TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => Alternatives to the Niku Hypothesis => Topic started by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on December 17, 2014, 03:43:26 PM
-
There is a new article on various theories about Amelia (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/will-search-for-amelia-earhart-ever-end-180953646/) on the Smithsonian Magazine website.
The author clearly favors crashed and sank. He treats as "facts" the very technical "points" that are in dispute:
"Some of the technical points are in dispute. Skeptics point out that the nominal flying time for the Electra on full tanks was 24 hours, not 20. But Earhart had faced head winds of 26.5 miles an hour, roughly twice as strong as forecast. Early in the flight a storm required a fuel-wasting climb to 10,000 feet. In 1999, an analysis by Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Center concluded that her tanks were almost certainly empty as she approached Howland. “She probably should have turned back to Lae at the halfway point,” says David Jourdan, the president of Nauticos, an undersea exploration company, which has sent two expeditions to look for the wreckage. “She knew she was going in,” Long says. “She couldn’t find the island and was running out of fuel. Her voice showed that.”
If he is not endorsing those three "points"--headwinds, early forced climb, and fuel exhaustion near Howland--he ought to have attributed them to his sources.
Oh, well. There is no bad publicity, I suppose.
-
Well written; not very flattering to Niku.
We know how desireable it is to have input from major expert agencies and Caltech's JP Center of course carries weight where aircraft range is concerned, for one thing.
Crouch... Blunt, ain't he?
-
We'll, if they think they have it all right, they should check the reference to the second photo captioned " Earhart and her husband, George Putnam" when it is clearly not George by her side.
Picky I know, but I would have expected some Editor at Smithsonian to have caught that.
Amck
-
We'll, if they think they have it all right, they should check the reference to the second photo captioned " Earhart and her husband, George Putnam" when it is clearly not George by her side.
Picky I know, but I would have expected some Editor at Smithsonian to have caught that.
Amck
The dapper man shown beside AE in that picture is very recognizable as Jimmy Walker, Mayor of New York City. A PBS special about AE has a website where that picture is so captioned (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/timeline/earhart/), and identified with the Library of Congress as the source.
-
Seems they transposed the captions for two pics. A picture of AE with a man sitting on the floor of a hanger (toolboxes on floor) says the man is mayor of NY. Oops. Blame the web layout person.
There are a good number of photos accompanying the web article. Many show items supporting the Niku hypothesis - such as newspaper reports of distress calls, Betty Klenck, the patch, ointment pot, plexiglass piece, bottle pieces. Let's see how many pics accompany the print article.
I expect the print article will have more detail than the web version.
Presently my major complaint is they let stand Mr. Long's assertion Artifact 2-2-V-1 came from a PBY.
-
I don't see this article as "Anti-Niku."
It accurately describes alternate interpretations of known or speculative phenomenon. Look, this is a near 80-year old mystery devoted to an event that no one witnessed--in a remote part of the world--in the middle of a vast ocean. Of course there are conflicting data, conflicting evidence. But at the end of the day even the "top, top, experts" are working with scant deterministic data.
JPL offered their good faith but speculative opinion. So does TIGHAR. And from where I sit, the preponderance of evidence is still on the Niku side of the scale.
To be sure. It does underscore the imperative for TIGHAR to adhere as close as practical to the Scientific Method. As you know, I do believe "Credibility is Everything."
Embrace the ambiguity but seize the opportunity. This is just another perfect moment for TIGHAR to separate itself from the conspiracy crowd. Crouch embarrasses himself with his completely unprofessional (and unscientific) ad hominem rhetoric. Pathetic.
Lesson for TIGHAR: Don't be Crouch.
-
Anybody shed any light on this?
“It’s nonstop,” marvels Dorothy Cochrane, a curator at the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum, who was recently contacted by a researcher trying to track down a piece of carved driftwood found 70 years ago that he thinks holds a clue to Earhart’s fate.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/will-search-for-amelia-earhart-ever-end-180953646/#HOXwiloQTo8t7D9I.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
-
Last I heard the driftwood was stored in a basement closet along with 12,374 splinters from the true cross...
