not so equipped castaway. Any thoughts on these issue would be appreciated. Ted Campbell ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:20:11 From: Tom King Subject: Re: Nikumaroro >When I read about the hassle you guys go through with the underbrush >just to get around I wonder how a castaway could end up making >"trails." Does this underbrush have to be cut or would routine >walking on/over eventually wear it down into a trail? The places where "trails" show up in airphotos are places where there isn't any underbrush, or where it's quite thin, and there we typically have some variation on what we call "moonscape" -- a coral rubble surface that's been blackened by exposure to the sun and algae growth. It doesn't take much walking across this sort of surface to make a trail, and if you're an ill-equipped castaway (or TIGHAR), that's where you're going to walk. When Ric first detected the "trails" he compared them with airphotos of known trails, and they compared quite well. >Concerning the "fire pits" is it fairly easy to dig a hole with hand >tools (a spoon, a scoop of some type, etc.) that would be visible >some 70 years later? Do the holes penetrate the underlying coral? They're not really pits; that's why we call 'em "fire features" or "burn features." The fires were evidentally on the ground surface, and to the extent there's depth to the features it's because the contents have filtered down through the coral rubble; they're never more than 10-15 cm. deep. >Do we have any idea if the islanders, or others, ever had live stock >on the island? I am wondering if the trails could have been made by >grazing livestock instead of a castaway. They had pigs, chickens, dogs and cats, but the thing about the "trails" around the Seven Site is that they show up in photos taken before the colonists were settled in, and before even pigs and chickens had arrived. Of course, there ARE the crabs..... >Finally, do we know if the islanders "got away" from the hustle and >bustle of village life from time to time to camp out near the 7 >site? Build a fire and cook a few mussels, claims, crabs and the >like over a nice open fire with a friendly companion! THAT is the 64-dollar question, or one of them. Paul Laxton, who was there in 1949, makes a couple of interesting offhand remarks in his 1950 paper "Nikumaroro" in the Journal of the Polynesian Society. He refers to something like "weekend houses" (That may not be the exact term; I don't have the paper with me, but that's the gist) -- in the vicinity of what we now call the Aukaraime Shoe Site, and he mentions going to the vicinity of the Seven Site with the colonists to get turtles. But he doesn't mention camping and cooking them on the site, and the ex-colonists we've asked have said they didn't do that kind of thing. That doesn't mean they didn't, but since -- as Tom Roberts showed on the last trip -- it's only a couple-hour walk from the village to the Seven Site around the SE end, there might not be a whole lot of incentive to camp out. Unless, of course, one just wanted to. And turtles are pretty heavy. And then there are incidents like the kids who "eloped" into the bush in, as I recall, the early '50s, and were somewhere off by themselves for several days. Bottom line, I think, is that there are lots of ways a fire feature COULD have gotten produced at the Seven Site. We can hope that a close study of the constituents of the features will help us determine how each one likely WAS produced, and by what kind of person. LTM, who likes nothing better than hanging out by a campfire ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:20:30 From: Tom King Subject: Re: What about a reward? We posted a reward at the end of our Fiji search in 1999, and it got us zip. But that doesn't mean that a more vigorous PR effort might not yield better results. It would have to be carefully done, though, very carefully thought through. And there would need to be some local entity for people to contact, which might turn out to be a significant burden for whoever that entity was. One problem is that there are quite a lot of bone sources in Fiji. I recently got a note from an archaeologist in Australia who some decades ago saw a whole prehistoric cemetery get washed out of a beach and into the ocean in a matter of weeks; that kind of thing can scatter a lot of bones around to be picked up. I think the reward idea has merit, though we've had some fairly heated arguments about it over the years. But it's something that would take some careful planning, and local help. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:20:58 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: What about a reward? > From Stephen Packard > > This might sound like a crazy idea, but I have been thinking > recently about the box and bones that went MIA such a long time > ago, and I'm wondering if the way to do it would be to post a > reward for their retrieval. ... > ... It might jog someone's memory "My > great uncle's neighbor used to have a box with some bones in it > that he said were from the medical school." or "When I was working > at the archive a few years ago I think that there was a box like > that in one of the lockers." > > Okay... it's a long shot, right? But you don't have to actually > pay the money unless something is found. Nothing really to loose, > and a lot to gain if it pans out. Worst case senerio is that it > might lead to some false leads. A reward of sufficient size will DEFINITELY generate false leads. TIGHAR has lots of experience with the Helpful Witness Syndrome. People get excited about the prospect of becoming The One Who Solved Aviation's Greatest Mystery and start to "remember" things that didn't happen. The clearest case of this was a fellow who "remembered" standing on the fantail of an aircraft carrier and seeing NR16020 being lifted aboard another Navy ship. The problem is that you can't tell a false lead from a genuine lead just by looking at it. You have to go to do some work to test the value of the lead. In the case of the eyewitness account above, TIGHAR researchers were able to document the movements of the ships in the story and could show that: 1) they never were near Niku and 2) no ship of the size recounted in the story could approach Niku close enough to allow an observer to see what was claimed to have been seen. You also don't want to open the door to hoaxes by making the reward so great that counterfeiting becomes profitable. I think TIGHAR's approach is calculated to bear fruit: just keep the issue in the press and on the internet. If someone finds the boxes we seek, with the right kind of evidence to show their authenticity, they'll probably be able to find TIGHAR within minutes of doing an internet search. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:27:46 From: Tom King Subject: Re: What about a reward? With respect, Marty, there's a difference between the anecdotal example you give and what Stephen's suggesting. The man on the fantail provides only a recollection, which is difficult if not impossible to verify or disverify. The guy with the box of bones can, presumably, produce the bones, which then can be tested to determine within some range of probability whether they're the bones we're interested in. Of course, a reward might produce only an expressed recollection of seeing a skull in Uncle Joe's attic in 1967, and we'd then have to decide whether to invest the effort to track down whether the thing was really there; that's one reason any reward program would have to be carefully crafted. Another is that we wouldn't want to encourage people to go dig up bones to show us, and certainly Fiji's historic preservation and forensic authorities would take a dim view of such encouragement. I might agree with you that our current approach is CALCULATED to bear fruit, but I doubt if it's very LIKELY to do so without further effort. I have very mixed feelings about the feasibility of offering a reward, and about its possible unintended consequences, but I think we need to keep considering "crazy ideas" like Stephen's. LTM (who is fond of crazy ideas) ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:28:09 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: What about a reward? Marty Moleski wrote... > A reward of sufficient size will DEFINITELY generate false leads. I would like to endorse what Marty so articulately wrote, about the pitfalls of a reward. The pith is if one advertises a payment for bones on a Pacific island, one will get bones, carloads of bones. LTM, who boned up on human nature first. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:03:19 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: What about a reward? > From Tom King for Marty Moleski > With respect, Marty, there's a difference between the anecdotal > example you give and what Stephen's suggesting. The man on the > fantail provides only a recollection, which is difficult if not > impossible to verify or disverify. People who provide leads are also relying on recollection. Roger and I spent a few hours with a fellow who thought he remembered a story about a box of bones from his childhood. We checked the few things we could check. Halfway through, I realized that he was telling us the story from the press coverage in 1999--it was a recollection, but not from his childhood. > The guy with the box of bones can, presumably, produce the bones, > which then can be tested to determine within some range of > probability whether they're the bones we're interested in. Yes, of course that's true--if the person who has some bones can connect them to the case. The last thing we want to do is test some bones that are NOT shown to be the same as those brought to Fiji in 1941. > Of course, a reward might produce only an expressed recollection of > seeing a skull in Uncle Joe's attic in 1967, and we'd then have to > decide whether to invest the effort to track down whether the thing > was really there; that's one reason any reward program would have > to be carefully crafted. Another is that we wouldn't want to > encourage people to go dig up bones to show us, and certainly > Fiji's historic preservation and forensic authorities would take a > dim view of such