-
In Paul Briand, Jr's book "Daughter of the Sky -- The Story of Amelia Earhart" (Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York, 1960) there is a photograph of a flat stick, sort of like a paint stirring stick or a yard stick without printing, with some words on both sides. "To My Husband-I have crashed 250 miles from Hawaii N.W. Our motor ___ into flames - sharks are about" Reverse side says "Mrs. A.E." and half the stick appears to be burned on that side.
Photo caption:
"Fragment of wood about 23 inches long, possibly associated with AE's last flight, 1937, found by Robert D. Weishaupt at Baranof Island, Alaska, in 1942. (Courtesy The Smithsonian Institution)"
I'll see if I can get the picture scanned and add it later.
Not the greatest scan but usable. :-\
-
In Paul Briand, Jr's book "Daughter of the Sky -- The Story of Amelia Earhart" (Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York, 1960) there is a photograph of a flat stick, sort of like a paint stirring stick or a yard stick without printing, with some words on both sides. "To My Husband-I have crashed 250 miles from Hawaii N.W. Our motor ___ into flames - sharks are about" Reverse side says "Mrs. A.E." and half the stick appears to be burned on that side.
Photo caption:
"Fragment of wood about 23 inches long, possibly associated with AE's last flight, 1937, found by Robert D. Weishaupt at Baranof Island, Alaska, in 1942. (Courtesy The Smithsonian Institution)"
I'll see if I can get the picture scanned and add it later.
Sounds like a fascinating hoax (like so many splinters).
Earhart would have known better than "250 miles from HAWAII N.W." And as I've come to understand would (OOPS, that word again...) not have identified herself as "MRS. A.E." - being styled variously as "A.E.", "Miss Earhart" or "Mrs. Putnam", apparently.
She was definitely not "Mrs. Amelia Earhart" unless there was a secret marriage to someone of that same name...
-
Thnaks Bill for the reply and Jeff for the ::) :P
-
My print copy of Smithsonian Magazine arrived. The text of the online version and the print version is the same. The magazine cover has a photo of AE with bold copy stating "New Clues, New Controversy." A photo of Artifact 2-2-V-1 has a page to itself. A grouping of photos has a newspaper at the top with the headline "Radio Men hear Earhart's Voice Faintly Asking for Aid." Below that is a pic of Ric plus a pic of Betty Klenck Brown, then others.
An introduction to the author, Jerry Adler, on the "Contributors" page mentions he was a teenage ham radio operator. He does not dismiss post loss radio messages - saying "Obviously, if genuine, these would disprove the crashed-and-sank theory." He then relates the story of Betty Klenck.
Those who wish can comment on the article via e-mail LettersEd@si.edu ;or via Facebook.com/smithsonianmagazine
See also: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
-
The Smithsonian article is a shallow and transparently biased reaction to TIGHAR's success. We'll respond appropriately.
-
The Smithsonian article is a shallow and transparently biased reaction to TIGHAR's success. We'll respond appropriately.
That certainly describes Crouch's contribution.
He didn't bother to go look at a PBY himself or ask one of his minions at the Museum to do so.
"I read a book that says 2-2-V-1 fits a PBY. That proves that Gillespie is just an exotic tour guide."
Yuck.
-
He didn't bother to go look at a PBY himself or ask one of his minions at the Museum to do so.
It's worse than that. Just before deadline, I gave Adler a copy of the letter from Prof. Eagar. He replied, "It would be stronger, I think, if he reached this conclusion after also hearing and weighing Elgen's PBY case. But no question, it's a win for your side.
Now I just have to figure out how to work this into my story. "
I replied, "Elgen doesn't have a PBY case. It’s laughable. I didn’t want to waste time and insult their intelligence. I’ll have a report titled “Is 2-2-V-1 from a PBY?” ready later today. I’ll send you the link. If you like, I can ask Prof. Eagar to review it and comment."
I did send Adler the link and I did have Eagar review it and comment. Prof. Eagar wrote, "I have reviewed your email attachment concerning the PBY. It appears you have excellent responses to Mr. Long's “perfect match” for the upper PBY wing hypothesis."
So Adler knew full well that Long's PBY claim had crashed and sunk. Adler is a good journalist but he had to dance to the editor's tune and that tune was "It Ain't Necessarily So." Make no mistake, this article was conceived in the wake of the burst of publicity we received in late October and it's purpose, from the start, was to discredit TIGHAR. Unable to counter the message, they decided to shoot the messenger.
-
I am moved to recall that a regular forum poster recently remarked in here that, "The mind of a conspiracy theorist is an awesome thing to behold."
Best for TIGHAR if it does not embark down that muddy and dung-strewn path. We have enough on our plate right now with Niku VIII and 2-2-V-1, to bother expending any energy on what amounts to the annoyance of a few yap dogs, frantically trying to attach themselves to TIGHAR's ankles.
And that's all I've got to say about that.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
-
For what it is worth -
Auger in on details like an argument over a single artifact and you've just sacrificed what is supposed to be the greater focus and mission of TIGHAR.
Take the broader view of the hypothesis, press it for the strengths you can demonstrate that it has - and yes, that you do lead expeditions 'out there' to learn all that can be learned - including by inclusion of interested enthusiasts, and don't apologize for that - and you may be onto something bigger and more defendable; maybe even not just 'defendable', but perhaps 'attractive'.
Also, as to the artifact temptation - again, point to 'process' - and do the process demonstrably 'right', and you also have something - whether a given artifact 'survives' or not.
Consider it: these things can leave you with two things that others may just find to be positives:
- A strong hypothesis as to where to go look for the airplane
- A strong internal process that fears nothing, even failing articles that we had hoped would point to bigger things
Maybe that is the bolder approach - and maybe it can yield something more like what TIGHAR has been envisioned to be in a shareable, perhaps even more infectious way.
Quit worrying about who is calculating what or who nips at whose heels. Just stand up for the big picture - and make it one you can be proud of and that others can truly want to sign on to. That can be - and must be - bigger than any written article, or any artifact.
Do less and drown in the mire of these small things. Sorry to be blunt, but what are friends for.
-
Nodding my head in approval... The Smithsonian article is, as Ric said, a shallow piece--unfortunately written to an agenda. Here's one of the many things about TIGHAR they don't get (and don't want to): A high functioning research organization is self-correcting. When we're right, we're right and when we're wrong, we're wrong. It's all good because it's part of the process driven by objective, verifiable, evidence. Our horse is not hitched to any single artifact. Our horse is hitched to the process.
The Smithsonian's behavior is so disappointing; they besmirch their own brand and reputation with bias and ad hominem rhetoric. I'm sure that if the Smithsonian had enough rope, they would have tied the knot around our necks multiple times. As it is, the only way they hurt us is by leaving 99% of the TIGHAR story out. And we can fix that!
Merry Christmas to my fellow TIGHARs. It's a real joy and privilege to participate in even the small way I do. I believe 2015 will be a happy new year for the Amelia Earhart saga.
-
Just out of curiosity, who pays for the Smithsonian and the employees there?
Some facts about the Smithsonian from the Smithsonian news desk. (http://newsdesk.si.edu/factsheets/facts-about-smithsonian-institution-short)
And what are the qualifications of the two so-called curators?
I don't know, and I'm not anxious enough about their credentials to look them up. ;)
-
And what are the qualifications of the two so-called curators?
From the NASM website (http://airandspace.si.edu/research/staff.cfm):
Tom Crouch is senior curator, Aeronautics Department, National Air and Space Museum. A Smithsonian employee since 1974, he has served both the National Air and Space Museum and the National Museum of American History in a variety of curatorial and administrative posts. Prior to coming to the Smithsonian he was employed by the Ohio Historical Society as director of education (1969-1973) and as director, Ohio American Revolution Bicentennial Advisory Commission (1973-1974).
Dr. Crouch holds a BA (1962) from Ohio University, an MA (1968) from Miami University and a PhD (1976) from the Ohio State University. All of his degrees are in history. In addition, he holds the honorary degree of Doctor of Humane Letters, conferred in June 2001 by the Wright State University.
********
Dorothy Cochrane curates the collections of general aviation aircraft; flight materiel (specifically personal, business, and utility production aircraft); aerial cameras; and the history of general aviation and women in aviation. She holds a BA in history from Ithaca College and a MEd from Lehigh University.