encouragement. These are precisely the two points I was trying to make. > I might agree with you that our current approach is CALCULATED to > bear fruit, but I doubt if it's very LIKELY to do so without > further effort. I would love to go back to New Zealand to root around in the outgoing correspondence some more. I'm unable to fund the trip myself and I'm unwilling to ask for any funding from benefactors because the odds of finding a lead are so low. Not zero, but not far from it, either. > I have very mixed feelings about the feasibility of offering a > reward, and about its possible unintended consequences, but I think > we need to keep considering "crazy ideas" like Stephen's. Roger and I tried to plant seeds among everyone we spoke with in the hope that we might get some new TIGHARs to take root in Fiji. No joy yet (four years later). As you know, I FedExed Shoes to everyone that we spent time talking to--you provided the books, FedEx donated the shipping. I suppose it might be time to go pound the pavement again (1999, 2003, 2008?) to see whether anyone has any new ideas over there. But I come up against the issue of calculating the odds here, too. They seem vanishingly small. Marty #2359 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:38:55 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: What about a reward? Maybe, or maybe not. I get the impression that the Fijians respect human remains. There are enough ethnic groups that I suppose you could justify selling them as some "others" remains. It is not Fiji, but there was a recent investigation of a cache of human heads in China. It turned out not to be a mass murder, but someone manufacturing counterfeit "Tibetan" human skull bowls. LTM (leave the mandibles) Dan Postellon TIGHAR#2263 > From William Webster-Garman > Marty Moleski wrote... >> A reward of sufficient size will DEFINITELY generate false leads. >> I would like to endorse what Marty so articulately wrote, about >> the pitfalls of a reward. The pith is if one advertises a payment >> for bones on a Pacific island, one will get bones, carloads of >> bones. LTM, who boned up on human nature first. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:28:12 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: What about a reward? When I was in Fiji many (most) of those who lived there seemed to be of Indian ethnicity. This is not the original race which inhabbitted the island. They original natives came from Africa, IIRC, and there are many africans still there. Then there are those who are either Asian or Paciffic Island/Polynesian in ehtnicity. There are a few Europeans who've lived there their whole lives as well... a few of the old colonial blood type. When I was there there was a large Muslim school and also a Hindu Temple. A few churches as well. What this says to me: There probably are a lot of people who treat human remains with a great deal of respect and customs. There are probably a lot of people who don't. I think a place as diverse would have plenty of both. When I was in Fiji I was mostly in Nandi, which isn't really of interest but I suppose most of the islands probably are similar to the culture I saw. In any case, I look very forward to going back to Fiji in the (hopefully) near future for some scuba diving, hiking and general relaxing. When I do so, I'll be sure to see if there's anything I could do to help... just since I plan on being in the neighborhood and all. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:28:37 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: What about a reward? Dan Postellon wrote > I get the impression that the Fijians respect human remains They do, but most human groups have that one percent (or five or whatever) of folks who because of any number of reasons might suspend their cultural mores for what they feel is a higher need, which can often come down to greed. LTM, whose uncle Fester (or was it Chester?) got behind on the rent now and then. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:13:05 From: Mike Maina Subject: Re: Kite camera The "Kite" photos are excellent - what a splendid idea some genius had! Reference to the photo entitled "Edge of the Abyss" a couple of dark objects underwater can be seen (top left) - are they shipwreck parts? Anyway the underwater objects are remarkably clear. There has been discussion that the L10 was washed out to the reef, snagged in a gully then pieces subsided further into deep water. On the next expedition perhaps, the Kite camera could photograph the reef flat in the likely landing area north of the shipwreck to include the breakers and immediate deep water seaward. I guess the sea conditions wold have to be really calm, sun at an optimum angle and possibly a polaroid filter employed. If anything of interest is found could scuba divers investigate? I note that National Geographic funded a shark survey of Nikumaroro in 2004 with scuba divers swimming around the reef so it seems feasible. At least it would be a lot less costly than employing a deep sea submersible. Mike Maina ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:14:21 From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: What about a reward? > From Stephen Packard > When I was in Fiji many (most) of those who lived there seemed to > be of Indian ethnicity. This is not the original race which > inhabited the island. From my 2003 notes. The source may be the Fiji Times: 1879: First Indians brought to Fiji as indentured labor for the plantations. 60,000 immigrated under this system before it was abandoned toward the end of WWI. "Any moves seen as a threat to Fijian control of the land are fiercely resisted." Indo-Fijians make up 44% of the population; they also account for about half of the poorest people in the land. The British wanted plantation workers. The natives were not interested in that kind of labor. People from India were willing to emigrate. Ethnic Fijians hold about 85% of the land in communal trusts. This means that there is very little hope of the Indo-Fijians ever owning land of their own. I believe that each time an Indo-Fijian has been elected as prime minister, his government has been overthrown by a coup (1987, 2000). The Wikipedia article on the 1987 coup suggests that the ethnic breakdown was: 46% ethnic Fijians 49% Indo-Fijian > ... When I was there there was a large Muslim > school and also a Hindu Temple. A few churches as well. For such a small land mass, Fiji has a huge number of religions, both old and new. > What this says to me: There probably are a lot of people who > treat human remains with a great deal of respect and customs. > There are probably a lot of people who don't. I think a place as > diverse would have plenty of both. Agreed. And there are always individuals who do not go along with the ethics of their own culture. > When I was in Fiji I was mostly in Nandi, which isn't really of > interest but I suppose most of the islands probably are similar to > the culture I saw. In any case, I look very forward to going > back to Fiji in the (hopefully) near future for some scuba diving, > hiking and general relaxing. When I do so, I'll be sure to see > if there's anything I could do to help... just since I plan on > being in the neighborhood and all. I think you should keep us up to date on your plans. There are lots of people you could contact for us to see if they've learned anything new since 2003. Mostly in Suva, which is a long ride away at the other end of the island from Nadi. Marty ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:44:52 From: Terry Thorgaard Subject: Re: What about a reward? Offering a reward for old bones, in the off chance that they might prove to be the ones we are looking for, is a practically guaranteed exercise in futility. The only way something like this could work would be: 1. Acquire the DNA data you are looking to match. Relatives of AE & FN, in other words. As I recall there are no known relatives of FN, so this might be a problem. Would digging up his ancestors be an option? 2. Then offer a large reward conditioned upon the following: a. up-front payment for DNA testing (only if bone specimen passes step 3 below); and b. detailed provenence information (where did the informant get the bones, etc.) 3. Verify that the bones match the description of the ones for which we are looking (the ones Gallagher shipped to Fiji). 4. If they appear that they might could be the same ones (or some of them) test the bones supplied (if DNA testing is possible). If you get an AE or FN match, go back and put together "chain of custody" back to the same bones discovered on Niko and subsequently lost. Case is solved. Of course even this methodology will encourage fraud. A set of bones which seems to be exactly what we are looking for, a plausable provenence story, etc., would encourage making exceptions to the "pay cost of testing up-front" rule. ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:45:20 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Kite camera The original satellite photo was supposed to give 1 meter resolution, down to a depth of 30 meters (or maybe 30 feet). The kite photos are much better resolution. Polaroid filters might be useful. What is visible on Ric's helicopter fly-over? Dan Postellon TIAGAR#2263 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:46:27 From: Rick Jones Subject: An Avalanche of Psychics I was so intrigued by the Popular Aviation articles in Research Document #24, (An Avalanche of Psychics) that I was attempting to find a copy on line with a clearer picture of the "remote viewing" illustrations drawn by a Detroit architect who was "impelled" to make them. She even recorded the exact times of these events--which I was trying to correlate to known time lines. (I am neither a believer nor disbeliever of psychic phenomenon, but thought it interesting that one drawing showed AE holding a box, almost exactly the shape of a sextant box, and other scenes which all seemed to fit the hypothesis). Anyway, to get to the point, my googling turned up a web site called "Outcast Earth" ( http://www.outcastearth.com/ameliasshadow.htm ) which seemed be a group of cruising Psychics who stopped at Niku to check for spirits, or whatever. The date was late September of 2005 or 2006 (both dates were used in the article. They said: "There were three major areas the team wanted to check out, based mainly on the reports from TIGHAR. The first was where they landed the day before, near the reef and the Norwich City wreck. The second was the old English colonial village that was established in the years after the Earhart disappearance. The third was Aukairame North, the alleged campsite of Earhart and Noonan" So the question is, do these ad hoc visitors disturb archaeological sites, even though they intend not to? This group cited TIGHAR almost exclusively for their information. Is there ever any communication with groups like this, either before or after their visits? LTM who says it's too close to Halloween to think about this. Rick J #2751 ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:02:43 From: Tom King Subject: Re: An avalanche of psychics I've corresponded with the Outcast Earth folks (by email, not psychically). Nice folks, but I'm 99.9% sure they've never visited Niku in the flesh (as most of us understand flesh). Some of their cruises may occur in the time-space dimension they share with most of us, but most appear to happen somewhere else, and their illustrations of Niku scenes are derived from ours. In theory, of course, such groups could disturb archaeological sites if they actually visited the island; it's something to be at least mildly worried about, but there's not much we can do about it. Luckily, the island's pretty remote, and other than the colonial village the sites of interest are not real easy to access once you're there. LTM (who remains psychically connected) ======================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:39:09 From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: An avalanche of psychics To put it delicately, their material bodies were not actually on Nikumaroro, right? Dan Postellon TIGHAR LTM (love those mediums) ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:33:57 From: Hilary Olson Subject: Re: Kite camera Due to being fresh off the Google Earth search for Steve Fossett everything I look at seems to resemble an aircraft. That said ,on the amazing kite pic titled," lagoon coral head. What is the feature at 7 o.clock on the coral ? Hilary ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:34:49 From: Hue Miller Subject: Not Fossett's plane About 25 years back i visited a gentleman in the Seattle Eastside area who had recently moved there from (where else) California. He had a basement room set up like a battleship radio room, quite impressive to me, also had a large circular plotting table. On one wall he had mounted a 50 caliber machine gun. He explained that "he had just dug it out of the sand, at some California desert air wreck site". It "looked good" in overall condition, as i recall there was some bending that pretty well insured it would never play again. -Hue Miller ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:30:37 From: Tom Doran Subject: Re: Nikumaroro > From Tom King for Ted Campbell > > And then there are incidents like the kids who "eloped" into the bush > in, as I recall, the early '50s, and were somewhere off by themselves > for several days. I don't remember hearing this story before. Tom D. # 2796 ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:33:11 From: Rick Boardman Subject: Re: An avalanche of psychics I think this maybe the group I referred to when I wrote about other visitors to Niku a while ago. It rings a bell. I was making the point at the time that we don't know everyone who's ever "popped ashore" throughout history, so it's by no means a clinically pure archeological site.... LTM Rick Boardman ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:09:51 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: An avalanche of psychics Rick Boardman wrote... > I think this maybe the group I referred to when I wrote about other > visitors to Niku a while ago. It rings a bell. I was making the point > at the time that we don't know everyone who's ever "popped ashore" > throughout history, so it's by no means a clinically pure archeological > site.... To put it mildly. I believe Ric can tell some tales about what he's seen along those lines. LTM, who popped in now and then for a laik-about herself. ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:07:04 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Re: An avalanche of psychics *rolls eyes* If there are any here who are hoping to track down some leads in the whole psychic/medium/visions/remote viewing or paranormal I should issue a warning that it will be hard for me to bite my tongue. I'm a dedicated empirical skeptic and active in the whole community. It won't be too long before you get the "Believing in this sort of thing is what holds back humanity from truly understanding the universe as it is and accepting reason as the guiding force in the pursuit of knowledge. And also if you buy into this stuff you're wasting good time and money." Not to be rude or anything, but like I said... being on a forum and having that stuff... I can only bite my tongue for so long. So I might as well just make it known. But in any case, Niku is far from pure and that's the problem. I think that modern containation is an issue but the more difficult one is contamination by the settlement, the norwhich city, the loran station and such. That stuff is close enough in age and type that it is always going to be hard to tell if it's contamination or not. A modern plastic item or piece of obviously new metal is less of a problem than that. ***************************************** Don't worry, Steve. We don't do psychics. Pat ======================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:25:05 From: Stephen Packard Subject: Is there any known aluminum from the Earhart plane or production run? There have been a number of pieces of aluminum found on the island which may/may not have come from the Electra. One of the most interesting ones I've seen is on this page http://www.companysj.com/ v223/amelia.htm. It's a box with aluminum which islanders said was from the wreckage of an aircraft. Of course, it's pretty hard to know this given how small the pieces are and that they don't contain any sort of identification like a serial number. I'm wondering however if there is any known aluminum which came from the airframe of the Earhart plane or from another aircraft which was built at the same time (and ideally one that was either right before or right after the Electra on the assembly line). I know that repairs were made to the aircraft and a few modifications made. I'm wondering if the replaced skin or other items might still exist. They would have had to have come from the same roll of aluminum sheet which was used for Earhart Electra. If this is the case there might be a possibility of testing the aluminum artifacts by means of neutron activation isotopic analysis. Basically this is a process which gives the isotopic composition of any material with a greater precision than possible in any other method. The elements and isotopes present in any material will be very very slightly different for any sample. The test is so sensative that it has been used in crime investigations to see if the lead from a bullet came from the same production run as another bullet, in some cases proving it must have come from only a dozen or so packages of bullets. This was used in the House Select Committed on the JFK assassination to test bullet gragments and determined that the tiny lead fragments taken from governor Conolie's wrist were without doubt of the same lead smelting as the "magic bullet" and that they were so exact that they probably came from the same bullet. This kind of precision could obviously be of use. It may even be of use if a verified sample does not exist, as it would be able to determine whether those artifacts recovered were from the same source or whether some may be forign. ======================================================================== Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:57:33 From: Matt Harrison Subject: Re: Atlanta Ameliaschpiels Count me in, too! That's MatthewCHarrison at gmail.com. I do look forward to meeting the Atlanta area TIGHAR members! Matt ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:11:09 From: Mike Piner Subject: Search for proof What is left which might give results, proving AE landed on Niku? We could list them, and pursue them as priority list. We all have expressed the fact that time is running out. People are getting older, senile, dead. The sites are getting worn by wind wave and sand. I know the main players in this endeavor have had these same thoughts, but I propose that the Forum compile such a list. I would propose the lagoon oposite or around the Village, with a pump moving sand in an effort to discover pieces of airplane (example - the wheel feature that was there but disappeared). LTM Mike ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:28:49 From: William Webster-Garman Subject: Re: Search for proof Mike Piner wrote, > I would propose the lagoon oposite or around the Village, with a > pump moving sand in an effort to discover pieces of airplane (example - > the wheel feature that was there but disappeared). My favourite notion to ponder at the moment is what someone wrote about running spectral analysis on aluminium samples from Electras which were known to have been in the Lockheed factory at about the same time as AE's, with fragments found in the village. LTM, whose mettle was light and tough. ======================================================================== Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:35:11 From: Mike Piner Subject: Re: Search for proof Great! 1. Aluminum Testing, 2. Search lagoon by moving material by use of a pump. Mel West found the Spanish Gold from the Galleon "Atocha" using this method.You only move the bottom around to expose the debris deposited there. I am confident that others have ideas. The aluminum doesn't require another trip to Niku, so it belong on the top of the list, until someone else has a "great idea" LTM She has great ideas.