-
"Some of the technical points are in dispute. Skeptics point out that the nominal flying time for the Electra on full tanks was 24 hours, not 20. But Earhart had faced head winds of 26.5 miles an hour, roughly twice as strong as forecast. Early in the flight a storm required a fuel-wasting climb to 10,000 feet. In 1999, an analysis by Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Center concluded that her tanks were almost certainly empty as she approached Howland. “She probably should have turned back to Lae at the halfway point,” says David Jourdan, the president of Nauticos, an undersea exploration company, which has sent two expeditions to look for the wreckage. “She knew she was going in,” Long says. “She couldn’t find the island and was running out of fuel. Her voice showed that.”
If I might ask a silly question. Is he implying that he knows what her voice sounded like? We have heard widely varying recounts of how she sounded on her final transmissions...everything from cool as a cucumber to near-hysterical. Do they have some kind of secret recording that we dont know about? Im not trying to discredit anyone but its seems like there is some speculation being presented as fact.
Oh well, anything that keeps Earhart in the spotlight will ultimately draw people here.
-
If I might ask a silly question. Is he implying that he knows what her voice sounded like? We have heard widely varying recounts of how she sounded on her final transmissions...everything from cool as a cucumber to near-hysterical. Do they have some kind of secret recording that we don't know about? I'm not trying to discredit anyone but its seems like there is some speculation being presented as fact.
There is no recording.
Earhart was advised en route to "pitch her voice higher":
Ric Gillespie (http://tighar.org/wiki/Ric_Gillespie), Finding Amelia (http://tighar.org/wiki/Finding_Amelia), p. 74.
On July 1, before having the plane fueled for the flight to Howland, Amelia made a short test flight to confirm that everything was working. She was, at last, able to establish two-way voice communication with the ground, transmitting to Lae on her daytime frequency of 6210 kilocycles (http://tighar.org/wiki/Frequency) and receiving Balfour’s reply on Lae’s frequency of 6522 kilocycles. Balfour’s assessment of the aircraft’s transmitter was that the 'carrier wave on 6210 kc was very rough and I advised Miss Earhart to pitch her voice higher to overcome distortion caused by rough carrier wave, otherwise transmitter seemed to be working satisfactorily.'
Nothing in the official logs (http://tighar.org/wiki/Transmissions_heard_from_NR16020) indicates panic.
See the first post in the thread, "Did Earhart panic?" (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,606.msg10385.html#msg10385) It has an excellent attachment at the end of it, a "Memorandum for Assistant Secretary Gibbons" by Admiral Waesche.
-
Im aware that there isnt a recording. ;)
I was just curious why they are claiming to know how her voices sounded in her final transmissions. The line "She couldnt find the island and she was running out of fuel. He voice showed it." We have varying descriptions of how she "sounded." Furthermore, how she sounded can be interpreted in many ways. Someone could SPECULATE that her voice indicated someone who realized they were up you-know-what creek, but it seems imprudent to present it as a fact. Just my bystanders opinion.
Krystal "You forgot your paddle" McGinty
-
The February issue of Smithsonian Magazine arrived yesterday. I was eager to see if they had published our response or, indeed, any of th scathing letters to the editor regarding their egregious January cover story. As you see, the only comment they chose to publish was from a male reader who asked, "Would we still be as fascinated with Amelia if she wasn't so gosh-danged pretty?"
In the words, do we still value women only for their appearance?
How do you think Amelia would have responded?
-
Of more interest to me is the lengthyyyyyyyy correction on the righthand side of the page regarding a different story - dates, locations, titles, all wrong. Whoopsie! But it does give you reason to wonder about their standards for accuracy.
LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
-
But it does give you reason to wonder about their standards for accuracy.
I don't have to wonder about their standards of accuracy.
-
Gentlemen:
Remember .... the Wright Flyer sat over 20 years in the Science Museum in London (not being moved back to the USA until 1942 mostly due to German bombing as I remember)
due to a little dispute the Wrights had with the Smithsonian over who demonstrated power flight first.
Bill Torgerson
-
The online Smithsonian site (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/magazine/discussion-march-2015-180954327/?no-ist), carrying a March 2015 date, has a short item that contains Ric's response to them, about how TIGHAR is not a one-man show.
-
Better than nothing, but only by the tiniest amount, akin to, "OK, we admit it, the sky really is blue. Except when it's not."
LTM, who will go back to his morning coffee now,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP