TIGHAR

Amelia Earhart Search Forum => Artifact Analysis => Topic started by: Ric Gillespie on December 30, 2010, 08:21:11 AM

Title: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on December 30, 2010, 08:21:11 AM
During the Niku VI expedition we found a small broken jar (designated TIGHAR Artifact 2-9-S-1) of rather distinctive design.  The jar is of a type known as an "ointment pot" and markings embossed on the bottom show that it was made by the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company.  Further research has shown that the jar matches Hazel-Atlas design No. 1995. The only product we have found advertised that appears to have used this style of container is Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream, an ointment intended to fade freckles. It was marketed from 1892 until 1961. Earhart is known to have been concerned about her freckles.

From Amelia: A Life of the Aviation Legend, by Goldstein and Dillon.
 
This refers to the New York ticker tape parade after the "Friendship" flight:
"As photographers snapped, several spectators, eager for a glimpse of the famous bob, sang out 'Take off you hat, Amelia!' She made a little face, but obligingly removed her modish straw cloche. Tossing it to Muriel, she remarked ruefully, 'Here's where I get sixty more freckles on my poor nose, I guess!'" (page 62)

Check your grandmother's medicine cabinet. We would very much like to find an existing jar of Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment (http://tighar.org/news/) for direct comparison to TIGHAR Artifact 2-9-S-1.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Kevin Weeks on December 30, 2010, 01:57:53 PM
just did a quickie google search on the stuff and found it listed in the american medical bureau's list of mercury containing skin applications  ???

any chance there were traces of mercury in the bottle??
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on December 30, 2010, 04:00:12 PM
any chance there were traces of mercury in the bottle??

There's no sign of any kind of residue in the bottle.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bruce Thomas on December 30, 2010, 04:01:59 PM
Check your grandmother's medicine cabinet. We would very much like to find an existing jar of Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment (http://tighar.org/news/) for direct comparison to TIGHAR Artifact 2-9-S-1.

There's a real estate agent in Dallas who claims to use this product.  She's quoted (http://dallashirisecondos.com/About-Carolyn-Shamis/Me-and-my-hair.htm) as saying, "I use a lot of baby oil, and also a cream that my mother has used all of her life and she is 72 years old with skin prettier than mine. It's called Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on December 30, 2010, 04:29:50 PM
I called the agency.  Carolyn Shamis died this past year but one of her employees is going to try to find out if her jar of Freckle Cream is still around.  I'm sure it was one of the weirdest phone calls she has ever received but she was great about it and is eager to help.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Petersen on December 30, 2010, 06:40:46 PM
You might try contacting Rich and Penn auctions and find out who bought the lot below:
http://www.icollector.com/Beauty-products-16-La-Jean-Hair-Pomade-w-Black-graphics-Mogro-Hair-Straightener-Dermatol-Cosmet_i9373952

edit:  On second thought, looking at the image closely, the jar isn't the same.  So it looks like Dr. Berry used a mix of containers to peddle his product.

edit 2:  On third thought there is a box under the jar in the image that also has a Dr. Berry logo on it.  It's hard to tell if the box contained the jar or if it contains a larger jar in it.  Here is a better image of it:
http://www.icollector.com/images/238/17468/17468_0097_1_lg.jpg
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mike Piner on December 30, 2010, 07:25:04 PM
Try googling
Nostrums and quackery: Articles on the nostrum evil and quackery ... - Google Books ResultAmerican Medical Association - 1912 - Medical
Berry's Freckle Ointment This ointment was marketed by Dr. CH Berry Co., Chicago and New ... Beauty
   on this report on quackery 1912 there is a label of the jar.  Mike Piner
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mike Piner on December 30, 2010, 07:34:41 PM
From Mike Piner;
   correction----google Dr Berrys Freckle Cream, then go down about six items, find "Nostrems and Quackery...1912.   Hope this works for you see picture of the Label..Mike
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ashley Such on December 30, 2010, 11:39:35 PM
Wow, that jar is convincing evidence! Is there any chance there might be DNA on/in the jar?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Willem Janszoon on December 31, 2010, 12:16:09 AM
Found this on ebay.  Different shape but it's something.

http://cgi.ebay.ca/old-skin-cream-jar-1800s-/110622480679?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19c19d1927 (http://cgi.ebay.ca/old-skin-cream-jar-1800s-/110622480679?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19c19d1927)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mike Piner on December 31, 2010, 01:13:38 PM
There seems to be two (possibly) operations with Berry's Freckle Cream.  one is associated with Chicago Ill. the orther that I came across may be a continuation of the other. "...Mrs Ella R, Berry studied medicine and chemestry in 1888.  ...began manufacturing products of patient medicinesand toilet preparations in New Orleans.  ...she moved her business to St. Louis.
  From a Googled source.   Mike Piner
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on January 01, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
A quick Google  shows that there is an online forum of Hazel-Atlas Depression Glass collectors at: http://www.hazelatlasglass.com/ (http://www.hazelatlasglass.com/)

Perhaps an inquiry there might find someone with a Dr. Berry's pot in their collection?

Also, is there anyway to find and access the Hazel-Atlas books to see what other products might have been marketed in this particular jar design?


....TB
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 02, 2011, 08:35:23 AM
A quick Google  shows that there is an online forum of Hazel-Atlas Depression Glass collectors

We're checking but the collectors are mostly interested in dinnerware, not bottles.

Also, is there anyway to find and access the Hazel-Atlas books to see what other products might have been marketed in this particular jar design?

Hazel-Atlas Glass went out of business in 1956.  The chances of finding the company records would seem to be remote.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Swift on January 06, 2011, 11:27:52 AM
I called the agency.  Carolyn Shamis died this past year but one of her employees is going to try to find out if her jar of Freckle Cream is still around.  I'm sure it was one of the weirdest phone calls she has ever received but she was great about it and is eager to help.

There is no doubt the jar is a match.  But it must confirmed that AE purchased that particular brand of Freckle Cream.  This information has to be somewhere.  Old shopping list, inventory, a picture, something, someone. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 06, 2011, 11:46:16 AM

The jar is a match but we don't know whether that design was also used for another product.  So far, the Freckle Cream is the only match bit research continues.  Unfortunately, AE's shopping lists do not appear to have been archived.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gus Rubio on January 06, 2011, 12:10:26 PM
Well that tears it, I'm archiving all my shopping lists from now on, in case someone needs them decades from now to solve the mystery of my disappearance.  Cheap insurance, right?    ;)

Kidding aside, it's an exciting clue, gender-specific IMO, and seemingly supported by known facts about AE.  I'm constantly astounded by what TIGHAR has been able to learn in pursuit of the truth.  Excelsior!

-Gus
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Ramsey on January 13, 2011, 04:14:58 PM
Ric....i will be in Dallas on Jan 21.  Any word from the real estate office if they did locate a jar of Dr. Berry's?  I live
part time in Dallas....so fairly familar with the local antique shops.  I may spend a few hours poking around to see if
I can stumble across one of the jars......remote chance, but worth a bit of time.

If the real estate office reps did happen to find a jar....I am happy to pick it up, pack it and send it your way.

Just let me know.

Mark
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on January 24, 2011, 10:22:42 PM
Hey Guys...Over the past couple of days I have been keeping an eye out for the jar that contains the freckle ointment, Well after searching a major antique mall in Topeka, Kansas, I stumbled upon a small jar-like container this afternoon, that actually has some of the freckle ointment still in it. Anyway, it stands about inch and a half tall and has a black lid and the rest of the container is black too. However, the box that I found stands about 2-3 inches tall and about 2 inches wide. Anyway, this particular box is the box we need to find Amelia's other jar of ointment. Anyway, both of these items are from the same company. I believe however that these were made at different time intervals...cause the black container has chicago and Paris as its manufacturer...and the box has New York and Chicago as its manufacturers. So I don't know what to tell you...Other than I have these items and am ready to ship these Ric!!!!! Thanks!!!!   Randy
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 25, 2011, 07:01:41 AM
Thanks Randy.  I'll be interested to see them.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Walter Runck on February 17, 2011, 08:17:02 AM
It looks like Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment was available through Sears, Roebuck in 1936.  There is an ad for it here (http://www.goantiques.com/scripts/images,id,1384949.html).  It looks like a different container, but a Sears line of research may reveal more about the packaging or perhaps lead to a sample bottle.  Is there a Sears museum somewhere?

I don't know if the ointment and cream were different products, but it seems like there is probably something out there that we haven't found yet.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Don Dollinger on February 17, 2011, 09:51:12 AM
Quote
cause the black container has chicago and Paris as its manufacturer

Found an article where they (manufacturer of Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream) where found in violation of laws of truthful labelling, could be they move their operation overseas where the laws didn't exist.

As an interesting aside:

From a report from the University of Phoenix in 2009 one of the paragraphs state:

http://www.uac.arizona.edu/VSC443/Alternmethod/Fdapap03.htm (http://www.uac.arizona.edu/VSC443/Alternmethod/Fdapap03.htm)

""As a result of the number of cases of injury related to Lash-Lure, and other aniline based lash/brow dies, many states began to ban the use of aniline dyes. The Food and Drug Administration supported the ban but could not prevent the manufacture, false advertizing, and sale of this hideous product, because the Pure Food and Drug Act did not cover cosmetics. Lash-Lure was not alone in causing suffering to scores of American women. There were many, many products on the market that were causing injury: Anti-Mole, a remedy, contained 50% nitric acid and 25% glacial acetic acid. It took off the moles along with the side of the victim’s face! Berry’s Freckle Ointment contained 12% mercury and produced mercury toxicity.  Some unsuspecting people purchased Bleachodent to whiten their teeth and burned their gums and tongues because of the high content of hydrochloric and sulphuric acid. Carbon tetrachloride, which we know today is carcinogenic and produces hepatic toxicity was a common ingredient of “dry” shampoos. Is your scalp itching? Use Dr. Dennis’s Compound which “prevents and stops the itch in one minute” because of it’s concentration of chloral hydrate, or Dewsberry Hair Tonic which stops an itching scalp with copper chloride and pryogallic acid.""

Maybe some of AE's bad decisions were not a result of poor judgement but more a result of mercury toxicity. ::)

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on March 15, 2012, 02:46:17 PM
I know I am digging up an old thread here, but.....

What is the status of this one?  Have we found a jar of Dr. Berry's?

As it turns out, I've an associate I have known for about 20 years.  All of the time I never knew it, but it turns out that he actually DOES collect antique jars and bottles.  And it seems his collection is quite sizable and he apparently knows quite a few others with similar collections and interests.  I recently have described the matter with him and he is quite interested. 


Can anyone point me to everything we have on this one?  I searched, but am not finding much...nor even finding some of the information I recall having read in the past.  Clearly, I am missing some of it.

I'd like to print everything we have on this, along with all the pics, and pass it to him.  Not sure how successful it will all be, but he is quite interested and 'knows the biz', as it were.


Many thanks,


   TB



Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on March 15, 2012, 06:21:27 PM
What is the status of this one?  Have we found a jar of Dr. Berry's?

I have seen steady and very detailed traffic on the EPAC mailing list for the last year or so.

I haven't been keeping score, and the results of the research haven't yet been pulled together in a research paper for public consumption.

Quote
As it turns out, I've an associate I have known for about 20 years.  All of the time I never knew it, but it turns out that he actually DOES collect antique jars and bottles.  And it seems his collection is quite sizable and he apparently knows quite a few others with similar collections and interests.  I recently have described the matter with him and he is quite interested. 

Can anyone point me to everything we have on this one?

I can't.

There are roughly a dozen search tools on this page (http://tighar.org/news/help/82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg).  Try glass, bottle, shards, pieces, salt sellar, beer ...

Quote
I'd like to print everything we have on this, along with all the pics, and pass it to him.  Not sure how successful it will all be, but he is quite interested and 'knows the biz', as it were.

"Everything" is a lot to ask for.  Here, for example, is the Google search for broken + glass (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009580785602718212762%3Anmcmqnbv5de&ie=UTF-8&q=broken+glass&sa=Search&siteurl=www-open-opensocial.googleusercontent.com%2Fgadgets%2Fifr%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252Fcoop%252Fapi%252F009580785602718212762%252Fcse%252Fnmcmqnbv5de%252Fgadget%26container%3Dopen%26view%3Dhome%26lang%3Dall%26country%3DALL%26debug%3D&ref=tighar.org%2Fnews%2Fhelp%2F82-how-do-i-search-tigharorg#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=broken%20glass&gsc.page=1), generated by the Google search box on the page indicated above.

Does he have a computer?  Could you teach him to browse the site?

I imagine that there will be a session on the glass analysis at the Symposium (http://www.earhartsearch75.com/).
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on March 15, 2012, 09:16:16 PM
I'm afraid I don't have time right now to assemble a complete report on the jar but the bottom line is this:
The artifact jar is clear glass
It fits in a Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream box
All of the known Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jars we've found so far as white "milk" glass, but none of them fits in the Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream box.
So...there was obviously a Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar that fit in the box.  We just haven't found an example yet.  The big question is whether the jar that fits in the box was clear glass like the artifact jar.
Any example of a known Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar that is clear glass would be a big help.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on March 15, 2012, 11:01:58 PM

Is the Hazel Atlas Glass Company out of the business?
I'm sure that they, like the Glass Company that I worked for (Kimble Glass Co, a subsidiary of Owens-Illinois), had samples of every jar, bottle that they ever made.

When I worked in the industry as a Quality Inspector and then a Draftsman/Designer we had a saying:  AH  HA are good, but KG and OI are better.  AH =Anchor-Hocking, HA=Hazel-Atlas, KG=Kimble Glass, and OI=Owens-Illinois.  Oh well, guess ya had to be there, LOL.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Daniel Paul Cotts on March 16, 2012, 12:43:02 AM
Thom,
http://tighar.org/news/index.php?start=9  scroll down to "Help Wanted – Artifact Example" dated Thursday, 30 December 2010 10:30

Harry,
Per an earlier post in this thread - Hazel-Atlas Glass went out of business in 1956.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on March 16, 2012, 11:15:29 PM
http://tighar.org/news/index.php?start=9  scroll down to "Help Wanted – Artifact Example" dated Thursday, 30 December 2010 10:30



Thanks Daniel.  I had found that one....but nothing else. 

In the past, I thought I'd seen something more than just that.   Bad memory, I guess.


Thanks again,

    tb


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on March 16, 2012, 11:29:07 PM
I'm afraid I don't have time right now to assemble a complete report on the jar but the bottom line is this:
The artifact jar is clear glass
It fits in a Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream box
All of the known Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jars we've found so far as white "milk" glass, but none of them fits in the Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream box.
So...there was obviously a Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar that fit in the box.  We just haven't found an example yet.  The big question is whether the jar that fits in the box was clear glass like the artifact jar.
Any example of a known Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar that is clear glass would be a big help.



Ric....

No need to go out of your way on the matter. When you've a spare moment, can you find the dimensions of the Dr. Berry's box we have?

As I said, I've no great reason to expect this to be terribly fruitful.  But this fellow IS quite interested in such things and seems to also be interested in our dilemma re this jar.  He doesn't THINK he's got anything close in his own collection (but it is quite a large collection, I am told)....I am hoping more that he can put the word out to others he's acquainted with equally as in-depth collections.   

Who knows.....always the chance we might get lucky.



tb

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on March 17, 2012, 05:10:47 PM
on Tighars next expedition to Nikumorro any chance of finding an artifact that was in popular demand ?  :)

i have looked through over 2000 bottles on ebay, the nearest jar that matches dr berry is dr freckle  :'(

is it possible that the ointment pot in question was a one off type,  made just to give amelia as a present ?

 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on April 25, 2012, 05:05:37 PM
Hey Ric...and fellow Tighar members...The time is drawing near for this awesome conference! Can't wait!!! Anyway, Ric...as I was glancing at the posts this afternoon ran across your posting with the freckle cream jar and I remembered something I saw several weeks ago while I was doing research on looking for a jar of that caliber. Anyway, followed up the search from the glass company that made this particular jar. As I was browsing on the net I stumbled upon a website( pray I still have it in my bookmarks) ran across an article that talked about the milk-glass jars made by this same company. As noted by this article, the company didn't start making milk-glass products until 1936. I also looked through a 1920's sears and roebuck catalog that my grandfather had in his estate of goodies and found that the freckle cream jar listed looked like the bigger size of freckle cream, but had no mention of a smaller version or listed the known box we have. Therefore, we have to ponder was there other distributors of Dr. Berry's freckle cream. Anyway, I believe that the jar found at Niku, has some major signaficant history here. I believe that we are looking at a major specialty item here. Kinda of what you would want at Christmas time. The item that is  hard to buy, or too pricey, and you can't find it in any ma and pa store. I believe this ointment pot was a rare one time thing. If it wasnt we all wouldn't be banging our heads against the wall trying to find it!!!! Anyway, like many of  you...I've looked in 6-10 antique malls and no luck...Now, considering that some may have indeed seen the bigger or smaller milk-glass versions of Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream. But, I believe this particular ointment jar is priceless! Afterall, it may have indeed been especially made for Amelia Earhart herself! Something to ponder!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Brad Beeching on April 25, 2012, 06:43:06 PM
What would be the chance of Amelia repackaging some of her cream herself? I repackaged my waterproof matches, cotton balls and other items to fit in my emergency pack, could she have done the same to save weight/space? I'll admit it's a stretch, but was she known to do things like that?

Brad

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on April 26, 2012, 11:25:22 PM
Here is the website page I found several weeks ago with the introduction of (milk-glass). The website is www.hazelatlasglass.com/history.html. The paragraph with the topic of milk-glass in on paragraph 4. Very interesting!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on April 26, 2012, 11:36:14 PM
Here is another page that is very resourceful!!!! www.scribd.com/doc/79546594/Hazel-Atlas!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on May 19, 2012, 06:12:03 PM
just come across this jar that is similar in appearance to freckle cream jar

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/deco-waisted-boots-vaseline-pot-circa-1920-/261023920683?pt=UK_Collectables_Bottle_Pots_ET&hash=item3cc63cf22b#ht_500wt_1202

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on May 20, 2012, 03:54:57 PM
These are photos of the freckle cream box I found at the antique mall here in Hays, over a year ago. This is the particular one that I had sent on to Ric and the team! As for finding this particular jar...its been very difficult and its almost like trying to find a needle in a haystack@
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Chris Austin on June 01, 2012, 08:57:22 AM
In today's UK Daily Mail

Is this Amelia Earhart's freckle-cream? 1930s cosmetic jar may unlock mystery of aviator's disappearance

 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2152931/Jar-1930s-anti-freckle-cream-unlock-mystery-Amelia-Earharts-disappearance.html)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: pilotart on June 02, 2012, 12:35:36 AM
Flying Magazine:  "Artifact Rekindles Amelia Earhart Speculation"
By Bethany Whitfield / Published: Jun 01, 2012

http://www.flyingmag.com/earhart.html

This is from AvWeb:

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/earhart_freckle_cream_jar_tighar_glass_206762-1.html
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Raines on June 04, 2012, 10:29:05 AM
What an exciting and tantalizing clue is this jar! I found my way to TIGHAR after reading the recent news reports.

It appears that Hazel Atlas received a patent for their white glass in 1936. Therefore, Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream was packed in clear glass ointment pots at least until 1936 and possibly longer before switching to the white glass. This would explain the discrepancy between the found artifact and the example jars.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on June 04, 2012, 02:29:16 PM
What an exciting and tantalizing clue is this jar! I found my way to TIGHAR after reading the recent news reports.

It appears that Hazel Atlas received a patent for their white glass in 1936. Therefore, Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream was packed in clear glass ointment pots at least until 1936 and possibly longer before switching to the white glass. This would explain the discrepancy between the found artifact and the example jars.
Things get manufactured before patents are issued so don't base too much on that date.

gl
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on July 26, 2012, 09:22:44 AM


Would like to know more about that clear jar, when made, etc.


I believe Jeff was asking the same question I have-

Can anyone shed light on the story behind the clear glass jar with the blue cap [follow link] that was on display at the symposium?  Who found it and where did they find it?

https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on July 26, 2012, 09:31:26 AM
I come across this jar ? That is very similar except it milk glass.

Reason i have posted is because some one mentioned they could only find Dr Berry's in that type of jar

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Early-1900s-Jar-A-D-S-Peredixo-Cream-Milk-Glass-Empty-/110739415999?_trksid=p5197.m1992&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D14%26meid%3D882247365794973711%26pid%3D100015%26prg%3D1006%26rk%3D2%26#ht_500wt_969
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on July 26, 2012, 09:39:21 AM
I come across this jar ? That is very similar except it milk glass.

Reason i have posted is because some one mentioned they could only find Dr Berry's in that type of jar


Richie,

You found the clear jar?  Where did you find it?  It appears to be "fresh out of the box.'' 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on July 26, 2012, 10:05:47 AM
has the link not appeared ?

it's on Ebay, it is not clear it's milk glass

 Early 1900s Jar A.D.S. Peredixo Cream Milk-Glass Empty

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Early-1900s-Jar-A-D-S-Peredixo-Cream-Milk-Glass-Empty-/110739415999?_trksid=p5197.m1992&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D14%26meid%3D882247365794973711%26pid%3D100015%26prg%3D1006%26rk%3D2%26#ht_500wt_969
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on July 26, 2012, 10:14:26 AM
Look for the clear glass jar with the blue cap on the left in this picture.

https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on July 26, 2012, 10:16:26 AM
Here is a Dr berry's milk glass jar, Think it's same as we already have  :(

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-vintage-milk-glass-beauty-165745496

(http://images.cloud.worthpoint.com/wpimages/images/images1/1/0611/15/1_1d4e5b88c8c8e1b159c4d0a514236f4b.jpg)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on July 26, 2012, 10:30:13 AM

I'm hoping to find out about the origin of the clear glass jar on the left in this photo, not the milk glass jar on the right.

https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on July 26, 2012, 11:26:07 AM

I'm hoping to find out about the origin of the clear glass jar on the left in this photo, not the milk glass jar on the right.

https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626 (https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626)

It's not from the island.

I think someone bought it to use as a comparison with the glued-together pieces which WERE found on Niku (in the center of the photograph).

I don't have any handy summary of the work of the glass-and-bottle group from EPAC.  Joe Cerniglia is a very active researcher, and there are a couple of other expert collectors involved, too.  They almost certainly said something about the clear glass jar with the blue top on the EPAC mailing list at some time or other, but, regrettably, I don't remember what they said.

I do have a very dim recollection, which may be utterly inaccurate, of someone talking about ink jars.  It seems to me that all of the fountain pen ink that I have ever had came in clear glass jars.  I have no idea what kind of pens, if any, AE and FN would have carried and used on the flight. 

I do believe that if they landed on Niku, AE would carry some kind of notebook and writing instrument with her.  A survivor's journal would be worth the investment in time and energy, if they survived the adventure.

This speculation is pretty much unencumbered by any attachment to facts.   ::)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on July 26, 2012, 11:56:41 AM


I'm hoping to find out about the origin of the clear glass jar on the left in this photo, not the milk glass jar on the right.

https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626 (https://picasaweb.google.com/irvdonald/Earhart75thSymposium?authkey=Gv1sRgCIKup5u7tdXUlQE#5749211342029120626)

"...I think someone bought it to use as a comparison with the glued-together pieces which WERE found on Niku..."

"...I do have a very dim recollection, which may be utterly inaccurate, of someone talking about ink jars." 


Many thanks Marty for this info.  Can we find out from Ric or Joe Cerniglia who brought the clear jar to the symposium, and where they found it?

"They almost certainly said something about the clear glass jar with the blue top on the EPAC mailing list at some time or other, but, regrettably, I don't remember what they said."

Can we can learn more about what was disscussed by the EPAC?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on July 26, 2012, 04:06:58 PM
I do have a very dim recollection, which may be utterly inaccurate, of someone talking about ink jars.  It seems to me that all of the fountain pen ink that I have ever had came in clear glass jars.  I have no idea what kind of pens, if any, AE and FN would have carried and used on the flight. 



An interesting notion.  I've never seen ink packaged in jars with wide mouths such as our found artifact.  Although I have seen quite a few large volume ink jars (indeed, I've several here on the shelf), they all have had smaller necks and mouths.  Would think smaller necked jars would make it easier to refill from.

However, all of that being said, I would think it would be simple enough to inquire with the larger such companies of the era (Shaeffer, Parker, Omas, Pelikan, Quink?, Waterman, etc.) to see if they've packaged in a similar jar.  Most are still in business today to one extent or another.




tb
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on July 26, 2012, 04:13:50 PM
Mark and Martin...It's your lucky day! Just received a facebook message from Joe Cerniglia. It reads as follows:

"Hi! It's Joe Cerniglia. We met at the Earhart 75 Symposium. A question has arisen on the forum as to who found and purchased the clear jar for use in the artifact exhibit. http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.60.html. I was the one who came up with that one. I found it on Ebay, about a week before the Symposium. Having been the one who originally brought the freckle ointment to EPAC's attention, I've been hot on the trail for this one...and I'm not letting up!

Also, you might want to know that I've sent a piece of the artifact jar to a lab in Syracuse, and we're expecting the results any day now. We're trying to determine if trace mercury can be found embedded in the glass that would perhaps signal freckle cream. It's a long shot, and negative results would prove nothing either way, but it's obviously a test worth doing. I'm ably assisted by the advice and counsel of Dr. Tom King, Tighar's Senior Archaeologist and a scientist named Greg George, who works at Sherry labs in Oklahoma. Greg and I met, oddly enough, through a comment he posted to an article in Discovery about the freckle cream". Joe goes on to say that he can answer any questions to all of you on this matter at joecernigila@hotmail.com. From Joe to you..."Thanks and Best regards to all of you on the forum...I read all of your posts each day and wouldn't missed it!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on July 27, 2012, 08:49:56 AM
I've never seen ink packaged in jars with wide mouths such as our found artifact.

Me, neither, now that I think of it.  None of the three jars of ink I have here at home have mouths wider than the base. 

I guess the ink idea stinks.   ::)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on July 27, 2012, 11:23:09 AM
Not sure if anyone has read this report, so thought i would post anyway  :)

http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/fdanj/bitstream/123456789/41433/4/fdnj01376.pdf
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on July 28, 2012, 12:34:58 AM
I've never seen ink packaged in jars with wide mouths such as our found artifact.

Me, neither, now that I think of it.  None of the three jars of ink I have here at home have mouths wider than the base. 


I was thinking more on this idea last night. 

Now that I do spend more time on it, I also notice that every ink jar I have...or recall ever having or having seen....also had a plastic or bakelite cap/lid on it.  Our artifact would have had a metal lid.  I suspect that this is significant as ink would likely have an adverse chemical reaction from being exposed to metal over a prolonged period of time.

Although I thought the ink pot notion might have had merit.....now I'd say you were right.  It 'stinks'!  :D



tb
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on July 28, 2012, 07:45:47 AM
Now that I do spend more time on it, I also notice that every ink jar I have...or recall ever having or having seen....also had a plastic or bakelite cap/lid on it.

I have a bottle of black Schaeffer ink with a metal lid on it.  It is probably not more than 22 years old.

I much prefer plastic lids, FWIW.  :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bruce Thomas on July 28, 2012, 08:41:56 AM
I have a bottle of black Schaeffer ink with a metal lid on it.  It is probably not more than 22 years old.

I much prefer plastic lids, FWIW.  :)

I found this picture of a Scheaffer ink container (http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6038/6328514920_912efafa40_z.jpg) with a metal screwcap.  The box and its markings, especially, conjure up strong memories from my elementary school years (early 1950s), when I would experiment with filling my mother's fountain pen when I was home alone.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on July 28, 2012, 09:46:32 AM
I found this picture of a Scheffer ink container (http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6038/6328514920_912efafa40_z.jpg) with a metal screwcap.

The ink bottle is identical to the one I have.  The built-in inkwell is handy.

My label is much smaller and simpler.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on July 28, 2012, 10:39:36 AM

I found this picture of a Scheffer ink container (http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6038/6328514920_912efafa40_z.jpg) with a metal screwcap.



Aaack!  I have, in the past, had a couple of those particular bottles of Schaeffer's.  Had forgotten about them.  Hmmm...perhaps ink is not as reactive as I had presumed.

I still cling to my comment about the mouth size of the bottles, however. A quick image search on Google seems to bear it out.  There are a few with slightly wider than average mouths...but none on the scale of our artifact.


I always rather liked the Pelikan ink bottle (http://www.overdiep.nl/ink/Dscn5359.jpg) with the built-in pen holder.  But....actually preferred Omas or Visconti ink.  You're right  Marty, the plastic lids were nicer.  Metal seemed to make it feel a cheaper product.



tb
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on July 28, 2012, 10:43:02 AM
Very impressive ink bottle. I have never seen one like it.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on July 28, 2012, 11:16:40 AM
The artifact seems rather over engineered to be an ink pot?
Why the aesthetic shape?
Why the thickness of glass?
If you are churning out and shipping tens of thousands or more a week wouldn't the cost and weight of the container be minimal compared to its contents, ink.
Why the fancy shape? a less aesthetic shape would be cheaper to produce.
It looks as though it was designed to catch the eye first, missing fancy label? contents were secondary.
Ink is ink, bought with cost in mind, I buy dozens of printer cartridges by cost, stuff the box and packaging!
Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on July 28, 2012, 01:28:18 PM
Richie....Don't know if you've seen this box or not...but did read the article and was quite amazed by your finding. Anyway, so this box we have is rather quite interesting! Anyway, here are two pics for you to analyze! Thanks!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Thom Boughton on July 28, 2012, 11:28:47 PM
The artifact seems rather over engineered to be an ink pot?
Why the aesthetic shape?
Why the thickness of glass?
If you are churning out and shipping tens of thousands or more a week wouldn't the cost and weight of the container be minimal compared to its contents, ink.
Why the fancy shape? a less aesthetic shape would be cheaper to produce.
It looks as though it was designed to catch the eye first, missing fancy label? contents were secondary.
Ink is ink, bought with cost in mind, I buy dozens of printer cartridges by cost, stuff the box and packaging!
Any thoughts?


I agree with you in regard to the thick and heavy glass used in the design of our artifact.  That along with the design of the mouth makes me relatively certain that it is not an ink bottle. (Although I admit thinking there might be some merit to the idea at first.)

However, as to the 'aesthetic shape' of it...if anything, that would (believe it or not) actually tend to be an argument for it being an ink bottle.  While not all fountain pen ink is packaged so extravagantly, there are quite a number of ink makers who even yet today still package their products in very fancy and ornate bottles.  It's a cachet thing, primarily.

A present-day Visconti ink bottle (http://www.theonlinepencompany.com/product_images/V_Inkbottle_Red_S.jpg), a Faber-Castell ink bottle (http://www.pencity.com.au/images/GrafVonFaberCastell/148700.jpg), and an Omas ink bottle (http://www.marcuslink.com/pens/views/images/omasbottle-01x250.jpg).  All of these are essentially the same shape bottle that each of these companies has produced since the 20's or 30's...or before.  Even makers such as Waterman and Schaeffer package in less than pedestrian forms.  A quick Google image search should reveal quite an array of ornate designs.  Like I said....it's a cachet thing.





tb
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on July 29, 2012, 09:14:19 AM
Jeff Hayden asks:
"Why the aesthetic shape?"

Go back to the very first post in this thread where Ric describes this as an "ointment pot", a form apparently well known in the glass jar / bottle enthusiast communities.  The purpose for the shape is to allow you to get your finger(s) in there and scoop stuff out, right down to the last little bit of mercury laced toxic substance.  If it had a more traditional squared off base, it would be near impossible to get the last remaining remnants out with your finger.

Getting the last bit out of an ink bottle may also be somewhat problematic, but I don't think rounding the bottom would improve things much, and may actually make it more difficult to get the last bit of ink sucked into your fountain pen.

Looking at these ink bottles certainly brings back a few memories though.  For a while, I found and used my grandfather's fountain pens.  Was great fun to work with them and see how different you could get your script to look, but I have to admit it cost me a few ink stained shirts along the way.  Mom was not pleased.

OK, back to ointment pots and freckle cream before thread drift takes too far off target .....

Andrew



Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on July 29, 2012, 09:49:32 AM
Good point Andrew, I hadn't considered the 'access' angle. Which leads to the if you accidentally knock it over angle. If it was ink inside you are guaranteed to lose the lot. I guess that's why the ink pots we have seen so far have a small access point, if you knock it over you don't lose it all, or ruin your parents carpet. >:(
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 01, 2012, 06:00:14 PM
Right this is a very long shot

But

I have just came across this. http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/7286881

It seem's that Dr Berry also made a pocket mirror to go with the ointment pot obviously for application, so i wonder if they came as a set ?

And in that set you got clear glass ointment pot, plus pocket mirror 

know it's a long shot but worth finding out  :)

bottom right of image 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 02, 2012, 12:42:11 AM
Hey Guys!!! Its so very late and need to get this posted. But, been searching for answers to this glass jar tonight and ran across something. Here is a pic of the smaller freckle cream jar?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 02, 2012, 12:44:11 AM
Found this on worthpoint.com!!! Not to sure on if its been sold or not? Trying to find out!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ricker H Jones on August 02, 2012, 10:24:33 AM
Good eye, Randy,
It is the Freckle Cream jar (except in white glass v. the clear glass of the artifact).  I will pass along your find to Joe C. who is the "Freckle Cream" guy.
As regards to the clear glass jar purported to be an inkwell bottle, Joe queried the seller he purchased the jar from and learned that he (the seller) had purchased it in a group of jars all thought to be inkwells, but he didn't know whether that specific jar was actually an inkwell or not.
Rick J
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ricker H Jones on August 02, 2012, 03:34:21 PM
Joe tells me that this is the very jar he purchased last summer which is now in the hands of TIGHAR.  It was on display at the symposium.   I'm glad that you have "tuned your eyes" to spot these jars, as they seem to be very few and far between.  Someday, maybe we'll find one in clear glass with the label intact, if we're lucky.
Rick J
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 02, 2012, 08:53:15 PM
Am unsure how it work's in america, But here in UK Celebs e.t.c, get special treatment,

Is it possible the clear glass freckle jar was made specifically for Amelia ? As they mention in last flight statement, they received free gifts, Were ever they landed,

Would it be out of place for a company like hazel glass, or Dr Berry, to provide a ointment pot that was usable in flight ?   
Title: Freckle Cream Ointment Pot ..."Chemical Analysis"`
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 03, 2012, 10:41:10 PM
Hey Guys! Good Evening!!! Hope most of you had an excellent day and the start of a wonderful weekend? Anyway, received an awesome email from Joe Cerniglia. The email he sent is in regards to recent testing of the ointment pot/jar found on the island. Anyway, hope most of you find this exciting as it did me!

.....Randy...Hello!!! I thought you might like to have this news to share with others  on the forum!
   
     Evans Analytical Group in Syracuse, New York has reported today that 3.4 micrograms per liter of mercury was detected from the ointment pot (Artifact  2-9-s-1).
     Results thus far are not yet fully complete, but I just got off the phone with Dr. Robert Isensee, a scientist at the lab, and he said that given the degradation to     
     be expected over time to elements such as mercury, he views this finding as good evidence that mercury contacted the glass via the jar's contents. (This is well
     above atmospheric levels, and mercury is not an ingredient used to make glass.) There were 7 products we know that were sold in these ointment jars. Dr. C.H. Berry
     Freckle Ointment is the only one of the seven that we know contained mercury. It is the only one likely to have contained mercury. I'd be interested in any discussion
     this might generate.

    What are the odds that the freckle ointment just happened to have 12% mercury and that this jar, which looks strikingly like a container of Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment
    just happened to have mercury on it, after decades of exposure to harsh heat, sun, wind, and rain? Best Wishes...Joe Cerniglia
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 04, 2012, 06:50:31 PM
When you've a spare moment, can you find the dimensions of the Dr. Berry's box we have?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 04, 2012, 11:37:13 PM
This is the measurements I have Ric...Hope you were referring to me on this matter!!! Glad to see you made it safely home!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 05, 2012, 09:11:01 AM
This is the measurements I have Ric...Hope you were referring to me on this matter!!!

Sad to say, the box does not seem to have returned from the symposium in Washington.  It was in the exhibit case and I'm quite sure I packed it with the other artifacts at the conclusion of the event but, in unpacking afterward, it was not there.  Fortunately we have lots of good photos of it but I hope the box turns up.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 05, 2012, 09:32:34 AM
One of the adverts for "Dr Berry Freckle Ointment" It says send off for free booklet, Has anyone searched or come across one yet ?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 07, 2012, 01:05:38 PM
i just come across this guys collection. might be worth emailing him 

At the bottom you can see a big bottle with silver cap, The jar is bottom right of that.
 
http://totallysecondhand.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/old-ponds-cold-cream-jars-with-metal.html

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mrHy9nulK38/TeA7SwaBXPI/AAAAAAAAAXs/LHdXKxlfEmA/s320/IMG_3653.JPG)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 07, 2012, 01:12:51 PM
here is why they look similar

I have put arrows to show lines in jar the jar in guy's collection has similar lines



 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 07, 2012, 01:17:27 PM
A link to another link to a milk glass freckle ointment (http://mitziscollectibles.typepad.com/.a/6a011168ca5559970c0147e30cebbe970b-800wi)

i know were looking for clear glass, but thought i would post anyway
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 07, 2012, 01:51:43 PM
Has Tighar been in contact with this website ?

http://www.californiaperfumecompany.net/collector/cal_collectors_tips.html

he has loads of vintage stuff
Title: Re: Freckle Cream Ointment Pot ..."Chemical Analysis"`
Post by: Thom Boughton on August 07, 2012, 03:26:37 PM
..........There were 7 products we know that were sold in these ointment jars. Dr. C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment is the only one of the seven that we know contained mercury. It is the only one likely to have contained mercury. I'd be interested in any discussion this might generate.



I knew there were a couple, but I wasn't aware we had found six other products.   What are the other six?




tb
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 07, 2012, 10:12:04 PM
Can anyone tell me if the round lid that is in the lineup of pictures with the shoe parts and the airplane skin back in 1992, possibly belongs to the jar recently found on the island?
Title: Re: Freckle Cream Ointment Pot ..."Chemical Analysis"`
Post by: dave burrell on August 11, 2012, 02:01:20 PM
..........There were 7 products we know that were sold in these ointment jars. Dr. C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment is the only one of the seven that we know contained mercury. It is the only one likely to have contained mercury. I'd be interested in any discussion this might generate.



I knew there were a couple, but I wasn't aware we had found six other products.   What are the other six?

tb

Hello, total newbie here and I hate to post a first post that is contradictory but there was more than one product containing mercury that used that jar type found on the island.
There is VELVETIN VANISHING CREAM. In fact their name is embossed in the glass in the botton of the jar I am aware of.
That was a 1930's product that used this exact same jar. It used mercury like every vanishing cream I am aware of.
It matches the found jar exactly except it too is milk glass.
So it appears that like today this ointment, vanishing cream(AKA freckle cream) was put out for different companies to sale in the same jar but with different labels. The hazel Atlas glass company apparently embossed a company name for some of their biggest buyers if requested.
So Dr.Berrys being just one freckle cream. Velvetine being another.
Which one would a lady of means prefer? We don't know.
That doesn't change that a vanishing cream jar was probably found on a deserted island.
What it does mean is that perhaps everyone jumped the gun a bit saying it is a Dr.Berry's jar. Every press report said a Dr.Berrys jar was found.
Perhaps very wrong.
It could have been another company marketing vanishing or lightening cream using this same jar. Some companies would have called it freckle cream. Some companies would have said labeled it spot lightening cream.Likely there were more than the two known companies, Velvetine and Dr Berrys using this jar.
By the late 1930's vanishing cream was fading from popularity, as this link below states.( Not sure if the rules permit links here, but here is a little class on vanishing creams).

http://cosmeticsandskin.com/aba/vanishing-cream.php

So a vanishing cream jar and it's implications was probably found.
To say it was Dr.Berrys is highly speculative since at least one other company( Velvetine) was using this exact same jar.
Perhaps it should be called the Vanishing cream jar, instead of the Dr.Berrys jar.
Title: Re: Freckle Cream Ointment Pot ..."Chemical Analysis"`
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 11, 2012, 02:08:12 PM
By the late 1930's vanishing cream was fading from popularity, as this link below states.( Not sure if the rules permit links here, but here is a little class on vanishing creams (http://cosmeticsandskin.com/aba/vanishing-cream.php)).

Here is a tutorial on how to insert a link into a post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,127.0.html).

How to insert an image (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,128.0.html).

How to modify your posts (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,453.0.html).
Title: Re: Freckle Cream Ointment Pot ..."Chemical Analysis"`
Post by: richie conroy on August 11, 2012, 06:12:53 PM
..........There were 7 products we know that were sold in these ointment jars. Dr. C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment is the only one of the seven that we know contained mercury. It is the only one likely to have contained mercury. I'd be interested in any discussion this might generate.



I knew there were a couple, but I wasn't aware we had found six other products.   What are the other six?

tb

Hello, total newbie here and I hate to post a first post that is contradictory but there was more than one product containing mercury that used that jar type found on the island.
There is VELVETIN VANISHING CREAM. In fact their name is embossed in the glass in the botton of the jar I am aware of.
That was a 1930's product that used this exact same jar. It used mercury like every vanishing cream I am aware of.
It matches the found jar exactly except it too is milk glass.
So it appears that like today this ointment, vanishing cream(AKA freckle cream) was put out for different companies to sale in the same jar but with different labels. The hazel Atlas glass company apparently embossed a company name for some of their biggest buyers if requested.
So Dr.Berrys being just one freckle cream. Velvetine being another.
Which one would a lady of means prefer? We don't know.
That doesn't change that a vanishing cream jar was probably found on a deserted island.
What it does mean is that perhaps everyone jumped the gun a bit saying it is a Dr.Berry's jar. Every press report said a Dr.Berrys jar was found.
Perhaps very wrong.
It could have been another company marketing vanishing or lightening cream using this same jar. Some companies would have called it freckle cream. Some companies would have said labeled it spot lightening cream.Likely there were more than the two known companies, Velvetine and Dr Berrys using this jar.
By the late 1930's vanishing cream was fading from popularity, as this link below states.( Not sure if the rules permit links here, but here is a little class on vanishing creams).

http://cosmeticsandskin.com/aba/vanishing-cream.php

So a vanishing cream jar and it's implications was probably found.
To say it was Dr.Berrys is highly speculative since at least one other company( Velvetine) was using this exact same jar.
Perhaps it should be called the Vanishing cream jar, instead of the Dr.Berrys jar.

First off welcome to the forum  :)

Tighar have never said IT IS Dr.C.H.Berry Freckle Ointment, What they have said is the only ointment pot they have found of same design is Dr.C.H.Berry Ointment, however up untill this moment we have not found a clear glass dr berry ointment.

You say exactly the same jar except it's milk glass, That's the problem ?, I can show you load's of Ointment Pot's of same design found on Niku BUT they are all milk glass.

A Clear Glass Ointment Pot of same design and pattern as found on Niku is what we seek ? If you can find one hats off to you.

Also Tighar can't control what the press print !!!! If only

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 11, 2012, 07:43:07 PM
Ok now I am more confused.
Randy said of the 7 ointments known to use this jar, Dr.Berrys is the only known cream using mercury.
I said not correct and gave an example of another brand of lightening cream using this jar containing mercury. And amazingly it's ANOTHER BRAND of freckle cream.

Then Richie said Tighars stance was quote "What they have said is the only ointment pot they have found of same design is Dr.C.H.Berry Ointment, however up untill this moment we have not found a clear glass dr berry ointment."

But that totally contradicts the fact that apparently there were 7 other ointment pots of the same design. Not just Dr Berry.

So I am really confused about what Tighars stance is.
They know of  7 different ointments that used this same design but release a press release saying Dr. Berrys is the only one that matched the found artifacts design? Or is Tighar saying they know of 7 different ointments but Dr.Berrys is the only one containing MERCURY which was found on the artifact?(which is also incorrect)
In either example, regardless of clear or milk glass, that press release is incorrect.
I consider it fairly irrelevant whether a clear Dr.Berrys glass is available. We know they used clear at some point correct? Pre 1936.
I guess what I am getting at is what is Tighars stance at this point on this artifact given that there were at least 7 different ointments known to use this design. Including ANOTHER lighening cream using mercury.
If all 7 ointments using this jar contained various forms of freckle(lightening cream), it is solid evidence that this jar is extremely relevant.
There would be no reason for this 1930's jar design to be on that island other than AE.
If however 4 of the ointments contained lip balm or chapstick, the case for this being connected to AE becomes very much strained.
So the big question for me, is not milk glass versus clear glass.
It is what ointments were known to use this design?
So far on this forum, I have heard of two.
Dr.Berrys and Velvatine. Both skin lighteners.
What are the others? Who came up with the number 7 ointments used this design?
And what are those ointments?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on August 11, 2012, 08:47:16 PM

There would be no reason for this 1930's jar design to be on that island other than AE.


The jar could have been left by a coast guardsman. See Mark Pearce's Reply #63 on the Evaluating the Niku Hypothesis thread (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,748.msg17299.html#msg17299). Also have a look at Diego Vasquez's post, Reply #8, on the Research Bulletin #62: Lotion Bottle thread (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,599.msg17887.html#msg17887).

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 11, 2012, 09:04:35 PM
Ok now I am more confused.
Randy said of the 7 ointments known to use this jar, Dr.Berrys is the only known cream using mercury.
I said not correct and gave an example of another brand of lightening cream using this jar containing mercury. And amazingly it's ANOTHER BRAND of freckle cream.

Then Richie said Tighars stance was quote "What they have said is the only ointment pot they have found of same design is Dr.C.H.Berry Ointment, however up untill this moment we have not found a clear glass dr berry ointment."

But that totally contradicts the fact that apparently there were 7 other ointment pots of the same design. Not just Dr Berry.

So I am really confused about what Tighars stance is.
They know of  7 different ointments that used this same design but release a press release saying Dr. Berrys is the only one that matched the found artifacts design? Or is Tighar saying they know of 7 different ointments but Dr.Berrys is the only one containing MERCURY which was found on the artifact?(which is also incorrect)
In either example, regardless of clear or milk glass, that press release is incorrect.
I consider it fairly irrelevant whether a clear Dr.Berrys glass is available. We know they used clear at some point correct? Pre 1936.
I guess what I am getting at is what is Tighars stance at this point on this artifact given that there were at least 7 different ointments known to use this design. Including ANOTHER lighening cream using mercury.
If all 7 ointments using this jar contained various forms of freckle(lightening cream), it is solid evidence that this jar is extremely relevant.
There would be no reason for this 1930's jar design to be on that island other than AE.
If however 4 of the ointments contained lip balm or chapstick, the case for this being connected to AE becomes very much strained.
So the big question for me, is not milk glass versus clear glass.
It is what ointments were known to use this design?
So far on this forum, I have heard of two.
Dr.Berrys and Velvatine. Both skin lighteners.
What are the others? Who came up with the number 7 ointments used this design?
And what are those ointments?

Randy said of the 7 ointment's that used this jar, We I mean I, are still waiting to know what the other 6 products are, You gave an example of another brand but it's not the same jar, Dont worry i made same error aldo they are similar their not exactly the same,

Tighar have said the ointment pot found on Niku, After much research matches hazel atlas serial number 1995, However as yet have not been able to find a Dr Berrys clear glass freckle cream or Another product, That uses same jar that is clear glass.

I have asked the question whether the clear glass jar could be Dr Berry's, But was specially made for Amelia as a gift.

Untill an exact match is found we won't know for certain :)   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 11, 2012, 09:27:50 PM
John, of course it could have been left by the coast guard. Not exactly my point however.
At the start of this thread, Ric, stated an opinion. You can re-read it, it was 2010. It states in summary we found this jar, and the ONLY advertising we can find for a similar bottle is Dr.Berrys freckle cream.
In it he make a plea for help in finding this bottle.
Now while Richie says Tighar cannot contol the press, this is exactly what happened.
There was a press release.
It hit every paper and internet site from Reuters to the LA Times.
The lead story was expedition finds bottle that only matches Dr.Berrys Freckle cream. Then the stories would explain why that was relevant.

Now there seems to be a backing off of this artifacts importance. Well not seems, there IS. In this thread alone, we have it that Tighar never stated it was Dr.Berrys freckle cream,(strongly implied it though worldwide), and news to me there have been 7 different ointments that have used this jar.
That never exactly made a press release.
The implications are obvious.

Since 2010 somebody found that 7 other companies making a variety of ointments used this jar. Who found that information and where are the results?
And then quietly the freckle jar artifact loses it's importance.
And lets make no mistake, this was front page news.
Not the Other green bottle found, not any other artifact, this Dr.Berrys freckle cream jar was all over
the place. Do a quick google search and you will find out it was a press release all over the world.
Now we have a "well it might have been a freckle jar", "we didn't say it was Dr.Berrys". I haven't seen any press releases saying subsequent research has us backing off our theory.
Don't want to be a negative nanny, but it's odd this thing explodes all over the world and internet with the headline -"could this clue solve the mystery..."
to now just another "maybe"

And no doubt it has to do with what those 7 other ointments that used this bottle were.
If subsequent research by the cream jar guy found conflicting or contradictory evidence towards this jar, then I think it relevant it be posted somewhere.
I searched this forum, and could not find that subsequent research and what it revealed.
It is important I believe. Probably the strongest evidence Tighar has found really and the reason it went worldwide with it. If all ointments that used this jar were lightening cream, the weight of evidence strongly tips to no coast guardsman using a pretty decorative bottle of spot cream remover.
If however chapstick was in this jar by bobs sunburn company, I can understand why this artifact has lost it's importance.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 11, 2012, 10:03:05 PM
Richie, I don't get the importance of clear versus milk.
It's the same jar.
The company records show it used both, so I think it's important to not
lose the forest for the trees.
A new form of milk glass Hazel Atlas made, patented in 36, and sat out on
an island for 80 years might not be opaque anymore.
Regardless, Dr Berrys used both.
So the one found COULD BE an earlier example.
The one I found should not be confused with a generic milk jar resembling the one found.
Mine says VELETINE LIGHTENING CREAM in the glass.
Coincidence?
Two known examples, though of a different color, of this exact height, size, and style of jar are found. And BOTH are freckle cream. For a fact.
Not conjecture, Tighar has one with a lable saying freckle cream, I have one that is embossed in the glass saying freckle cream.
I would say this jar held freckle cream.

Unless someone found examples of this jar holding lip balm, or toothpaste.
Then it's evidential weight becomes compromised as perhaps coincidence.
If however, all 7 companies were lightening cream, and we have two bottles marked lighteing cream, I think it matters not the glass color since hazel glass records say they used both types of color.
In other words, I think the color thing is seeing the trees instead of the forest.
The importance is what these other ointments using this STYLE jar used.
Not the color. Not in my opinion.
So where is this research. Show the research on what these jars held.
If there are only two known examples, albeit white, and both say freckle cream from two seperate companies, I would say it's a darn sure bet that is a bottle of freckle cream.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 12, 2012, 06:52:03 AM
Good Morning Guys! Hey, I just got caught up on reading some of the posts and I have to be honest with you on this...I overlooked Joe's last email to me on what the 6 other jars were. Like you, I too was baffled by his email. So anyway, my apology and here is what he wrote:

Randy..A forum member, Thom Boughton, asks "What are the 6 other products that were sold in the ointment pot? they are: Burnham Kalos Skin Rejuvenator, Gervaise Graham Hygienic Skin Cream,Gervaise Graham Skin Food, Woodbury Violet Face Cream, Dr. Berry's Creme Elite, and Dr. Berry's Massage Cream. We've seen actual examples of only the Burnham and the Woodbury products. The other 4 products have only been spotted from advertisements, mainly in the Sears Roebuck Catalogs from the Twentieth Century. The 2 Gervaise products may represent a single product that changed its name. All of these others are unlikely to have contained mercury. We would be very interested in any examples anyone can find on ebay or elsewhere!!! Thanks!!! Joe Cerniglia
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 12, 2012, 07:27:21 AM
Richie, I don't get the importance of clear versus milk.
It's the same jar.

It's a strange discrepancy.

It poses a question that might be answered by further research.

Quote
A new form of milk glass Hazel Atlas made, patented in 36, and sat out on
an island for 80 years might not be opaque anymore.

People who collect antique glass say that's not what happens with opaque glass exposed to sunlight.

Quote
Mine says VELETINE LIGHTENING CREAM in the glass.

... 
Two known examples, though of a different color, of this exact height, size, and style of jar are found. And BOTH are freckle cream. For a fact.

May we have some pictures of your jar, along with a scale in the picture? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on August 12, 2012, 07:43:34 AM
Any glass containing manganese prior ca. 1915 will turn purple when exposed to the sun or ultraviolet light.  After 1915 most, not all glass companies substituted selenium as a clearing agent for glass.  Heisey, Duncan & Miller, Fostoria, Cambridge and Imperial glass companies are some exceptions.  Glass collectors know this as the purpled glass is quite collectible.  Marty is absolutely correct, clear glass will not turn opaque when exposed to the sun.  Opaque glass will turn a lavender shade if it contains manganese. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 12, 2012, 09:10:10 AM
marty I will get pictures of the Velvetin skin lightner jar, going to take a couple of weeks but I will put them on this same thread.
Though I have to say after reading the list of other companies using this bottle it is disheartening.
I wish they all were skin lighteners, if so that glued together bottle would have stronger evidential value to AE's freckles.
As I suspected, I think one distributer sold this product to different companies to slap their name on and sell it.
Joes subsequent research since the press release did not help strengthen the link to AE.
All were facial skin creams, though some companies called it specifically skin lightener, and some called it skin rejeuvenator and some called it freckle cream.
Same thing done today in a lot of products on the shelf.
Still strange that a facial cream or freckle cream was found, but it sure would have been better if every known example was a mercury containing skin lightener. But the reality is a sun burnt coast guardsman could have bought something called skin food for his aching red face.
Oh well, mystery continues....
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 12, 2012, 09:35:28 AM
Joe's subsequent research since the press release did not help strengthen the link to AE.

No lab test will ever make that connection.

If we stumble across a picture of AE holding a clear glass jar like the one in question, that would help. 

Or correspondence with a cosmetic manufacturer about a product that came in clear Hazel-Atlas jars of that style.

Barring a breakthrough at that level, I think we're left with a very open question about who brought the jar to the Seven Site.  It seems more likely to me that the apparently cosmetic materials (broken mirror, rouge, broken U.S. cosmetic jar) argue for an American woman as the source, but it is not an airtight case by any means.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 13, 2012, 01:50:31 AM
I am now of the opinion that this artifact is not associated with AE.
Despite the fact I have an identical jar in white. Bummer.

My reasoning as follows- (And while I respect Joes research and locating the model number with Hazel Atlas, too much doesn't add up. I have spent some hours on this, researching this company and while not an expert here are some things to ponder)

 Do a quick search on Ebay for ointment jars. heck do a loooooong search on Hazel atlas which has apparently been ongoing for 2 years? You will find white glass, commonly called milkglass. Now this is not just coincidence that clear ones are not showing up. Clear glass in ointment jars were produced in a very narrow time frame in the overall scheme of things.
What is overlooked and misinterpreted is a notation in the companies history that Hazel atlas applied for a patent for white glass in 1936. So everyone put two and two and got five and said well a clear jar would be before 1936 but still possibly used by AE. We just have to find that clear jar.

What is overlooked is the companies history. They didn't just learn how to produce white glass in 1936. They were producing ointment jars in milk glass by 1920 at least. Go to the Owings Corning glass museum website and find a book by hazel atlas, printed in 1926, 7th EDITION, with a long title starting "Opal ointment jars"... ect.
Let that sink in.
By 1926 certainly Hazel Atlas's ointment jars were white. Like every other company had. This was the largest glass company in the world. They didnt just starting making white glass in 1936!
The 1936 patent date is after they started producing plates and housewares and wanted their own form of milk glass, and called it platonite.
In 1929, depression starting, sales were down, company was losing money and looking for an edge,  they began to move away from clear houseware plates to highly decorative and beautiful forms of colored plates and dishes. Hence we have "depression glass"
That has nothing at all to do with the ointment jars they had been producing since at least 1900.

By 1910 every catalog and advertisement you will find lists ponds, colgate, hundreds of facial creams, and every single one of them are in white milk glass jars.
Including hazel atlas (who started out remember making WHITE GLASS MASON JAR LID INSERTS.) They then moved on to ketchup bottles and industrial jars like ointment pots. All in "opal" , MEANING WHITE. This was all in the early 1900's, a good estimate would be 1905-1910 they really started cranking out white ointment pots for any company that would place an order.
By 1920 at the latest, hazel atlas produced their own catalog of white ointment pots for sale. A Big huge book of Ointment jar styles in WHITE. Not clear. White. That book is on Microfilm at Owens Corning. Did Joe have that book while doing his research?
 
Now another nail in the coffin with this found artifact is the different companies that used this same design. The initial press release was fascinating, as Tighar said we have found ONE product that matches this pot. Freckle cream. It went world wide. Front page everywhere.
Subsequently Joe must have found other companies using this same ointment pot. Those findings did not have a press release. Not quite as sexy, if Tighar said we found an old jar that might have been some skin cream from some company with a date we are unsure of. It was a bigger attention grabber to state "we found a jar that we have matched to one product, a freckle cream from the 1930's, now what was a freckle lightener doing on a deserted island? The world was abuzz.!  Finally some solid, though circumstantial evidence of a European desent woman on an island that had been deserted)
Now of course, there is a backing away from that since there is serious uncertainty over which company even used this jar. A new company using this style jar gets found a lot it seems.

So now where are we at?
We have an ointment pot that had to be made around 1900-1910. Predating the white milk glass craze everyone used by 1937. It is also guessing whether it ever had Dr.Berrys freckle cream in it at all, as there were several companies that were using this same design. Not just a freckle cream remover. Heck I have a jar that wasn't even on Joe's list of companies that used this same design, how many more were there?
Of the companies listed in this thread as using this jar, you will find two of them were early 1900's, small time companies. By 1920 Gervais(sic?) was a lady doctor working from her home and down to selling hair care solution, not even the facial cream she was using back in the early teens.

So basically if this jar was associated with AE it SHOULD BE WHITE. By 1937 every ointment and facial jar I have found is white, opaque, blue, but colored not clear. Even the hazel atlas own records has a catalog, a book really,of white ointment jars, not clear ones by 1920. Did joe get the style and model number of this jar, but the guide book did not list the production years and color?

So unless AE was using a 1905 jar of Dr.Berrys, there is no way this is hers.
I can't imagine my wife using a 30 year old facial cream.
I doubt AE did either.
I am not happy with this finding, but the more research you do into this jar, the more it looks like a wild goose chase. It's an unknown product produced in a clear glass long since discontinued by 1930.
Can we say some shaky evidence?
Everyone is looking for a clear Dr.Berrys jar, when they should have been checking to see what color Hazel Atlas was making ointment jars in 1937.
It was white. And had been white for a couples of decades. Not clear.
Dead end my friends.
This jar is too old.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on August 13, 2012, 08:47:13 AM
Good research work Dave!
Your conclusion leads me to the probability of it having belonged to a Brit, we never chuck anything away and, hoard items that may turn out to be 'useful', even 30 years later ;)
Good work Dave
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ricker H Jones on August 13, 2012, 10:16:54 AM
We must remember that the artifact ointment pot had the Hazel Atlas logo on the bottom "which was first used in 1923 according to trademark records quoted by Peterson (400 Trademarks on Glass)" (http://www.myinsulators.com/glass-factories/bottlemarks2.html).
Rick J
 
 
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on August 13, 2012, 11:06:23 AM
Good point Rick. :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 13, 2012, 11:15:40 AM
Ricker I think the answer is "maybe"
Does the found sample have an "ha"? or does it say "hazel", or does it
have an "N", or does it have an H with a dot on top?
All those are known varieties.
What I have read is it's marked so that Joe could say it was Hazel Atlas.
What is the Mark on this glass?

Even if it says "HA". Reference material I found said it was used "around" 1920. And different plants may have Embossed different glass at different times. Even with a patent date of 1923. It could have been embossed years before that. So we are back to clear glass being used and probably marked before 1920.
Also, again, there were big differences in industrial produced items and household glassware, note white glass was patented in 1936 but HA was producing white glass ointment jars two decades before that. God only knows how each plant manager marked each run especially on industrial useage jars and bottles.

What we do know for a fact, is white ointment jars were made for sure by hazel atlas by 1920 almost exclusively. Their own catalog states as much printed in 1926. Why is this one clear if it was supposedly belonging to a woman in 1937? The weight of evidence suggests unless it was a one off bottle, for AE, this is a not a late 1930's ointment jar.
And to think Hazel produced a special clear glass ointment jar just for AE, just because it fits the timeframe of 1937, is reaching and making the evidence fit the theory.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on August 13, 2012, 01:05:33 PM
Dave
While milk glass ointment jars were certainly more common than clear glass I don't think you can say that clear glass ointment jars have to predate 1920.  Here is a link to  the Illinois glass company catalogue from 1926,
http://www.sha.org/bottle/igco1926.htm

 if you scroll down you will find a section for ointment jars many of which are milk ( or opal)  glass however the first link there
http://www.sha.org/bottle/Typing/IGCo1926/page93.jpg

is a clear flint glass model described as their "leading package" ( probably their simplest cheapest model).  Did the HA catalogue from 1926 say that they had ceased all production of clear glass ointment jars?  Certainly other possibilities remain such as companies stockpiling packaging so that they would be selling products in jars that were produced several years previously.

All that being said it is troubling that the press release was misleading. 
In terms of evidence for the presence of AE these fragments from the 7 site are always going to ambiguous, too much chance for both pre and post 1937 contamination, narrowing it down to a woman's product manufactured in the 1930s would make it somewhat more relevant but still would not convince anyone who did not already assume AE and FN had been on Niku.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dave McDaniel on August 13, 2012, 03:21:17 PM
Or, maybe it happened like this. During the transition from clear to white glass, H.A. is stuck with a warehouse of clear #1955 jars. Doc Berry needs to place an order for more #1955 jars. H.A.s' sales Rep. tells the Doc he has a bunch of the old clear #1955's and makes her a heck of a deal. She buy them and makes a "one off" run of the freckle cream in clear jars. AE buys a new jar of the Doc's freckle cream in the clear jar for the trip and it winds up at the beach party on Gardner. So the run becomes a financial "one off" verses one for AE's celebrity. As far-fetched as this may sound, you gotta' think in post depression terms. A buck was a buck, and good deal would have been a great motivator for a transaction like this in the years following. Just as it is in todays financial climate.

And Dave, don't let patent dates and production dates frustrate you. While they can be similarly tied they are two different trains being driven by two totally different engines.

LTM,
Dave
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 13, 2012, 08:59:40 PM
Do we have any direct evidence apart from the fact Amelia Earhart once mentioned her freckles at a publicity photo shoot that she was carrying freckle cream?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dave McDaniel on August 13, 2012, 11:53:41 PM
I'd like to answer that but I'm ignoring you!

LTM,
Dave
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 14, 2012, 12:49:11 AM
Yesterday afternoon, while I was doing my research on this very very disputive clear jar found on the island...I found out, like Mr. Burrell has that Pond's had white milkglass jars as far back as 1911. Now, I don't understand why Hazel-Atlas would apply for a patent on milkglass component Platonite, when milk-glass was already being made! But, like someone has mentioned Dave Burrell that the jar indeed had the trademark stamped on the bottom of the jar. So, we have to say that this is the product that was made for this jar with all the scientific studies done so far. As for Joe...I think Joe has done a wonderful job on all the scientific studies and long research done to find this particular jar that we seek. I don't think the man is rushing to conclusions and picking jars out of the air as we speak! Anyway, this jar fits the freckle cream box perfectly, has the hazel-atlas stamp on the bottom, and is white, has traces of mercury on it. Seems like its a match to me!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 14, 2012, 01:23:16 AM
(Cringe) My first post, offered in humility, here goes:

It seems to me that the opinion stated in Reply 108 that "this jar is too old" is supported by the fact that in 1936 the Dr. Berry's product was sold in jars completely unlike the artifact jar, see the '36-'37 Fall/Winter Sears catalog page (http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015009227433;seq=697;size=150;view=image).  [About halfway down the page, to the left.]  Not to spoil an objective post with (worthless) personal opinion, but the "streamlined" container shown there looks much more appropriate to the 1930's; the artifact jar and the other ornate Dr. Berry's jars and boxes collected by TIGHAR have a much more turn-of-the-century appearance.

1) If everyone here already knew this, or the post is otherwise dumb, I'm sure you'll let me know.
2) If the contrary, I deserve no credit.  The original find appeared on another person's blog that is not related to AE.  I am not linking directly to that blog as the owner may not wish to have his/her server swamped and/or receive a wave of unexpected comments. 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 14, 2012, 01:23:39 AM
Randy nobody said it wasnt a hazel atlas jar.
If it has the mark, it has the mark.
And it may fit a Dr.Berrys box.
So?
I have a Velvetine Hazel atlas jar that will fit as well.
Same jar, but in milk glass.
That means nothing.
Also, I explained why platonite was patented in 1936.
That was for plates and dinnerware.
Not cream jars.
Platonite was a new process that allowed milk glass to be layered
with other colors, such as red stripes, for decorations.

The point being, as you found, milk glass was THE predominant glass color by at least 1900 for ointment jars.
It's hard to find a clear one made between 1900 to 1950.
Clear ointment pots generally show up in catalogs in the 1890 to 1900 time frame.

Milk glass was so common, as early as 1905, that Hazel atlas, in their own catalog of Ointment jars titles their book " Opal ointment jars..."
That was from a catalog in 1926. And apparenty opal glass was used long before then since the Hazel book I found made in 1926 was the 7th printing!
They don't have a book listing clear ointment jars.

Now it matters not whether another company used clear glass for their ointment jars.
The fact of the matter, is that Hazel, our examples company, had pretty much phased out clear ointment jars years before AE's flight.
I cannot say for certain a run or two did not happen with clear glass.
But given it's been two years of research to locate one print ad from the 1930's showing a clear ointment jar from HA, I would say the odds are great few clear ointment jars were produced in the 1930's from this company.

Therefore, a clear ointment jar from Hazel Atlas points to an earlier manufacture date, most likely before 1920 and probably a decade or more earlier than that.
Meaning the found jar was much older than the 1937 flight.
So the jar doesn't fit, this "evidence" you must acquit. :D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on August 14, 2012, 01:37:43 AM
 :)
I'd like to answer that but I'm ignoring you!

LTM,
Dave

Dave how old are ye, just breath in an out. Don't let Mr Happy stop u from adding ur input
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dave McDaniel on August 14, 2012, 01:47:50 AM
I apologize for that last post folks. even though it is true. But it was really mean and I've got to go to sleep tonight and I can't end my day like this. He asked a simple question and it really does deserve an answer.  So please allow me to respond to this as an adult.

Malcolm, you asked " Do we have any direct evidence apart from the fact Amelia Earhart once mentioned her freckles at a publicity shoot that she was carrying freckle cream?" Honest answer..I don't know. So I asked the resident freckle expert in the house, my wife, who had used every cosmetic avaliable to cover her freckles until I told her they beautiful about 20 years ago. Her answer " would Noonan leave his sextant behind?" at two o'clock in the morning... end of conversation. I believe that says it all.

You have a great day Malcolm, wherever you are!
LTM,
Dave
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 14, 2012, 05:03:42 AM
I apologize for that last post folks. even though it is true. But it was really mean and I've got to go to sleep tonight and I can't end my day like this. He asked a simple question and it really does deserve an answer.  So please allow me to respond to this as an adult.

Malcolm, you asked " Do we have any direct evidence apart from the fact Amelia Earhart once mentioned her freckles at a publicity shoot that she was carrying freckle cream?" Honest answer..I don't know. So I asked the resident freckle expert in the house, my wife, who had used every cosmetic avaliable to cover her freckles until I told her they beautiful about 20 years ago. Her answer " would Noonan leave his sextant behind?" at two o'clock in the morning... end of conversation. I believe that says it all.

You have a great day Malcolm, wherever you are!
LTM,
Dave

So apart from the wild guess by your wife you have no idea.

That's the problem with working from an artifact to a conclusion that we would like to see proven. We are assuming that Earhart once had a jar of Dr Berry's Freckle Cream (high levels of toxic mercury guaranteed) because she expressed a concern about outdoor publicity photo shoots giving her freckles. That's it isn't it? - I haven't missed anything in the chain of evidence.

But that aside the important question is "Did she have a jar of freckle cream with her on the flight?". Now that may seem a simple question but first we must ascertain why we are asking this question. The answer to that preliminary question is that someone found in the detritus of approximately 28 years of European and European influenced Islander occupation of Nikumaroro the broken fragments of a jar that resembles jars used for the selling of propriety cosmetic products in the early and middle 20th century. Furthermore this was not found in a secure datable setting and we are uncertain as to what the jar actually contained, but we are guessing freckle cream because Earhart once expressed a concern about those pesky outdoor photo ops that gave her freckles. That's it isn't it? - I haven't missed anything in the chain of evidence. Therefore according to this chain of supposition we have an artifact that is possibly the key to the whole puzzle.

Well it is the key if our suppositions that Earhart actually used the estimable Dr Berry's toxic freckle cream are correct, and we can find in our documentary sources that she was carrying this product on the flight. But there is more, we then must suppose that after the still quite hypothetical landing on Nikumaroro by the aviators, Earhart carried this jar of freckle cream ashore with her as the Electra slowly sank, with the sun, in the west.

I think I have that right. But being a boring old archaeologist by trade I come back to the original archaeological problem which is that the remains of this jar with no proven Earhartian provenance was found in an insecure dating context amongst the detritus of approximately 28 years of European and European influenced Islander occupation of Nikumaroro. Forgive me if I appear sceptical.  :)   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 14, 2012, 06:58:38 AM
Forgive me if I appear sceptical.  :)

You are forgiven, but what is your argument? 
• Are you arguing that there is, as yet, no conclusive proof that Earhart died on Nikumaroro?  If so, with whom are you arguing? 
• Are you arguing that, with sufficient creative speculation, each piece of circumstantial evidence found so far may all be dismissed?  If so - again - with whom are you arguing?
• Are you arguing that we should not mistake possible clues for established evidence?  With whom are you arguing?
• Are you arguing that there is insufficient circumstantial evidence to justify further investigation and testing?  If so, then you are welcome to earmark your contributions to TIGHAR for use on one of our other projects.
• Do you have an hypothesis about what happened to Earhart that you can support with better clues and evidence? If so, let's hear it.


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Tom Swearengen on August 14, 2012, 10:59:03 AM
If I may-----In Amelia's personal effects in the states, at her home, was there a bottle of Freckle cream? Granted, all the principles of this mystery are now watching from above, but surely someone, would have knowledge.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ricker H Jones on August 14, 2012, 11:44:55 AM
I just received the following message from Joe C that I will pass along:
" Malcom said "Do we have any direct evidence apart from the fact Amelia Earhart once mentioned her freckles at a publicity shoot that she was carrying freckle cream? (It wasn't a publicity shoot; it was a ticker tape parade for the Friendship flight.) Well, I was digging around my files and all I could find was this poor lonely photo of AE having her hair cut with a cosmetic jar at her side. Too bad the jar looks to be milk glass! Oh well. I guess that means AE only preferred milk glass cosmetic jars and wouldn't have used any other kind. Back to the drawing board....hehe :)"
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 14, 2012, 03:54:49 PM
If I may-----In Amelia's personal effects in the states, at her home, was there a bottle of Freckle cream? Granted, all the principles of this mystery are now watching from above, but surely someone, would have knowledge.

In reference to Tom Swearengen's comment...I personally have been looking for many weeks. Now, if Ric may help me out on this matter, but I do believe that Joe indeed had stumbled upon a jar of freckle cream in Atchinson during the Amelia Earhart Festival last year. It was milk-glass. I have stumbled upon a box and a small vile milk glass jar of freckle cream as indicated in the pictures I posted. Anyway, as far as checking her birthplace or hometown that is something I haven't done yet personally...but I have searched several antique stores to the south of Atchinson in Topeka. That is where the box originally came from. So, we must say that this stuff was being sold in Kansas.
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 14, 2012, 06:40:22 PM
You are forgiven, but what is your argument? 
• Are you arguing that there is, as yet, no conclusive proof that Earhart died on Nikumaroro?  If so, with whom are you arguing? 
• Are you arguing that, with sufficient creative speculation, each piece of circumstantial evidence found so far may all be dismissed?  If so - again - with whom are you arguing?
• Are you arguing that we should not mistake possible clues for established evidence?  With whom are you arguing?
• Are you arguing that there is insufficient circumstantial evidence to justify further investigation and testing?  If so, then you are welcome to earmark your contributions to TIGHAR for use on one of our other projects.
• Do you have an hypothesis about what happened to Earhart that you can support with better clues and evidence? If so, let's hear it.

Thank you for your forgiveness Ric.

But I also humbly suggest that as you are the one that has been proposing that Earhart and Noonan met their end on Nikumaroro for some considerable time, and has also organised expeditions to the island on a number of occasions to demonstrate that that hypothesis is correct then it is up to you, not I, to prove that your hypothesis is the answer.

I am simply using my archaeological training to evaluate whether the oft cited artifacts have secure  Earhartian provenance. So far, and as far as I am aware, none of them have been demonstrated to have this provenance - something which is crucial to their hypothesized fit in the puzzle. On the broader issue of Earhart and Noonan's fate I have no preferred option simply because to date none have been shown to be superior to another - bar of course the abducted by aliens option  ;D . If Nauticos turns up a wreck or the East New Britain search does the same then that will show that one of the alternate hypotheses is the correct one, and that will close the matter.

Of course in the mean time people may speculate to their heart's content and it is all good fun but in the end it is for TIGHAR not I to demonstrate that their Nikumaroro hypothesis is the answer. Now it may well be that on the last trip you found off the reef evidence of the Electra and we await the DC program with interest, but if that is not the case then what is the next step?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 14, 2012, 07:15:16 PM

As to myself and perhaps Ric and some others here and there, we have a strong 'pointer' in things-found like that, with others - and considering all observable circumstances, etc.  Think of that - we are in stark agreement with Malcolm, actually - we know that had AE even owned a jar like that it would still not be proof that we found hers... but what a co-inky-dink, me thinks, that one turned up down there... it is an interesting thing, isn't it?  I'd never heard of one before all this.

LTM -

Pointers as such are good, but if they are offer only a coincidental relationship rather than actual evidence then, unfortunately, they are valueless. In prehistoric archaeology whose methodology offers the closest parallel with the Earhart search because there is at present no clear indication outside of rather vague coincidental artifacts that Nikumaroro was indeed where Earhart and Noonan finished up things are rarely clear cut. It is a foolish archaeologist who claims something is definite based solely on the often fragmentary and incomplete evidence that exists outside of verifiable historical data.

Possible is a much used term because certainly only invites embarrassment. Also as in the case of the freckle cream jar, even if the last trip found the wreck off the reef, this does not actually prove that the coincidental artifacts are related to Earhart or Noonan - they still retain their coincidental association until evidence is located which connects them to the aviators. That is the problem - all the artifacts from the hypothetical wreck to the smallest coincidental artifact each are subject to their own individual history, not to the imperatives of an overarching hypothesis.     
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Adam Marsland on August 14, 2012, 09:06:04 PM
"The nay-case has often been at least as 'contrived' as the pro-case is accused of being in my experience here."

Bingo.  Often quite a bit more so, actually, which is my basic problem with a lot of the naysayers on here.  Skepticism for its own sake is not objectivity...it is another, and more insidious, form of bias.  I do like, however, when someone comes up with a new factoid or alternate theory that merits further thought.

On that line, there IS an interesting counter-theory developing that the castaway dates from further back than AE...certainly Gallagher thought the remains had been there longer than three.  Once again, evidence is not proof, and evidence so far is scant, but that doesn't mean we can't consider it and weigh it with a truly open mind.  If that evidence accumulates higher than the evidence for AE, I'm certainly swayable to that point of view...and it'd be a fascinating exercise to try and puzzle out who that person might have been.  But poking holes for its own sake or explaining away evidence with even more implausible scenarios doesn't really cut it for me.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 14, 2012, 09:37:27 PM
It is true that people have different levels of "proof".
We have thousands who saw planes fly into the world trade center, survivors, news crews, it's on video, yet some people still claim no planes hit.
You can't please everybody nor should that be a goal.
BUT... you can make a stronger case for the majority of rational people with cumulative circumstantial evidence.
And short of a found plane, that is all we are going to get, cumulative circumstantial evidence.
In the court of law, men have been put to death with enough of it.
In the case of the jar, it goes from very intriquing to zero weight
if this jar cannot be dated.
The date is a starting point. Without a date that fits, such as a catalog or ad or evidence of a production date around 1936-1937, then it should not be considered relevant at all.
The police do this with every crime scene. They sort out the relevant artifacts from random debris.
Without a date, there is no way to tell the difference and sort it.
So far, I haven't seen evidence of a relevant date. Not one advertisement or production log listing this Jar as being made around 1937.
In fact everything I have found shows the opposite, that in 1937 it should be milk glass. Previous posters on this thread have given advertisements for Dr.Berrys in 1936. It was milk glass as well.
You can't just say here is this jar, and it looks like a jar that once held freckle cream "around" the first half of the 20th century.
That is concerning, if in fact there has been considerable man hours spent searching for this information.
This is not searching for Noahs ark. There are Hazel Atlas catalogs, now most exist in libraries, I have found them in libraries at Santa Barbara, Ball State U, and the University of West Virginia. Records do exist. And some catalogs are in the hands of private researchers and museums.
In fact we know Mr.Joe C has found some Hazel Atlas records as he gives a number to this jar. That did not come from an advertisement.
We have a product identification number but in all the research in the last two years Tighar cannot determine a production date? I also haven't seen a makers mark photo, I haven't seen a catalog photo showing this bottle, I haven't seen really anything of the methadology or research that has been completed on one of the few "hard" artifacts Tighar has.
Why?
Therefore it is understandable that a scientist would be very skeptical, as would anyone without an agenda and with open logical mind.

Because even if you can prove AE used freckle cream, and you can show a freckle cream company used this style jar, it becomes irrelevant if the records show this style jar in clear glass was made during 1915-1920 for instance.
The date is everything. Then you can proceed to the ointments that used the jar during those dates. Then we can speculate if AE used it. That last link will likely never be proven of course.
But you have to start with a dated clear glass record. That would start making this jar "possibly" a relevant artifact. If You date it to 1930-1940, and we know of several facial creams and freckle creams that used it, then it's evidential value becomes higher than junk.
Without a date, or with a proven manufacture date of 1910 to 1920, it's just junk glass.
And really, just my opinion, there should have been no press release on this artifact until it was dated.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 06:30:52 AM
Whatever this piece of glass is it's not junk, but a fine mystery of true Agatha Christie calibre. Let us see mes amis .... as far as I am aware there are two possible known identities for our unfortunate castaway, either a survivor from Amelia's flight, or one of the eight lost seamen from the Norwich City (11 were lost, but three bodies found and buried ... I am hypothesising for a moment that one of the remaining eight could have been washed further down the coast, survived and remained after the rest of the crew had been evacuated, ending his days at the seven site - long shot I know, but could happen). As far as we know, the last people to grace the shores of this island before the Norwich City was wrecked, packed their bags and left in the late 19th century. This means that either a stranded Norwich City seaman, Amelia, Fred, one of the Brits, resettled islanders, US coasties, or a TIGHAR archaeologist left the jar there. The earliest of these landed in 1929. So mes amis, if the jar is pre WWI as the posts above suggest ... it doesn't make sense for any of these visitors to have brought it ashore. If you're right about the age of the jar, it's too old for all of them ... so why is it there? A ha ... solve that one mythbusters. No? Okay, here's a feeble attempt .... Since the Norwich City was commissioned in 1911, it is conceivable that it may have picked up a clear, early 20th century American jar of whatever on one of its early voyages. Once the original contents were consumed, the jar could have remained on the ship for many years, being used for a number of other things by the seamen on board. If our unfortunate castaway was a Norwich City seaman (and I hope it wasn't, I'm gunning for Ric and Amelia), this would explain the presence of an early 20th century clear glass jar at the seven site. Of course another option is that the Norwich City brought it to the island, Amelia found it and used it as a survival implement of some sort (I like that one - that's going to be my favourite until proven otherwise).    :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 07:01:24 AM
Of course an alternative hypothesis is that Amelia had a 20 gallon drum of Dr. Berry's gunk in her garage and periodically re-filled her mom's favourite cosmetic jar with it for every flight.  :) The point of my last post was that if the jar really does date back to the first decade of the 20th century, it's too old for all the known vistors to the island, not just Amelia. The dating of the jar is still important, but not critical to proving or disproving its connection to Amelia.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 07:25:59 AM
Raf,

yes but no, something old can come to the island at a later date if it has been picked up as usable (as cosmetics or water boiling) it can only suggest that it has a starting point of production and availability.

Indeed it can. My post was perhaps a little over-verbose. What I meant was that if the thing is proven to be older than Ms. Earhart's unfortunate demise there are thousands of ways it can be connected to her, no matter how old it is. Only if we can date it as being manufactured after her demise, can we categorically say it wasn't hers. From all the research posted above, we know it pre-dates her disappearance. Some of the folks on this thread say it it is "unlikely" she would have brought it along as it was too old. My point was that it was too old for any of the known visitors .. but it still happened .. so it must be 'likely". Clear as mud?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 15, 2012, 08:51:24 AM
Of course an alternative hypothesis is that Amelia had a 20 gallon drum of Dr. Berry's gunk in her garage and periodically re-filled her mom's favourite cosmetic jar with it for every flight.  :) The point of my last post was that if the jar really does date back to the first decade of the 20th century, it's too old for all the known vistors to the island, not just Amelia. The dating of the jar is still important, but not critical to proving or disproving its connection to Amelia.

I couldn't disagree more. What you are doing by dismissing an early date is making the evidence Fit your hypothesis in some highly improbably manners.
You state if it's 1905 then it couldn't have come from any of the known or probable castaways, but that a 1905 manufacture date is not critical to proving a connection to AE. That makes no sense. ???

If the jar is 1905, or pre WW1, it absolutely breaks a link to AE.
She wasn't carrying a 30 year old jar of facial cream. Does your wife have a 30 year old bottle in her purse. No.
If that jar was made more than 10 years before her flight, or likewise was made 1 year after her flight, there is near zero probability it is AE's.
Period.

Now how it got there if not AE, that is another story entirely, and one that is outside the bounds of TIGHARS theory, it could have been on the NC and salvaged by an Islander in later years, it could have washed ashore from an unknown wreck we don't even know about.
But that is not what we are doing here.
We are proving a link to AE right? And if the date is too early, there is no link. How much more critical do you need? The date is everything and to suggest otherwise, and say a pre WWI date doesn't matter is slightly absurd.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 09:20:27 AM
Chastised by Mr Burell ...  I am not worthy  :) ... but the probability is only zero if the jar was manufactured after the Electra's disappearance. As I stated before, as far as we know, no one was on the island from about 1890 to 1929, at least no one of European/US origin. If the jar was manufactured in 1905, the first people who could have left it there were the survivors of the Norwich City. That was in 1929. That already makes the jar 24 years old ...  how absurd is that?  ??? What were a bunch of sailors doing with a 24 year old bottle of face cream? Ask your wife, mine doesn't know ... but it was there ... on the seven site. Or was it the US coast guard in the mid 1940s? What were a bunch of coasties doing with a bottle of 39 year old face cream? My wife doesn't know the answer to that either. Absurd ... is it not? All of these to me are pertinent questions. One of the ways to make sense of what may or may not have happened to Amelia Earhart is to understand and eliminate possible or plausible alternatives. If there was a known US/European presence on the island before WWI, I'd be with you in your convictions, but we're told by the researchers that it was deserted until 1929.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 15, 2012, 09:46:05 AM
... we're told by the researchers that it was deserted until 1929.

Since no one lived on the island routinely except for the colonial period, we cannot say with certainty who might have visited the island--or even become a castaway on the island--prior to 1939.

Strange things do happen.

People do things unexpectedly.

Some garbage floats.

Even if we had a signed agreement between AE and some cosmetic manufacturer, and even if we had a photo of her holding a transparent Hazel Atlas jar in her hand as she boarded the Electra, it would not prove that this jar belonged to her.

It would, of course, raise the odds that her presence on the island would account for the presence of the jar, but the two propositions do not logically entail each other.  These two propositions are false:

-- Amelia is the only person who could have brought the jar to the island.
-- The presence of the jar on the island proves that Amelia was on the island.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Don Dollinger on August 15, 2012, 10:51:16 AM
Quote
Well it is the key if our suppositions that Earhart actually used the estimable Dr Berry's toxic freckle cream are correct, and we can find in our documentary sources that she was carrying this product on the flight. But there is more, we then must suppose that after the still quite hypothetical landing on Nikumaroro by the aviators, Earhart carried this jar of freckle cream ashore with her as the Electra slowly sank, with the sun, in the west.

You seem to think it is a stretch that of all things that she would bring her freckle cream ashore.  I would suppose she like most women would have a bag of sorts that held ALL of her personal items that she would take with her at her numerous stops around the world to freshen up or what not.  I would also suppose that her freckle cream would be in that bag just as Noonan probably had a shaving kit.  It would also contain her compact, rougue, etc.
 
My wife carries one of those bags and calls it a purse.  I've been tasked a few times in my many years of marriage to "get the (fill in the blank) out of my purse for me" and it is still unbelieveable to me that she carries that much stuff with her just go to the store.  I would suppose the contents would change somewhat for an around the world flight.

Lastly, the users of these products did not know that the product was toxic and I would think that the manufactor at the very least did not realize the health issues associated with long term exposure to mercury.  There was not an FDA then and a lot of products changed, were discontinued, or what they were used for changed after they discovered that they were unhealthy.  I received an email some time back with a collection of magazine ads from the 50's.  The one for Lysol stood out as it was being advertised for women to use it to douche with (google it).  These days it is used as a floor cleaner.  Do you think maybe the previous use for it was found to be unhealthy?

LTM,

Don
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on August 15, 2012, 01:31:25 PM
Good points Don, when you think of AEs public image it would be very surprising if she didn't have a make up case on board, she had to look fresh at every stop to charm the male reporters and look feminine in any photos.  It would not be the first thing she would grab when the plane landed on the reef but with the likelihood of several return trips to the Electra to send the post loss radio messages there would be a good chance after a day or two that some toiletries would be nice to have.  As for old products, I agree with Chris that people of that generation would be much more likely to hang onto products for a longer period of time, I am old enough to remember my grandmothers house in the 1960s, her bathroom counters were lined with health and beauty products from the 30s and 40s.
Another issue that has been raised is the possibility of this not being a Dr Berry's jar, this form was apparently used by other facial creams however the presence of mercury rules out most of those, I can find no references to cold creams or vanishing creams ever containing mercury.  Mercury was found mainly in the freckle creams and skin bleaches ( correct me if there are other candidates). As an aside from researching this I learned that in many countries (ie India and Jamaica) these mercury containing skin bleaches are still sold legally.  In the US the FDA started to crack down on these in 1938.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on August 15, 2012, 01:56:05 PM
Having re-read the account of the grounding of the Norwich City in 1929 I would be surprised to say the least if the glass jar in question arrived on Gardner Island via the Norwich City. Of all the things you might need to risk your life for while the ship was ablaze and the weather being naff before abandoning ship, a glass jar seems odd to say the least. Still, that said it may have had some other value which we can only guess at. Maybe a very self conscious sailor concerned about his freckles? a studious writer protecting his ink supplies? Opium?
Whatever it was it wasn't worth risking your life for.
Must have arrived AFTER 1929
IMHO of course
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 15, 2012, 02:00:53 PM
Rafael, you contradict yourself. And I am just trying to make you see a point, not chastise or argue, really I am not. Some people get so wrapped in something that tend to make every little item fit their hypothesis.
You state it is not critical to know the date of this jar.
Then you state, well it might be important if it was made after 1937.
But you state if really doesn't matter if it was made in 1905 because "someone" had to leave it.
Talk about circular reasoning.
Then you start talking of PROBABILITIES of who would have left it, if it
dates early, say 1905-1915.
Well when you start discussing probabilties you certainly need a date to get the data to arrive at an accurate probability.
Therefore a date is extremely critical.

Lets discuss probabilties.
If it dates to 1911, we are down to few options.
1.The NC had it aboard, and it was another old bottle in an old tramp steamer no doubt full of junk. It could have then washed out or been taken by a survivor or a subsequent islanders. I am sure the islanders who were desperate for manmade materials got aboard that ship. To ignore this huge beached depository of possible canned food, mirrors, medicine, metal chains, on and on, there is a small probability they ignored this wreck and didn't strip it of everything that wasnt tied down. We don't need an injured seaman on the NC to bring it ashore. Those islanders looked at the wreck for decades, every day. they could have easily brought it ashore. The probabilies are hight they removed items.

2. thatanother way an early date jar could be there was we can have a previous castaway we know nothing about. There was also a mention of periodic crab and oyster fisherman on the island that predates AE. Remember this jar didn't just hold freckle cream. We have known exampes that it held cream called "skin food", and Vanishing cream among other creams.
I suspect the probability is fairly high another castaway or a fisherman left it behind after using the last dab of it. If I had a sunburn from oyster digging off a small boat in 1915, I don't think it's a large stretch to think someone applied a type of face cream to stop the burning. Remember this is was a non inhabited island. It doesn't mean people didn't use it. Big difference.
Hence the footprints and gun discovered by TIGHAR. We don't have a record of who was there, but obviously someone was using this island. Most probable  its been used for decades before AE. For turtles, eggs, birds, easy to catch fish, clams...

3. It simply washed up. probable high-we know it happens all the time. It happened with the aluminum skin artifact. And it could have washed up from any ship that sailed pre WWI. The oceans are full of trash and in 1911, passenger lines, as well as merchant ships dumped tons of trash overboard.
It is a stretch to think some early 1st decade 20th century debris washed ashore? Not really. Actually it's probably what happened if this jar dates to pre WWI.

4. Last option, AE with her "flying laboratory" was using a facial product in a jar that was made 25 years earlier if we use the 1911 date. Don't you think she could afford a .25 cent new jar? Or she just preferred deteriorating old oily cream that probably wasnt in the greatest of condition by 1937. we would have to assume she took this ancient face cream with her or bought during layovers. We have to assume AE did not mind smearing this old deteriorating cream on her face. When every store held ponds, or noxema. scores of facial creams she could have bought for a quarter.
Which is unlike any woman I have ever met.

So there are the choices, Which is the most probable way it arraive on Niku if it was made in 1911. 
It could have been left in multiple ways as suggested above.
AE carrying an ancient bottle of cream seems the most far fetched.
But impossible? No,not impossible. Improbable.

THAT is why it is indeed important to date this jar if possible. Because there is a huge new set of probabilties to an AE link if the jar was made 1905 to 1912, versus finding a catalog showing 17,000 jars were produced in this same style fromt 1932 to 1941.
If you cannot see the difference a date would make, and how a later date strengtens the probability of an AE link, and continue to claim a 1905 jar has thesame evidential weigh as a 1935 date, there is no sense continuing this line of talk.
You are denying common sense and logic.
Even Tighar understood the importance of locating the date of the green bottle made in 1933 in New Jersey.
The date is a vital clue.
In this instance, its extremely important.
Because nobody but extremists would argue that a 1905 dated jar has the same evidentiary value as a jar dated in 1935,
This is common sense.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 15, 2012, 02:03:55 PM
and I would think that the manufactor at the very least did not realize the health issues associated with long term exposure to mercury.

If Dr. Berry didn't know before, he/she certainly got a clue when the USDA seized 180 bottles of the stuff in 1911 and issued judgment in 1912 (http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/fdanj/bitstream/123456789/41433/4/fdnj01376.pdf), saying ". . . said product is injurious, in this, to wit, that it contains a large quantity of a poisonous substance, to wit, 11.63 per cent of ammoniated mercury."

A bit off topic, sorry, but interesting.  Also disheartening in that, as a previous post says, the legal tools to actually regulate the product did not arrive until 1938.  All that could be required in 1912 was a change in the product literature to remove assurances that it was non-toxic.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 02:22:24 PM
Marty,
I fully agree with you that the presence of the jar at the seven site does not prove AE's presence there, but my argument is that Don's adamant supposition that the age of the jar discounts this possibility almost entirely is equally mistaken. Yes, we don't know who, if anyone, was at the seven site prior to our known 'actors', but the possibility of any of the known visitors dumping the jar there is just as equally implausible if we take Don's argument to its logical conclusion ... Yet it was there. So either Don's view is rather hasty, or someone with access to American cosmetics was there earlier. Have we done any research on pre-Norwich City western visitors or shipwrecks in the vicinity? We are talking about a period that was reasonably well documented, if only for political or insurance purposes, from about 1890 to 1929.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 15, 2012, 02:57:01 PM
Don,
I agree! I said earlier that dating the jar was important, but that if we find it's too old for her to plausibly have purchased it as usable face cream we cannot dismiss the possibility that she found it and left it at the seven site, which I understood to be your argument. Your proposition was, at least as I understood it, that if we find it is too old we can conclude it had nothing to do with her and is therefore 'junk'. For me, this is a huge value laden assumption. AE wouldn't use a 30 year old jar of ointment, so it has nothing to do with her. Fine. In that case, neither would the Norwich City survivors, nor Bevington, nor anyone else for that matter. It was too old for all of them, yet as I keep saying (in my twisted, obsessive manner) ... It was still there. Just because she may not have brought it with her on the Electra, doesn't mean she didn't leave it at the seven site for Ric ands his colleagues to find. I'm not saying she did, but we can't dismiss this possibility out of hand just by dating the thing. We need more information to come to your conclusion.    :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 15, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
I fully agree with you that the presence of the jar at the seven site does not prove AE's presence there, but my argument is that Don's adamant supposition that the age of the jar discounts this possibility almost entirely is equally mistaken.

Agreed.

It's one thing to say, "We know with certainty that AE could not have brought an old jar to the island."

It's another thing to say, "It seems unlikely that AE would have brought an old jar to the island."  (I'm not convinced it is a 1911 jar, by the way--but I'm going to leave the dating problem to our jar experts.)

Quote
Have we done any research on pre-Norwich City western visitors or shipwrecks in the vicinity? We are talking about a period that was reasonably well documented, if only for political or insurance purposes, from about 1890 to 1929.

My supposition is that visitors to Niku and shipwrecks "in the vicinity" (stuff can drift a long way in the Pacific, so "vicinity" has to be very loosely defined!) are not well-documented.

The Pacific is ringed with nations and ports.  Ships moved around a lot in the early 20th century, with little, if any surveillance.  There is no central authority that would keep records of every departure from all those ports, of every route taken after departure, or of every ship that failed to reach its purported destination.  It's a big ocean and a lot of boats. 

OK--insurance claims might be a way of tracking some shipwrecks.  That seems like a good angle.  But that won't cover yachties who might decide to spend some time on a deserted Pacific island, leaving behind some cosmetics, or flotsam or jetsam from other traffic.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Brad Beeching on August 15, 2012, 05:41:27 PM
Lets stir the pot a little...

 Nice boat with tall mast bump rock... nice boat with tall mast sinks to bottom... captain of nice boat with tall mast escapes with wife... cosmetics float away from nice boat with tall mast... Old bottle of skin cream washes up on shore... airplane crash-lands on shore... occupants disembark... stub toe on skin cream bottle... "Oh look! Just what I need!"... use up skin cream treating sunburn, minor skin abrasions... bottle used for hauling water... funny things swimming in water... boil water to stop funny things from swimming around in water.... fire too hot... water too hot... bottle breaks... time passes... tall man with white hat and small shovel cuts toe on bottle pieces... tall man with white hat brings bottle pieces back... friends tell tall man with white hat that bottle pieces had skin cream on them... other friends find out about bottle pieces... other friends argue about how bottle is too old... too white... too clear... never used... over used... other friends of tall man with white hat and band-aid on toe read what other friends are argueing about and finds it extremely funny... other friends look at big picture of all the stuff tall man with white hat and scar on toe has collected in 20 years and say... maybe!

Brad
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 15, 2012, 07:21:35 PM

You seem to think it is a stretch that of all things that she would bring her freckle cream ashore.  I would suppose she like most women would have a bag of sorts that held ALL of her personal items that she would take with her at her numerous stops around the world to freshen up or what not.  I would also suppose that her freckle cream would be in that bag just as Noonan probably had a shaving kit.  It would also contain her compact, rougue, etc.


I was being whimsical.

However it doesn't alter the fact that the dating of both the jar itself and the date of its deposition at the site are from an archaeological perspective unknown. There is no reliable relative dating and no certain date as to its arrival. Simply put it could have arrived at the island anytime from when the jar was first manufactured up until the time it was actually found by TIGHAR. Therefore any relationship to the hypothetical presence of Earhart and Noonan has to be determined by direct evidence linking it to them. So far that has not been achieved.   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 15, 2012, 09:26:51 PM
Mercury was found mainly in the freckle creams and skin bleaches ( correct me if there are other candidates).

Not correcting, just adding . . . the 1934 publication Modern Cosmetics (http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?view=image;size=100;id=mdp.39015037504902;q1=mercuric;page=root;seq=5;num=1) gives common formulas for a wide variety of cosmetic products.  It shows three product categories that were sometimes formulated with mercury compounds:  (1) Acne, Blackhead, and Eczema Creams; (2) Bleaching Creams/Lotions; and (3) Freckle Creams/Lotions.  I am pleased to see that the author did take pains to point out the toxicity of mercury.  (I am less pleased to imagine that similar publications from the decades prior to the '30's might well have offered additional uses for mercury and/or been less forthcoming about the warnings.)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 16, 2012, 07:55:18 AM
... It was still there. Just because she may not have brought it with her on the Electra, doesn't mean she didn't leave it at the seven site for Ric ands his colleagues to find. I'm not saying she did, but we can't dismiss this possibility out of hand just by dating the thing.

Think about what you just said. "just because she may not have brought it with her on the electra doesnt mean she didn't leave it at the seven site"

Talk about reaching.
So AE may have found an old bottle after she landed, and then she may have used this old bottle or touched it, so we cannot discount a link to her. Holy cow!
I guess if TIGHAR finds ANY old object dated pre WWI on the island we can say it's possibly linked to AE. That is what you are saying. If they find a 1600 spanish anchor, well AE may have used it by drying her shirt on it!
Find a pair of civil war era shoes? Well Amelia may have found those shoes on the island and wore them around a bit!
This is just ridiculous and shows the lenght some will go to support a hypothesis.
Instead of admitting the obvious, that if this cream jar was made in 1905, however it got here, whether an old fisherman or just sea trash washed up, the probability is it has nothing to do with AE.
That is the most logical conclusion.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 16, 2012, 08:35:10 AM
... if this cream jar was made in 1905, however it got here, whether an old fisherman or just sea trash washed up, the probability is it has nothing to do with AE.
That is the most logical conclusion.

I agree with your assessment of the probabilities--if you are correct that the jar could not have been produced later than 1905.

What the other poster has been saying is that the 1905 jar (if it is a 1905 jar) ended up in a very strange part of the world, which shows that something highly improbable actually happened.

"Improbable" never means "impossible."  It is illogical--actually, it is a logical error--to change the meaning of a word in the middle of an argument.  It's called "equivocation."  When all is said and done, it is logically correct to say that there are two tenable positions:
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 16, 2012, 11:37:29 AM
My objection was to the the term 'junk' just because an item was deemed too old, but since we seem to have flogged that one to death and agreed to disagree, I'm happy to leave it there. The reason why I think it's important is because I believe this investigation will not end with the establishment of a postitive connection between Niku and AE. Let's suppose for a moment that the wing or whatever it is that was found on the last trip proves, after salvage, to be part of the Electra. Once the media noise dies down and all the sceptics apologise to Ric, the work will really start. Ric's hypothesis states that AE and FN landed their plane on Niku,  it was subesquently washed under the ocean and then one or both of them somehow ended up on the seven site. The discovery of the plane on a ridge below Niku will raise more questions than answers. The world will want to know what happened next and tracing our interpid flyers' steps from the 'Nessie' site to the seven site will doubtless take years of painstaking reasearch during which the presence of all sorts of 'junk' may take on a different meaning altogether. I may be jumping the (smoking) gun, but nothing is 'junk' unless it post-dates the Electra's disappearance.
Best regards to you all
That 'ridiculous other poster' ... Otherwise known as :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Don Dollinger on August 16, 2012, 11:58:00 AM
Quote
However it doesn't alter the fact that the dating of both the jar itself and the date of its deposition at the site are from an archaeological perspective unknown. There is no reliable relative dating and no certain date as to its arrival. Simply put it could have arrived at the island anytime from when the jar was first manufactured up until the time it was actually found by TIGHAR. Therefore any relationship to the hypothetical presence of Earhart and Noonan has to be determined by direct evidence linking it to them. So far that has not been achieved.

For once I agree.  Even if they found the Electra parked on the beach next to the 7 site, short of DNA on the bottle, it can not be positively linked to Earhart.  This is how it is to be viewed. 
- The questions are asked, could they have landed at Niku, lived a period of time as castaways, camped at the 7 site and died there?
- Those question can not be answered with absolute certainty even if the Electra is found, the bottle is just another piece of "circumstancial" evidence that goes with the bones, the shoe pieces, aircraft aluminum, the plexiglass, the zipper, etc., that says a categorical MAYBE someone of Europian descent was a castaway and died there. 
- It was never stated nor implied that any of these were smoking guns, as a single item nor with all the items that they have combined.
You need to look at it from the other side of the fence.  NOT does it prove that she left it there, but does it DISPROVE that she left it there.  It's a possibility due to the provenance of the item that it could have been something that Earhart would own due to concern about here freckles.  It becomes a "possibility", enough possiblities can become a "probability".  Even if they find the Electra there tomorrow when Ric writes his book "Amelia Earhart Mystery Solved" it still is going to be a story of what probably happened given the circumstancial evidence TIGHAR has collected.   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 16, 2012, 12:13:17 PM
J Neville, no I don't know the date, I was using 1905 as an example as you said.
To make my point that dating the jar is vital.
Some here said any date prior to 1937 doesn't disprove it was AE's.
My point was if it's too early the probabilities greatly support the contention
it is just trash. Not impossible, but if the probabilites are too low, it does become
reaching.
I do agree that is Tighars position as well. I do not for a second think that if this dates
to 1905 Tighar will put any weight behind it. Some posters still will.
And some will say "well Amelia could have used it"
No matter how improbable that is.
A scientist will not relate it to Ms.Earnhart if it's too dated too early.

I lived in Key west for a few years. Islands are trash collectors. It was very common to find 1950's beer bottles inland, even in 1985. It's just the nature of being an island.
Put a chlorine float in your pool, come back in a few days, and most of the floating debris will be around the float. Wind and Current(from pump) eventually has debris hitting the "island" where it remains. Until the next storm.

I would love to date this 1930 to 1937. I have put some research into it and have contacted the administrator of the West Virginia Glass Museum to help. He had never heard of this jar but agreed to check his catalogs of Hazel Atlas glass in his possession. Keep your fingers crossed.
A date of 1935 would really narrow it down and have some serious weight behind it.
Everyone keep looking!  ;)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 16, 2012, 07:06:36 PM

You need to look at it from the other side of the fence.  NOT does it prove that she left it there, but does it DISPROVE that she left it there.  It's a possibility due to the provenance of the item that it could have been something that Earhart would own due to concern about here freckles.  It becomes a "possibility", enough possiblities can become a "probability".  Even if they find the Electra there tomorrow when Ric writes his book "Amelia Earhart Mystery Solved" it still is going to be a story of what probably happened given the circumstancial evidence TIGHAR has collected.

Well actually I prefer to look at these stray artifacts from a fence sitting position. Uncomfortable I know because it can attract complaint from both sides but necessary from a purely scientific view because unless direct attribution or a clear attribution to some other circumstance can be demonstrated all we can say is that we don't know. Remember I said stray artifacts because given the lack of any reliable relative dating to the hypothesised time when Earhart was supposedly on the island they all could date from any period after their initial manufacture right up until they were found by TIGHAR. The only artifacts that are less broad in the date of their appearance are the items reported by Gallagher and of course items that we know to come from the various settlements and the visits to the island. That I admit is a rather bleak view but then that is all the evidence at present allows.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on August 16, 2012, 07:33:20 PM
Would it be adding a new complication to the 'ointment pot' story to find the Hazel-Atlas Company began to ship its products over to England by the year 1915?  I’d tend to think this throws another healthy dose of suspicion over any claim that an “…American woman…” factors into the story of the jar.
------------------------------------------

The Washington Reporter Dec. 13, 1915, page 11

HAZEL-ATLAS CO. IS GOING AFTER FOREIGN TRADE

All Plants are Working to the limit

A.B.Paxton, Secretary of Company, sails tomorrow for England… The trip is the second within the past few months by Mr. Paxton.  The first resulted in heavy orders for the Hazel-Atlas company, which is now exporting heavily to England.  Practically every kind of product made by the company, except mason jars, is being shipped abroad…. The European orders have necessitated many enlargements and improvements in the various Hazel-Atlas plants…  Another tank is also being prepared for the manufacture of opal ointment jars, to help out Hazel No. 1 factory, which is crowded with orders…  Most of the product being turned out for foreign shipment is from stock patterns, although some is new mold stuff… ”

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Qn9iAAAAIBAJ&sjid=dXcNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4329,106218&dq=hazel+atlas+ointment&hl=en
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 16, 2012, 08:43:57 PM
Mark, nice work.
It has to be a negative variable of course for this hypothesis.
You are right, now it cannot be said an American woman probably had this.
It also clearly suggests OPAL(WHITE) was the predominant pot by 1915
which is supported by the 1926 catalog I found,and the lack of additional matching clear pots found. Not that I am suggesting that is the full inventory Hazel atlas made in the 20's and 30's. We may find a clear ointment pot in a catalog. I hope so since I do believe she landed there. Based on the sum of ALL the evidence, with little emphasis on this jar.
Of course come Sunday, if we see an Electra, all this is a moot point!  :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 17, 2012, 03:39:56 AM
Would it be adding a new complication to the 'ointment pot' story to find the Hazel-Atlas Company began to ship its products over to England by the year 1915?  I’d tend to think this throws another healthy dose of suspicion over any claim that an “…American woman…” factors into the story of the jar.
------------------------------------------

The Washington Reporter Dec. 13, 1915, page 11

HAZEL-ATLAS CO. IS GOING AFTER FOREIGN TRADE

All Plants are Working to the limit

A.B.Paxton, Secretary of Company, sails tomorrow for England… The trip is the second within the past few months by Mr. Paxton.  The first resulted in heavy orders for the Hazel-Atlas company, which is now exporting heavily to England.  Practically every kind of product made by the company, except mason jars, is being shipped abroad…. The European orders have necessitated many enlargements and improvements in the various Hazel-Atlas plants…  Another tank is also being prepared for the manufacture of opal ointment jars, to help out Hazel No. 1 factory, which is crowded with orders…  Most of the product being turned out for foreign shipment is from stock patterns, although some is new mold stuff… ”

They were taking a bit of a risk weren't they? Was Mr A.B. Paxton a popular man?  :) This was over a year after the start of WW1 and well into the unrestricted German U-boat campaign against merchant shipping in the Atlantic (which had commenced in February 1915). If Hazel-Atlas had such huge orders from a war-time England where space on Atlantic crossing ships was mostly reserved for items 'vital to the war effort', does this not suggest Hazel-Atlas products were being ordered for military or medical issue? Can we find out who the British customer was and what they were ordering? All gripping stuff eh? But back on Niku, it simply adds a little weight to the thing having found its way there on the Norwich City. It doesn't prove or disprove anything else.

As for the esteemed Mr Burell's statement that:

It also clearly suggests OPAL(WHITE) was the predominant pot by 1915

I read the article several times and still cannot see that. It says that "Another tank is also being prepared for the manufacture of opal ointment jars, to help out Hazel No. 1 factory, which is crowded with orders…" it doesn't say these are the predominant pot by 1915. It doesn't even say these are being shipped to England. It just says they need to increase capacity for one type of popular product. It does however say that "Practically every kind of product made by the company, except mason jars, is being shipped abroad", which suggests a variety of products ...

 ... or am I being ridiculous again?  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Rafael Krasnodebski on August 17, 2012, 06:44:04 AM
 ... who after donning their tutu's, picked up all the glass jars they could find and shot the living daylights out them with their M1s.  :P
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ricker H Jones on August 17, 2012, 10:31:26 AM
 Joe Cerniglia has amassed a large number of advertisements for Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream, showing the availability of this jar as late as the Spring of 1933. (A copy of the Fall 1930 Sears Roebuck catalog page is attached.) Thus, its availability went well into the 1930's.  If one wanted to pursue this further, simply registering for a membership with Ancestry.com will provide access these catalogs. The cost is somewhere around $20.
Rick J.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on August 17, 2012, 11:04:11 AM
Rick, very interesting ads. I notice that Dr.Berry's is the only one on that page that is pictured in an "ointment jar".
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 17, 2012, 01:34:37 PM
  If one wanted to pursue this further . . .

With this latest input we've already got the change in Berry's jar shape pinned down pretty well, it's between 1933 and 1936 (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18094.html#msg18094).  It's just unfortunate that Sears was not accommodating enough to print their catalogs in color, as the illustrations give no clue about jar color (clear or white).

I am glad to see the post about 1933.  I was considering an "expedition" to my city library's fourth sub-basement to see the actual old Sears catalogs, but was reluctant due to lack of adequate protection from rats & insects and an effective dust mask, haha . . . now I don't need to.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 18, 2012, 11:35:48 PM
For several days now, many of us have dilligently been trying to solve what the ointment glass is made of. Joe Cerrnigila, has also gone to the trouble of having a test conducted on the quality content of the glass. Anyway, ran across this piece this afternoon. This indeed will help out!!!! Anyway, enjoy this!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 19, 2012, 01:45:54 AM
"Manufactured in Opal Glass Only" . . . apparently 1921, at least, was not a banner year for HA clear-glass jars.  Which further confirms what some posters have been saying, that opal predominated after the early years of the century.  The jar on the extreme right seems to be the correct shape, but appears to have a number different from the "1995" previously identified (I can't quite read the exact number in the photo).

Also, in the top photo, another surprise: WHO KNEW that the Fountain of Youth, when finally discovered, would contain 12% mercury?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 19, 2012, 02:30:08 AM
"Manufactured in Opal Glass Only" . . . apparently 1921, at least, was not a banner year for HA clear-glass jars.  Which further confirms what some posters have been saying, that opal predominated after the early years of the century.  The jar on the extreme right seems to be the correct shape, but appears to have a number different from the "1995" previously identified (I can't quite read the exact number in the photo).

Also, in the top photo, another surprise: WHO KNEW that the Fountain of Youth, when finally discovered, would contain 12% mercury?

yes that would be me who has been saying it for the last week.
 It backs up other references I found to 1922 those jars being white, and 1926 also being white. This ad backs it even further up to 1921 being white ONLY.
So like I said, the clear jar was LIKELY made in the teens, probably 20 years easily before Earhart could have landed there.
Therefore, the pot heard round the world, and made front page headlines as THE CLUE to solve the mystery, from the LA times to the Washington Post, is probably totally unrelated to Amelia E.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 19, 2012, 06:14:20 AM
For several days now, many of us have dilligently been trying to solve what the ointment glass is made of. Joe Cerrnigila, has also gone to the trouble of having a test conducted on the quality content of the glass. Anyway, ran across this piece this afternoon. This indeed will help out!!!! Anyway, enjoy this!!!!

Randy, you might want to study up on how to capture the screen (or window) (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-vista/Take-a-screen-capture-print-screen) from your PC.

Doing a screen capture will make your findings more legible.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 19, 2012, 06:16:00 AM
For those of you who have read my latest post, that includes Alan and Dave...  I also ran across the same ad with the same jars in the same type of magazine in December 1919. So I'm not trying to snub someone into the ground on this...but very confused as to where the clear jar comes into effect. However, help me out on this endeavor...but I'm starting to believe that this jar in the beginning for a period of years was only "lined" with milk glass. Kinda of like dipped chocolate strawberries or something. Anyway, I also think that at some point in time that Hazel-Atlas might have been stealing someone's invention on the milk glass. Cause, why would you "patent" a milk glass jar when its already been invented by Ponds Cold Cream years before!! Doesn't make sense. Anyway, I'm now believing that this jar was only lined and what happened with fire and time is the thing became clear. Help me out on this please!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on August 19, 2012, 07:34:25 AM

The History and Origin of Milk Glass (http://milkglass.org/history.html)

Although milk glass came from the 1500’s, the term ‘milk glass’ did not actually come into play until relatively recently. During the 19th century glass makers referred to milk glass as ‘opaque glass’ and was still considered a luxury item and a great collectable.

During the early 20th century, also known as the American Gilded Age, milk glass was synonymous with the cultural prosperity of the wealthy American culture. Milk glass made in the Gilded Age still remains some of the best ever made. It is known for the delicacy and elegance and were often seen on dressers and shelf tops in upper-class American homes.


However, during the 1930’s, milk glass made during the Depression was considered less elegant and delicate and more a production of the harsh times. Because of this, milk glass made during the 1930’s and 1940’s is often considered of lesser quality.

Could it be that the Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar that TIGHAR has is one of lesser quality and is more opaque than milk colored.  It looks like that to me imo.  Not all milk glass is pure white.  Some have a milky cast as in this Depression era milk glass creamer.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 19, 2012, 11:09:17 AM
Well I suggested that perhaps it was once more opaque and Ric said he talked with collectors who said that Milk glass would not turn clear. Never mentioned there were other milk glass examples that were practically clear to begin with. Case closed, and the reason we have all been looking for clear glass. Have we all been looking for a clear jar that never existed? Maybe.

So it appears this jar was either a very early pre WWI example or Ric's advice from collectors was incorrect, and it indeed faded to clear (maybe after being mostly clear to begin with). In fact one chemist on another article suggested just that. That milk glass made of tin and antimony would probably change color if heated in a fire pit.
I don't know. I am not a chemist, nor have I conducted heat tests on milk glass.
But I think it should have been done.

 I think that is the only option left if this is to be a relevant artifact dated to the right period. Either it was weak milk glass that turned clear and could have been Earharts, or it was clear glass all along, and has no connection with Earhart as the bottle would be too old.

I do find these announcements made to the press too early to be concerning. For instance when it was first found, all newspaper articles said Dr.Berrys was the ONLY glass found that matched this jar. The implications was there. This was a Dr. Berrys. There was no mention of 6 other products. I didn't find that on any press release by any news agencies. I found that information here and by doing some quick googling in a week.

As late as last month, newspaper reports said that not only did this product match Dr.Berrys', it was the ONLY item found that contained mercury.
Again not true. I brought up Velvetine which was a skin lightener, and skin lighteners contained mercury. Same jar style, shape and size and also opaque. Yet There is Breaking news, right now on this site, from Mr.Cerniglia that Dr.Berrys was the ONLY product that used this jar and contained Mercury. NOT TRUE!  I am not sure if the theory is if it's repeated long enough it makes it true. How many times has he told this to some gullible reporter? How many news stories have been done stating the same.
So the Mr C. is to this day putting out incorrect information in press releases and interviews possibly. Not good.

In the beginning of this thread it was suggested that the example be tested for mercury on any residue remaining. Ric said there was no residue to test for mercury.
So there is no residue, but finally 2 years later the glass is tested for mercury? If there is no residue, how can the glass itself show mercury?
Glass in inert, and I do not believe it absorbs the surrounding elements.
But it took all this time to test it?
And it was tested by a guy who just happened to hear the story and took it upon himself to do some testing?
I understand budget constraints, but seems like the artifact evidence is being analyzed haphazardly, if at all, some by volunteers who happen to read a news story. Some by Tighar forum members.

I think all the science should be done professionally, and an exhaustive search done for any clear bottles, also testing to find whether an opaque bottle heated to near red changes color(not just relying on the word of a glass collector), and finally any other known examples shared with the public as well.
Like I said, I understand budget constraints, this is being done on a shoestring compared to the navy sponsoring Dr.Ballard,  but It took Joe.C two years to find the above ad from National Druggist in 1921 that this jar was produced in opaque only?
I have been looking at jars for a week and found these same references in Google books.
So not to discredit Mr.Cerniglias work, he is probably working for nothing, but a lot of press releases were made that this was the only bottle found that matched this shape, now it's released to the public, Dr.Berrys was the only bottle found of this shape that had mercury.
It seems like folks wanted to believe something and released it as news, because neither of those press releases were exactly correct.
Now, like the movie JFK, the internet stories have been done with an incorrect version of the truth. you can't take it back. There are a lot of people out there who think that absolutely a mercury containing freckle cream from Dr.Berrys has been found with an exact bottle that matched the time of the flight.
Not proven. Do the science right, take your time, then do the press release.
Just my opinion and probably not a popular one, so shoot away.
I still believe Gardner is it based on the radio transmits, but this glass stuff was put out way too early before testing and exhaustive archive research and it creates a perception that may be invalid, and once that perception is put out there by NBC, CNN, Discovery, its tough to modify it.
Otherwise, if new information does come up, it looks like Tighar wasnt professional or thorough enough and raises credibility doubts.
(Not from me I hasten to add, but there are rumblings out there even Ric  and Tighar members are keenly aware of).
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 19, 2012, 02:11:56 PM
Dave...the ad with the opal jar came from my searching. Please don't discredit Joe for this finding. We as members are all trying to come up with solutions to these findings. Its taken TIGHAR and Ric, Monte, Thomas King, and a whole list of others almost twenty years of searching. Its taken countless hours and days to get to this island. So you have to understand, this jar is a gem, a treasure, or something of significance. Its not like we found it in a Walmart sack on the beach or wherever. I hope you realize our intentions. You also have to step back and see the big picture. That includes the hypothesis photo of the landing gear. If tonight, or whenever we see the big show we will know one way or another if we're headed in the right direction. As for your views, I am very understanding, and understand too that alot of this don't make much sense. But, alot was done differently in that time and age. So, as for Joe, please don't discredit his image or anyone's  image on the forum. Alot of people have put alot of time into this endeavor. Thanks!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 19, 2012, 02:23:17 PM
The discussion is already moving past this, but here's a little more info.  First, thanks to Randy for the excellent clue in Reply 175 that "The National Druggist" (TND) was one publication in which Hazel-Atlas (HA) regularly advertised.  There are additional issues of TND available online . . .

It backs up other references I found to 1922 those jars being white, and 1926 also being white. This ad backs it even further up to 1921 being white ONLY.
So like I said, the clear jar was LIKELY made in the teens, probably 20 years easily before Earhart could have landed there.
This might be a good time for you to visit Vegas, it appears 20 years may be exactly right.  HA's ads for 1920, 1919, and 1918 are identical to the one Randy showed for 1921.  Additionally, with a clearer view, I take back what I previously said about a different jar number, the jar of interest is indeed labeled as No. 1995.  The first attachment below is from TND Vol. 48 for 1918.

There is no HA ad in the 1917 issue of TND.  However, for 1916 and earlier the ad is significantly different.  Significantly in that instead of "Opal Glass Only" we find "Opal, Flint, and Amber Glass".  (Flint glass is a high-quality clear glass.)  Also the "No. 1995" jar is not shown, but I don't attach any particular significance to that.  The second attachment below is from TND Vol. 46 for 1916.  Earlier years, such as 1914, have the same ad.

So the cut-off for clear jars appears to be right about 1917.  To be objective, I have not personally found/seen ads for every later year up to 1937, so I can't prove they didn't suddenly return to clear glass in, say, 1932 or something.  But in my opinion the likelihood is very high that, if the artifact jar was originally clear and has not "faded", it was manufactured before 1918.  Re the "fading", I am not a chemist, but from what little I've read it sounds like the additives used to produce Flint and Opal glass, respectively, are sufficiently distinct to be identified by analysis.

As a reminder, the data we have coming from the "Dr. Berry's" end of the problem is that that specific Freckle Cream came in jars in the shape of HA No. 1995 until 1933, and was in jars of a completely different shape by 1936.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 19, 2012, 04:02:55 PM
I also think that at some point in time that Hazel-Atlas might have been stealing someone's invention on the milk glass. Cause, why would you "patent" a milk glass jar when its already been invented by Ponds Cold Cream years before!!

I rather think the patent issue may not be very relevant.  From a cursory look around the web, basic opal glass (or milk glass) was first developed in Venice in the 16th century.  It was also developed in China (to imitate porcelain) at an unknown date but probably even much earlier than that.  The patents probably pertain either to alternate chemical additives newly discovered to produce the desired opaque effect; or to special decorative embellishments, as I believe was mentioned by Dave.  As a piece of trivia, the specific name "milk glass" is much more recent than the product and has been traced back to 1869.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 19, 2012, 04:14:39 PM
The discussion is already moving past this, but here's a little more info.  First, thanks to Randy for the excellent clue in Reply 175 that "The National Druggist" (TND) was one publication in which Hazel-Atlas (HA) regularly advertised.  There are additional issues of TND available online . . .

It backs up other references I found to 1922 those jars being white, and 1926 also being white. This ad backs it even further up to 1921 being white ONLY.
So like I said, the clear jar was LIKELY made in the teens, probably 20 years easily before Earhart could have landed there.
This might be a good time for you to visit Vegas, it appears 20 years may be exactly right.  HA's ads for 1920, 1919, and 1918 are identical to the one Randy showed for 1921.  Additionally, with a clearer view, I take back what I previously said about a different jar number, the jar of interest is indeed labeled as No. 1995.  The first attachment below is from TND Vol. 48 for 1918.

There is no HA ad in the 1917 issue of TND.  However, for 1916 and earlier the ad is significantly different.  Significantly in that instead of "Opal Glass Only" we find "Opal, Flint, and Amber Glass".  (Flint glass is a high-quality clear glass.)  Also the "No. 1995" jar is not shown, but I don't attach any particular significance to that.  The second attachment below is from TND Vol. 46 for 1916.  Earlier years, such as 1914, have the same ad.

So the cut-off for clear jars appears to be right about 1917.  To be objective, I have not personally found/seen ads for every later year up to 1937, so I can't prove they didn't suddenly return to clear glass in, say, 1932 or something.  But in my opinion the likelihood is very high that, if the artifact jar was originally clear and has not "faded", it was manufactured before 1918.  Re the "fading", I am not a chemist, but from what little I've read it sounds like the additives used to produce Flint and Opal glass, respectively, are sufficiently distinct to be identified by analysis.

As a reminder, the data we have coming from the "Dr. Berry's" end of the problem is that that specific Freckle Cream came in jars in the shape of HA No. 1995 until 1933, and was in jars of a completely different shape by 1936.

First of all Alan great work. YOU did it. And Randy as well. 1917 would put it right where I originally estimated, 1915 to 1920. If what you have found is correct, and this jar number was in Flint glass for 1917, YOU HAVE YOUR DATE.
I got lucky, but it was educated guesswork, looking at catalogs for Hazel and finding only Opaque jars in the mid 20's.

And Randy, I am in no way putting down Mr.C's work. I understand he is not in this for fame or fortune. Unfortunately There are a lot of people worldwide that now believe this was Mrs.Earhart's freckle cream jar. It appears that would not be the case unless the viewer is determinely stubborn to make this jar fit. I wish the press releases would have been held back until all the evidence of its manufacture was done. But what is done is done. Maybe a retraction would be in order...

So I understand the big picture, and wish the best for the success of Tighar and all it's contributers, and I am very glad this artifacts provenance has finally been identified. Now onto the plane....
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 19, 2012, 04:50:46 PM
Thank you.  Not technically "armchair" work, it was "computer chair" work, i.e. still not in any way comparable to people risking dehydration, sunstroke, drowning, attack by sharks and giant crabs, etc.  So no big deal.

I also meant to remark in that post that the production of clear jars until 1917 overlaps the 1915 date that Mark found (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18242.html#msg18242) for European distribution, so that alternate route for the jar to have reached Niku is still open for consideration.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 19, 2012, 06:10:18 PM
When all the discussion is done it remains that the freckle cream jar, if indeed that's what it is, still has no proven provenance to Earhart except that once she is recorded as saying that she didn't like her freckles. Now while TIGHAR may not have encouraged the media's take on the issue this jar now is being billed as Earhart's with only a few obligatory caveats just to make it look like the reporters are being cautious. I am amazed that any organization would allow this story to have developed to this point because the truth is that the over-hyped media attention is making TIGHAR look faintly ridiculous. Mercury in the form of calomel (mercury chloride) was widely used in the many medicines and creams for treating everything from freckles, to whiten teeth, to stop bleeding, as a disinfectant, a laxative and as a widespread treatment for syphilis. It's purported presence in a jar found on Nikumaroro means very little given just how common its presence in patent and other medical products was. It comes back to demonstrating that Earhart used Berry's cream, demonstrating that she had it on the flight and also demonstrating that a patent medicine containing mercury which was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century could not have found it's way to the island by any other means and importantly in the form of a medicine that was not intended for use other than treating Earhart's freckles.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 20, 2012, 12:11:27 AM
When all the discussion is done it remains that the freckle cream jar, if indeed that's what it is, still has no proven provenance to Earhart except that once she is recorded as saying that she didn't like her freckles. Now while TIGHAR may not have encouraged the media's take on the issue this jar now is being billed as Earhart's with only a few obligatory caveats just to make it look like the reporters are being cautious. I am amazed that any organization would allow this story to have developed to this point because the truth is that the over-hyped media attention is making TIGHAR look faintly ridiculous. Mercury in the form of calomel (mercury chloride) was widely used in the many medicines and creams for treating everything from freckles, to whiten teeth, to stop bleeding, as a disinfectant, a laxative and as a widespread treatment for syphilis. It's purported presence in a jar found on Nikumaroro means very little given just how common its presence in patent and other medical products was. It comes back to demonstrating that Earhart used Berry's cream, demonstrating that she had it on the flight and also demonstrating that a patent medicine containing mercury which was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century could not have found it's way to the island by any other means and importantly in the form of a medicine that was not intended for use other than treating Earhart's freckles.

The jar's presence means even less now that we know it was made before 1918. She didn't carry 20 year old cream with her. Or else she used very small dabs for two decades to make it last.  :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 20, 2012, 03:51:55 PM
In reference to posts by Dave and Alan, found very interesting as to the "Flint" glass and jar No# 1995. If indeed this a special type of glass per say, such as flint or otherwise known today as "Lead Crystal". Wouldn't the scientists be able to conduct a ringtone test on the top of the jar. As I was searching references to Flint Glass I stumbled upon the fact that we now call it lead crystal today! So it would definately be interesting if Jeff would do this test or see if it can be done. Also, did a little test of my own and thought of something not thought of. But, let's say this was just anyones jar...and they were castaways...how long do you think the cream would last under those extreme temperatures. I found an old cream jar at the same antique store I found the box and set the contents inside on fire. The cream definately burned, but also turned everything to oil. Eventually, overtime, with heat and water and etc, the contents wouldn't last long! So, I'm believing that this jar wouldn't be a surviving mechanism if needed to be. If the pictures of temperatures on Niku are right, then there is no way that this cream could even survive. Just the jar!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Greg Daspit on August 20, 2012, 05:50:34 PM
To be objective, I have not personally found/seen ads for every later year up to 1937, so I can't prove they didn't suddenly return to clear glass in, say, 1932 or something.

Fair comment

Also, people keep and use containers for other uses after the product in them runs out.
If you are traveling light, small used containers like this little jar are a good choice to store supplies of any other product that may have been available only in a bigger container. It saves weight and space.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 20, 2012, 06:08:15 PM
In reference to posts by Dave and Alan, found very interesting as to the "Flint" glass and jar No# 1995. If indeed this a special type of glass per say, such as flint or otherwise known today as "Lead Crystal". Wouldn't the scientists be able to conduct a ringtone test on the top of the jar. As I was searching references to Flint Glass I stumbled upon the fact that we now call it lead crystal today! So it would definately be interesting if Jeff would do this test or see if it can be done. Also, did a little test of my own and thought of something not thought of. But, let's say this was just anyones jar...and they were castaways...how long do you think the cream would last under those extreme temperatures. I found an old cream jar at the same antique store I found the box and set the contents inside on fire. The cream definately burned, but also turned everything to oil. Eventually, overtime, with heat and water and etc, the contents wouldn't last long! So, I'm believing that this jar wouldn't be a surviving mechanism if needed to be. If the pictures of temperatures on Niku are right, then there is no way that this cream could even survive. Just the jar!

Kind of lost me Randy with burning of the cream test. Are you saying that the freckle cream would melt in the heat and only the jar would be left? I guess so.
As far as the Lead crystal association, I am pretty sure they had an ancient connection, but haven't in a hundred or more years. Flint glass for the last hundred years is just basically clear glass which may have different amounts of silica or other elements, but no lead.
So when the catalog said this jar was offered in flint glass, it just means clear. Nothing more really. It's not lead crystal.
And When their catalog says offered in Opal, it means white.(or milkglass if you prefer)
Therefore we are back to the reference Alan found. It clearly states that flint(clear) glass was last offered in 1917 in this style ointment jar.

That is evidence, not theory, and not my personal opinion.
It's just the facts found by hours of research. Same as any evidence.
I found some good leads that opal was the primary glass used by 1921.
But couldn't date it past then.
Alan found hard evidence this jar in clear was not made after 1917.
Everything else about it, even what it contained, is pretty irrelevant once you accept that Hazel Atlas said this recovered clear jar was last produced in 1917.

Now could AE have used the jar for her earrings? Yes, I suppose so. But I thought the whole reason we were attaching such weight to it was she had freckles, this was freckle cream, Womans ect?
So yes we can reach a bit and still try to tie this to AE, despite the manufacturers date, by saying she may have kept her rings in a 20 year old jar.

Or it could be a jar dumped with tons of other trash off a passenger liner or boat back in 1918 and it washed up on Niku beach during a storm.
For each to decide I suppose.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Adam Marsland on August 20, 2012, 08:00:24 PM
What's interesting to me is that if this is true, it creates an even bigger mystery...who left it there then?  Too early for AE (1937), too early for Norwich City (1929), too late for Arundel (1892).  I'm not 100% sure that we've heard the last of the dating of the jar question, but assuming this holds, it raises even more questions.  Assuming the castaway theory is correct (and I personally think the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor, not just the ground in situ but taken with what Gallagher described) is the castaway someone else who died on the island during or just after World War I?  If so, who? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 21, 2012, 07:59:02 AM
Adam, nobody may have left it. The ocean is full of trash.
As far as not hearing the last of the dating you are correct.
Someone will try to poke holes in it and may find other evidence trails.
  We are never going to get a signed affadavit from hazel atlas glass saying this jar was produced on this date.
We can only go with the evidence we have.
The best evidence at the moment says 1916-1917 was the latest this jar could have been made.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 21, 2012, 03:24:19 PM
Dave, sorry hadn't gotten back to you on your question. Been doin some research on this matter. Anyway, here goes the story on what I did over the weekend. I sat at home the other night contemplating if this was indeed Amelia's jar...how long would the material last inside? So I went back to the antique store where I found the jar box and found an old cream jar...similar to the one Pond's used. Now, the cream inside to about a half inch from the top was dried and crusted. However, I sat it in a can and lit the dried cream. Guess what...it took right off. However, just like that of a candle, it eventually melted and turned to oil. Soon, the flame went out and I had white stuff on the bottom of the jar. Anyway, likely scenario at 105 degrees in July, the cream if left in the jar would have turned to oil and ran out...and of course if it got wet it wouldnt be no good anyway...Cause oil and water don't mix.
     Anyway, here is what I think happened. Jeff just emailed me and informed me that they found scratches at the bottom of the jar. This jar might have been used to drink from..eventually after major cleaning...per say!!!1 Whoever used it might  have also used it to eat out of? So a jar of that size has alot of value to it. To drink out of it...you would first have to boil water and then drink it. It you're boiling the water, and you have coffee then you can drink that or tea whatever is at hand. Anyway, with the scratches indicated someone desperately wanted something out of the that jar. So it would indicate something metallic or sharp to eat with. Possibly a fork or spoon or handmade device. Also, we know the jar was in several pieces. We can all say that whatever the sharp pieces were used for were to cut something with. Anyway, if the jar did have cream in it...it wouldn't last long...but its value was important on that island, despite who it might have belonged too. Still searching...Thanks Dave and Alan for timeline on ad and jar.!!!! Its been alot of help!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 21, 2012, 11:24:31 PM
The following pictures are of the fragmented freckle cream jar. These pictures are mostly from the bottom of the jar, which also indicates the Hazel-Atlas logo stamp!!! These pictures were taken from Joe Cerniligia this afternoon!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 21, 2012, 11:27:14 PM
More pictures.....
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 21, 2012, 11:35:53 PM
More pictures including the jar inside the box!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 21, 2012, 11:48:18 PM
The Jeff I was referring too this afternoon was Jeff Cerniglia. I had asked him the question in regards to the photos shown. Does the jar have a beveled bottom edge in the middle...Really unique.  Also, it is very slightly rounded un the interior, cupped as it were. I mean on the edge of the interior. The bottom of the intereior, Anyway, look forward to see more
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Adam Marsland on August 22, 2012, 01:37:09 AM
Adam, nobody may have left it. The ocean is full of trash.

Eh, now that I don't really buy.  It was found because it was with a lot of other items associated with the fire feature.  I suppose it may have been scavenged from the beach, though that seems a rather facile explanation to me.  But if so, it's back to where we started, as an item that seems to have been used by person X.  So as Earhart evidence, it actually goes right back in under that theory....though not as something she carried with her, but found and used according to the available evidence. 

If the dating is right I think there's a little bit more evidence accumulating towards a pre-Norwich City castaway.  We have your tentative dating, we have Gallagher's impression of the site, and IIRC we had some anecdotal account of evidence of a castaway in the early '20s, though I don't recall where I read this (but it was recently, here).  There's the makings of an alternate theory there that hangs together to me.  But the idea that it just washed up and found its way to the site seems a bit too facile.  And if it was scavenged, then AE or a hypothetical Norwich City castaway would be the most likely culprits, seems to me.

Kudos, though.  Seems like really good work all 'round.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 22, 2012, 05:43:16 AM
The Jeff I was referring too this afternoon was Jeff Cerniglia. I had asked him the question in regards to the photos shown. Does the jar have a beveled bottom edge in the middle...Really unique.  Also, it is very slightly rounded un the interior, cupped as it were. I mean on the edge of the interior. The bottom of the interior, Anyway, look forward to see more

Cerniglia's first name is "Joe," not Jeff.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 22, 2012, 06:31:41 AM
Well adam there might have been a previous castaway who knows. I am pretty positive this particular artifact isnt AE.
If you go back to the shoe heels to the airplane skin there is something found that years later is discredited. From 1991 to 1998 it was the airplane skin. Tighar tracks for years 100% said they were certain it was relevant. It wasnt.
This jar is like that, but was found out to be irrelevant sooner thats all. Glad I could help.
After one item tighar had been touting was shown to be not related, Rick said something true and its printed in tighar tracks. He said paraphrase" we have to follow the truth even if it contradicts our earlier ideas"
I couldnt have said it better myself and speaks of honesty.
So stick a fork in the freckle cream guys, like a string of artifacts before this one did not pan out. No shame in that. Just got to keep looking

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on August 22, 2012, 10:37:30 AM
Adam and Dave,
Those accounts of possible ‘alternate’ castaways on Gardner Island are found in two articles published in 1924 and 1929 in the Auckland Star newspaper.
------------------------------------------------------ 
October 10, 1924, [page 9].
"The Phoenix Group"
"Isolated Pacific Islands"

“Somewhere about six hundred miles to the nor’west of the mandated islands of Samoa are the low-lying coral islands of the Phoenix Group…  Gardner is the most southerly island, and as our ship nosed up to the anchorage, she was greeted by swarms of sharks…  The island, unlike other coral islands of the Pacific, was heavily wooded by tall and stately trees, the timber of which, when polished, closely resembles mahogany.  A dilapidated shack told of a probable castaway…”

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19241010.2.101&srpos=26&e=--1900---1938--50--1----2gardner+island--
==============================
Auckland Star, December 2, 1929, page 7

Aucklander’s Memories

“Gardner Island is well known to Captain William Ross, Auckland’s veteran mariner, who was ashore there 30 years ago, when he landed Mr. George Ellis, of Auckland, so that a survey might be made with view to establishing a coconut plantation…"

“…Many vessels were wrecked on Gardner Island in the old days, the survivors dying lonely deaths. Captain Ross found mounds above the graves of sailors when he visited the island 30 years ago, but the skeleton of the last to die was nowhere seen..."

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19291202.2.50&srpos=8&e=-------50--1----0%22gardner+island%22+wreck--
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Kevin Weeks on August 22, 2012, 11:01:24 AM
Adam and Dave,
Those accounts of possible ‘alternate’ castaways on Gardner Island are found in two articles published in 1924 and 1929 in the Auckland Star newspaper.
------------------------------------------------------ 
October 10, 1924, [page 9].
"The Phoenix Group"
"Isolated Pacific Islands"

“Somewhere about six hundred miles to the nor’west of the mandated islands of Samoa are the low-lying coral islands of the Phoenix Group…  Gardner is the most southerly island, and as our ship nosed up to the anchorage, she was greeted by swarms of sharks…  The island, unlike other coral islands of the Pacific, was heavily wooded by tall and stately trees, the timber of which, when polished, closely resembles mahogany.  A dilapidated shack told of a probable castaway…”

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19241010.2.101&srpos=26&e=--1900---1938--50--1----2gardner+island--
==============================
Auckland Star, December 2, 1929, page 7

Aucklander’s Memories

“Gardner Island is well known to Captain William Ross, Auckland’s veteran mariner, who was ashore there 30 years ago, when he landed Mr. George Ellis, of Auckland, so that a survey might be made with view to establishing a coconut plantation…"

“…Many vessels were wrecked on Gardner Island in the old days, the survivors dying lonely deaths. Captain Ross found mounds above the graves of sailors when he visited the island 30 years ago, but the skeleton of the last to die was nowhere seen..."

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19291202.2.50&srpos=8&e=-------50--1----0%22gardner+island%22+wreck--

wow, Mark I have not read this article before! very interesting. Is this something that I have missed and Tighar has seen in the past?? What i also found very interesting was the canadian-australian mail ship passed between hull and gardner regularly makes me wonder how many other ships passed fairly close by. the closer ships come the more chance you have of random trash washing ashore.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on August 22, 2012, 11:26:03 AM
Yes very interesting articles. Is there part of the article about Capt Ross missing?  I don't understand what is meant by "the skeleton of the last to die was nowhere seen...".  Did he dig up the most recent mound and find it empty or was something cut out.   This Ross was being interviewed in light of the NC wreck and was speaking of his visits 30 years or so before that time so any castaway/skeleton he was referring to would have been there in the mid 1890's at the latest.  The dilapidated cast away shack in the 1924 story is much more interesting as it comes closer to probable dates for the Dr Berrys (or velvetine ) jar and  the skeletal remains would be more likely to be found in 1940. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 22, 2012, 11:34:07 AM
Time to rethink some things? The bones, the artifacts,burial mounds, it seems this place has god knows how many castaways and their junk.
WOW.
Mark, as one newbie to another. Nice dang research job!!!!
Amelia may be offshore, but my opinion, which means squat to people doing this for decades, is the land search is compromised severly.
Just too many stories of bodies, castaways, junk,hurricanes, villagers.
IMHO, all the physical evidence is weaker now.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Kevin Weeks on August 22, 2012, 11:42:59 AM
Yes very interesting articles. Is there part of the article about Capt Ross missing?  I don't understand what is meant by "the skeleton of the last to die was nowhere seen...".  Did he dig up the most recent mound and find it empty or was something cut out.   This Ross was being interviewed in light of the NC wreck and was speaking of his visits 30 years or so before that time so any castaway/skeleton he was referring to would have been there in the mid 1890's at the latest.  The dilapidated cast away shack in the 1924 story is much more interesting as it comes closer to probable dates for the Dr Berrys (or velvetine ) jar and  the skeletal remains would be more likely to be found in 1940.

my understanding of that was someone from the shipwreck has to be alive to bury the dead, then when there is only one person left alive there is no one to bury them. meaning the skeleton would be exposed.

edit: that dilapidated shack with skeleton is quoted as being from canton island, not gardner.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on August 22, 2012, 12:42:05 PM
"...A dilapidated shack [that] told of a probable castaway…”, was found on Gardner Island, circa 1924.

"...the bleached remains of a human skeleton, housed in an old shack...", was found on Canton Island. 

The bones of either the "probable castaway", or Capt Ross's un-seen "...last to die", circa 1899, can easily explain Gallagher's discovery in 1940. Maybe they were one and the same? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Kevin Weeks on August 22, 2012, 12:47:49 PM
"...A dilapidated shack [that] told of a probable castaway…”, was found on Gardner Island, circa 1924.

"...the bleached remains of a human skeleton, housed in an old shack...", was found on Canton Island. 

The bones of either the "probable castaway", or Capt Ross's un-seen "...last to die", circa 1899, can easily explain Gallagher's discovery in 1940. Maybe they were one and the same?

ahh yes. the "dilapitated shack" may well have been the tin roofed leftover from the coconut plantation

well, I'm not sure. Has the sextant box #'s been able to date the castaway to a certain date period?? I thought they were calling them surplus wwi sextants but I cannot be sure off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on August 22, 2012, 01:23:55 PM


ahh yes. the "dilapitated shack" may well have been the tin roofed leftover from the coconut plantation

...and maybe not.

See replies #8 and #15 in 'Join the Search'-
 
Re: The castaway -- ships and boats lost between ~1919-1939

http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,900.msg17825.html#msg17825
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 22, 2012, 01:34:31 PM
well, I'm not sure. Has the sextant box #'s been able to date the castaway to a certain date period?? I thought they were calling them surplus wwi sextants but I cannot be sure off the top of my head.

Here is a very detailed article on the sextant box numbers (http://tighar.org/wiki/Sextant), which provides data for you to make your own guesses as well as some guesses by Ric Gillespie and Art Rypinksi.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on August 22, 2012, 02:50:15 PM
Mark,

My compliments on an excellent piece of research.  We had not seen the 1924 newspaper article.  Let's take a close look at it.

"Seven islands comprise the group, which is held under Crown lease by a wellknown Island identity."

There are eight islands in the Phoenix Group - McKean, Gardner, Hull, Sydney, Enderbury, Phoenix, Birnie and Canton.  According to Harry Maude's history of Gardner Island prepared as part of his proposal for the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme, the "well-known island identity" was the Samoa Shipping and Trading Company, Ltd. who were issued an Occupation License for a term of 87 years on January 1st, 1914.  The manager of the company, Captain Allen, "made several visits to Gardner for the purpose of cutting and loading timber for ship repairing but no other use was made of the island."

"A dilapidated shack told of a probable castaway. Here and there were small clusters of coconut palms,"

In 1924 the only coconut palms on the island were in five small clusters at the west end - three on Nutiran and two in Ritiati.  They were the survivors of the Arundel plantings in 1890-92.  The dilapidated shack was in all likelihood the remains of the well-documented Arundel barracks on Nutiran.



==============================
Auckland Star, December 2, 1929, page 7

Aucklander’s Memories

“Gardner Island is well known to Captain William Ross, Auckland’s veteran mariner, who was ashore there 30 years ago, when he landed Mr. George Ellis, of Auckland, so that a survey might be made with view to establishing a coconut plantation…"

Thirty years ago would be 1899.  The survey by Mr. Ellis may have been done for Lever's Pacific Plantations Limited who were considering taking over the lease around that time.

“…Many vessels were wrecked on Gardner Island in the old days, the survivors dying lonely deaths. Captain Ross found mounds above the graves of sailors when he visited the island 30 years ago, but the skeleton of the last to die was nowhere seen..."
[/quote]

We've found no record of wrecks prior to Norwich City - and not for want of looking - but we could have missed some.  The American Exploring Expedition aboard USS Vincennes visited the island in 1840 and saw no wrecks. The mounds found by Captain Ross circa 1899 may have covered sailors but may also have been the graves of Arundel workers.  In any case, sextant boxes made circa 1918 and products marketed to American women in the 1930s were not commonly available at the turn of the 20th century.

In short, there is nothing in these newspaper accounts that suggest an explanation for anything found at the Seven Site.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Kevin Weeks on August 22, 2012, 04:41:11 PM


We've found no record of wrecks prior to Norwich City - and not for want of looking - but we could have missed some.  The American Exploring Expedition aboard USS Vincennes visited the island in 1840 and saw no wrecks. The mounds found by Captain Ross circa 1899 may have covered sailors but may also have been the graves of Arundel workers.  In any case, sextant boxes made circa 1918 and products marketed to American women in the 1930s were not commonly available at the turn of the 20th century.

In short, there is nothing in these newspaper accounts that suggest an explanation for anything found at the Seven Site.

Ric, what are you referring to in the bold??
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on August 22, 2012, 05:13:59 PM
Well a hurricane might account for some of what was found at the 7 site. They tend to leave debris.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on August 22, 2012, 05:43:37 PM
Was doin some research last night at the college library and went back into the old Saturday Evening Posts and Ladies Home Journal. On both accounts, I searched in the years 1916, 1917, 1921, and 1937. Both the Saturday Evening Post and Ladies Home Journal had books that archived the entire year. Pretty interesting, and how times have changed. What I really found interesting was that during the month of December...I could not find one account of an ad leading to Dr. C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment in both magazines. I even went as far as searching the latar year of 1937 and nothing. So I'm wondering how readily available this product was to the American public. If you couldn't find it in the Ladies Home Journal or Saturday Evening Posts on different years...then how would a person go about finding it from state to state?  I'm assuming this product wasn't that easy to come by. Any Suggestions???
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on August 22, 2012, 06:39:51 PM
Well a hurricane might account for some of what was found at the 7 site. They tend to leave debris.

Apropos of which, I once did some survey work in a coastal part of northern Australia which being tropical is subject to the usual types of extreme weather. On a low lying area which while covered in light vegetation was in fact part of the flood plain at the mouth of a river I noted what at first sight were shell middens of what I thought was human origin. Such middens are extremely common in those parts of Australia and as such not all that noteworthy - just the usual background noise of human occupation.

But I also extended my research through the literature to ascertain if there were any distinctive features that might be of special interest - just normal belt and braces work. I found an interesting paper on the creation of false middens in tidal areas which are a result of high tides, storm surges etc. accumulating the usual natural debris of shell fragments in piles that can mimic a human created midden.

Now as there are some depressions at the Seven Site I wonder if some of the material like the bones etc. could have been accumulated in them as a result of tidal or storm surges that washed over that part of the island. These surges might not remove deeply rooted plants (I worked in area with mangroves) but would carry light loose material to any depressions which would be natural traps. If this happened it may create an unrecognised bias in the material found in these depressions, if one is working solely from the premise that the material is largely of human origin.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 22, 2012, 06:41:29 PM
If you couldn't find it in the Ladies Home Journal or Saturday Evening Posts on different years...then how would a person go about finding it from state to state?  I'm assuming this product wasn't that easy to come by. Any Suggestions???
 

IMO that is a valid question, and (again, IMO) there does not appear to have been much national advertising.  The only obvious, and supportable, answer is that it appears quite regularly in the Sears Roebuck catalogs over those years.  One could, from that, speculate that it may also have been in the similar Montgomery Ward catalogs; unfortunately those seem to have more copyright protection than Sears' and are less available for examination.

Other suggestions/speculations (only) are:
•  Dr. Berry's was a small outfit that could not afford advertising in the "slick" magazines with wide circulation.
•  In the earlier years, especially, advertising may have primarily been in local newspapers, I think I have seen examples but can't lay my hands on a reference right this minute.
•  It may well have been marketed directly to druggists through salesmen, mailings, or in trade publications, such that the druggist would then "push" the product to his customers.  However, I don't have a specific example or reference to confirm that.
•  Moving through the '20's and into the '30's, there was increasing public awareness of the dangers of toxic products like this, including several "muck-raking" public-interest books and articles, and the larger magazines may not have wanted the potential liability associated with advertising them.

Just to repeat, all the above except the Sears catalogs are simply my own thoughts and no proof is offered.  Also, as I typed the last point above, about public awareness of the dangers, it brought another of my personal opinions (only) to mind.  I have a mental image of AE as a thoroughly "modern" woman who kept up with the times, and I think it very possible that she was aware of what was in the freckle cream and how dangerous it was, and would therefore not be all that likely to smear it on her face.  But that's just me.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on August 22, 2012, 07:57:12 PM
Kevin , beyond the freckle cream jar there was bottle patented in 1933 for campana balm and of course the compact remains , among other stuff
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on August 22, 2012, 08:32:15 PM
At the start of this thread, Ric said that the markings embossed on the bottom of this jar show that it was made by the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company, and that further research has shown that it matches Hazel-Atlas design No. 1995.

Can someone point me to a more detailed discussion of how these conclusions were arrived at? I found no Ameliapedia article on this jar; perhaps there is an as-yet-to-be-published Tighar report of some type in the works?...

Assuming the information I'm seeking hasn't already been provided somewhere on this web site (if it has, thanks for pointing it out) I'm wondering if someone in the know might be so kind as to briefly explain how it is known from the embossing on the bottom that the jar was made by Hazel-Atlas, and that it is their style 1995 jar.

Thanks to Randy Conrad for posting a picture (reply #195 above, glass4.jpg) showing the embossing on the bottom of the jar.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on August 22, 2012, 10:43:37 PM
I found no Ameliapedia article on this jar; perhaps there is an as-yet-to-be-published Tighar report of some type in the works?...

Thanks for searching.

Your impression that there is no article or Research Bulletin is correct.  Joe Cerniglia is still working on various and sundry details.  I've read dozens of e-mails from him to the Earhart Project Advisory Committee, but it's up to him to decide how to organize what he has learned and present his conclusions.

It's a work-in-progress.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on August 22, 2012, 11:28:40 PM
Ok--looking at the photo Randy posted showing the marking on the bottom of the jar, I realized that what initially looked to me like Babylonian cuneiform actually was decipherable. Part of the mark looked like an 'A', not a very neat A, but an A, i.e., the letter 'Atlas' begins with. This web site  (http://www.myinsulators.com/glass-factories/bottlemarks2.html) shows the Hazel-Atlas bottle mark to be a curved 'H' with a block-style 'A' between its legs. So, from the portion of the bottle in Randy's picture I think we are looking at the 'A' and the legs of the 'H'.  The web site I referred to by the way says that the mark was first used in 1923; if true, that piece of information provides a dating point for the jar that haven't seen discussed on this thread. The mark apparently remained unchanged for decades, according to another web site whose url now escapes me.
 
I am still curious to know how certain Joe et. al. are that the jar is style #1995.

Also of interest from the above web site: "Hazel-Atlas manufactured tremendous quantities of "depression" pressed glassware in a wide variety of patterns throughout the 1920s, '30s and '40s. They also produced many of the white milkglass "inserts" used inside zinc fruit jar lids, as well as many types of milkglass cold cream jars and salve containers. Also an important maker of a very large variety of bottles and jars for the commercial packaging industry."


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on August 23, 2012, 12:05:12 AM
products marketed to American women in the 1930s were not commonly available at the turn of the 20th century.

Ric,

If you're referring to Campana Balm and Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream (if indeed that is what was in the Hazel-Atlas jar), it's not clear that either product was marketed exclusively to women.  Mark previously discussed the Campana Lotion bottle (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,748.msg17299.html#msg17299) and Diego Vasquez found a mention in the Carey Diary of the Itasca crew having sweet scented lotions and sharing some with Gilbert Islanders (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,599.msg17887.html#msg17887) during the Earhart search. To me, these two artifacts are as likely to have been left at the Seven Site by the Coast Guard guys as by a castaway.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 23, 2012, 02:02:01 AM
Ok--looking at the photo Randy posted showing the marking on the bottom of the jar, I realized that what initially looked to me like Babylonian cuneiform actually was decipherable. Part of the mark looked like an 'A', not a very neat A, but an A, i.e., the letter 'Atlas' begins with. This web site  (http://www.myinsulators.com/glass-factories/bottlemarks2.html) shows the Hazel-Atlas bottle mark to be a curved 'H' with a block-style 'A' between its legs. So, from the portion of the bottle in Randy's picture I think we are looking at the 'A' and the legs of the 'H'.

The view we just got from Randy is a bit surprising in terms of the distorted logo, apparently:
1)  the jar was made on a Monday morning  :)
2)  it is a result of fire damage
3)  it is actually a portion of some other, different logo that we haven't recognized (offered for completeness, I doubt if anyone believes this)

Quote
The web site I referred to by the way says that the mark was first used in 1923; if true, that piece of information provides a dating point for the jar that haven't seen discussed on this thread. The mark apparently remained unchanged for decades, according to another web site whose url now escapes me.

This was first raised in Reply 110 on this same thread.  As far as I know, no one so far has really explained the 1923 date.  The company first started calling itself "Hazel-Atlas" long before that, in 1902.  My personal thoughts:
1)  The source of the 1923 logo dating may be in error.
2)  Or if not in error, it may be a partial story.  Almost all of the web sites talking about HA are for collectors concerned with their dinnerware and table glassware, not with commercial products.  The logo could have first appeared on dinnerware in 1923 but been used earlier on jars?
3)  1923 could be the date of a formal, legal copyright/trademark procedure, but the logo could have been in use before that.

. . . Or add your own.  IMO the 1923 date hanging out in space is not reliable enough to be used as a firm dating point for the artifact.  This may be one thing that will be cleared up in the report from Joe C.

Quote
I am still curious to know how certain Joe et. al. are that the jar is style #1995.

Again, the forthcoming Joe report should cover that.  Presumably, they started from the logo identifying it as HA, and then examined HA catalogs and advertisements to see which HA style(s) visually matched.  I further presume that, had there been significant uncertainty, they would have given a group of possible numbers instead of just the one.  From the HA advertisements I have seen there is no reason to doubt the style identification.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on August 23, 2012, 09:38:42 AM
John Alan, here is an easy to find reference for the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company that states "The Hazel-Atlas mark, usually placed on the back of the product, is an 'A' nested underneath an 'H'. The mark was reportedly first used in 1923, according to trademark office records quoted by Peterson (400 Trademarks on Glass)".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazel-Atlas_Glass_Company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazel-Atlas_Glass_Company)  Also the mark is not distorted as shown in this reference.http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html (http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 23, 2012, 03:59:50 PM
Alan, here is an easy to find reference for the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company that states "The Hazel-Atlas mark, usually placed on the back of the product, is an 'A' nested underneath an 'H'. The mark was reportedly first used in 1923, according to trademark office records quoted by Peterson (400 Trademarks on Glass)".

Yes, thank you, I was well aware of the Wiki entry.  Also Ricker Jones posted the exact same language from a different web site back in Reply 110.  What I was discussing is whether Wiki/"Peterson" have it right, or have the entire story.  Plus, it references the "trademark office", and I believe it is not unknown for companies to use names, and logos, before going through the official filing process.  Anyway, IMO there is reason to question it, as other data are strongly suggesting that the jar is older than 1923.  That's why I am hoping the official report now in preparation can untangle this for us.

Quote
  Also the mark is not distorted as shown in this reference.http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html (http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html)

Possibly we have different definitions of "distorted".  As I look at Randy's photo "glass4.jpg", what we believe is/was a complete block letter "A" is not really recognizable as such unless you already know what it should be.  John Kada's reference to "Babylonian cuneiform" is quite apt IMO.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on August 23, 2012, 04:40:55 PM

Yes, thank you, I was well aware of the Wiki entry.  Also Ricker Jones posted the exact same language from a different web site back in Reply 110.  What I was discussing is whether Wiki/"Peterson" have it right, or have the entire story.  Plus, it references the "trademark office", and I believe it is not unknown for companies to use names, and logos, before going through the official filing process.  Anyway, IMO there is reason to question it, as other data are strongly suggesting that the jar is older than 1923.  That's why I am hoping the official report now in preparation can untangle this for us.

Possibly we have different definitions of "distorted".  As I look at Randy's photo "glass4.jpg", what we believe is/was a complete block letter "A" is not really recognizable as such unless you already know what it should be.  John Kada's reference to "Babylonian cuneiform" is quite apt IMO.

You asked the question, where did the 1923 come from and I tried to give you a possible answer.

As far as the mark on the bottom of the jar is concerned, based on my limited experience casting objects, the mark came out very well. Casting objects, in any medium, is not an exact science.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on August 23, 2012, 08:45:52 PM
The 1923 date for the HA logo:

Several previous posts in this thread have discussed the info found on Wiki and some other web sites that the Hazel-Atlas "H over A" logo dates from 1923.  Some additional searching reveals that this view is not universally shared among glass historians and collectors.  So, it's another situation where information (or maybe opinion?) is coming from interested parties long after the fact, instead of from contemporary records and company documents.

A popular and seemingly predominant HA collector group says the following (http://hazelatlasglass.com/hazel-atlas-mark.html):
Quote
Many companies would have design changes in their logo or mark over the course of years, however Hazel Atlas' mark remained the same from the early 1900s to the late 1950s.

Another Wiki-related website where answers are "contributed" has this (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_the_Hazel_Atlas_mark_start_appearing_on_the_glass):
Quote
Hazel Atlas was formed from a merger of two companies in 1902, they had produced fruit jars and utilitarian ware up to this point and in 1923 the Hazel Atlas Glass company began marketing dinnerware items. The earliest H over A mark was found on fruit jars dating to around 1910.

To this point I have not seen or found any specific dating for first use of the HA mark that I would consider rock-solid.  As I have commented in prior posts, even hard evidence of a formal trademark registration would not necessarily be enough, we would like to know first use.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 02, 2012, 01:36:57 AM
Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.

The second ad here, with it's heading "Sunburn Creams and Lotions of Proven Efficiency", clearly supports the contention made earlier (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,748.msg17299.html#msg17299) that freckle cream was also used at that time as a sun-screen- by both women and men. 

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19300104.2.170.1&srpos=7&e=-------10--1----0Dr%2e+Berry%27s+freckle+--

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19310110.2.167.61.1&srpos=3&e=-------10--1----0dr%2e+berry%27s+freckle+cream--

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 02, 2012, 03:15:46 AM
Here’s an interesting development-

The Stealth Kiwi Newspaper Bandit strikes again!  Mark, why do you prolong our agony, quit holding back and just show us the pages from the Auckland Star that give photos of the wrecked Electra, detailed maps, and a complete description of the incident.*    ;D

Yes, very interesting.  Obviously the Berry Skin Remover was distributed much more widely than we knew or thought.  Given its availability in New Zealand, it's possible that newspaper archives in England and Australia might contain similar finds.  (Hmmm, Australia, the Norwich City's place of departure prior to wrecking.)  For myself, I will need to think through the full implications for the Hypothesis.  I mean, for sure it further significantly decreases the odds that any freckle cream found had to have come from AE's druggist; but we don't know that the artifact jar contained Berry's freckle cream, or any freckle cream, and the dating of the jar is trending toward the mid-teen's rather than the '30s.  Plus, as other posters have noted, we have no evidence at all that AE used any such cream.

* As no one here knows (or cares) about my weird sense of humor, I should carefully explain that this sentence is not in any sense a sarcastic dig at Mark, it is just that I find it too funny how Mark stays quiet for long periods and then suddenly pops up with amazing things from obscure NZ papers.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on September 02, 2012, 04:24:04 AM
Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.


Certainly interesting and given that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands then that gives as an alternative origin for the freckle cream jar. In fact rather than clarifying the matter it adds an additional possible source for the jar - but was the product sold in New Zealand packed in the same type and colour of jar as the example from Nikumaroro.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on September 02, 2012, 05:42:31 AM
Sounds like a another lead to be followed up, NewZealand/Australia as the source of the jar?
A bit of research here may add some new information regarding the origin and owner of the jar found on Gardner Island.
The same theory may apply to the PISS and Great Britain as being the source of the jar. I'll have a trawl around the 1930's magazines and newspapers of Great Britain to see if anything comes up.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on September 02, 2012, 06:11:44 AM
Here’s an interesting development-

Two newspaper advertisements show that Dr. Berry’s freckle cream was marketed in the 1930s, not only in America, but also in New Zealand.

The second ad here, with it's heading "Sunburn Creams and Lotions of Proven Efficiency", clearly supports the contention made earlier (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,748.msg17299.html#msg17299) that freckle cream was also used at that time as a sun-screen- by both women and men. 

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19300104.2.170.1&srpos=7&e=-------10--1----0Dr%2e+Berry%27s+freckle+--

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19310110.2.167.61.1&srpos=3&e=-------10--1----0dr%2e+berry%27s+freckle+cream--

What was interesting to me was how many "hits" I got when I went to this web site, PAPERSPAST (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast), located Auckland Star, and typed in "Dr Berry's Cream" or "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 02, 2012, 09:02:46 AM
Assuming the artifact found is a Dr. Berry's jar.
That has not been proven.
What was found is an old jar, likely pre 1920 vintage,that once held
an unknown ointment type, ointment made by an unknown company, purchased in an unknown country, used by an unknown person, for an unknown ailment.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 02, 2012, 09:27:33 AM
Certainly interesting and given that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands then that gives as an alternative origin for the freckle cream jar. In fact rather than clarifying the matter it adds an additional possible source for the jar - but was the product sold in New Zealand packed in the same type and colour of jar as the example from Nikumaroro.

Please provide your source for your statement that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on September 02, 2012, 05:53:10 PM

What was interesting to me was how many "hits" I got when I went to this web site, PAPERSPAST (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast), located Auckland Star, and typed in "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" or "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".
Since no one has commented on my previous post today, I assume that either no one else has looked at The Auckland Star (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=CL1.AS&e=-------10--1----0--), or that no one else found it strange when, although this site contains the ditigal copies of this newspaper from 24 March 1870 to 31 December 1945 (23312 issues), only one ad is found for "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" and one separate mention is made of "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Personally I find it somewhat of a stretch of the imagination to believe that, although only two ads for this product were apparently printed in these 75 years of this newspaper's publishing, we are supposed to take these two ads as proof this product was sold in New Zealand during the 1930s. Someone is going to have to come up with more than this to convince me.

Assuming the artifact found is a Dr. Berry's jar.
That has not been proven.
What was found is an old jar, likely pre 1920 vintage,that once held
an unknown ointment, from an unknown company, purchased in an unknown country, used by an unknown person, for an unknown ailment.

Also, I disagree that the company that made this jar is unknown. We know what the Hazel-Atlas trade mark looked like, see picture 1 below. The remnants of the mark on the pot/jar, shown in picture 2, appear to be a very close approximation of this trade mark.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 02, 2012, 06:06:47 PM
What I meant by "unknown company" is that we do not know if this jar ever held Dr.Berrys ointment.
Of course it's Hazel atlas made, the glass is so marked, but who Hazel atlas sold it to, and who filled it with ointment, is the unknown company.
Unfortunately the jar did not come with a label.
I never said "the company that made this jar is unknown" but I can see where it might be read that way, so I just edited my Original.
My post should have been read "Unknown ointment MADE BY an unknown company."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on September 02, 2012, 06:10:06 PM
And there was a NZ survey team on the island in 1938 http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/New_Zealand_Survey_Report/generalreport.html while the freckle cream IIRC was sold as a anti-sunburn prep as well. There is another source for it.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on September 02, 2012, 06:15:59 PM
Quote
although this site contains the ditigal copies of this newspaper from 24 March 1870 to 31 December 1945 (23312 issues), only one ad is found for "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" and one separate mention is made of "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Doubt very much if one advert in 75 years and 23312 issues brought in many customers.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 02, 2012, 06:31:36 PM
And there was a NZ survey team on the island in 1938 http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/New_Zealand_Survey_Report/generalreport.html while the freckle cream IIRC was sold as a anti-sunburn prep as well. There is another source for it.

If the 1938/39 New Zealand Survey was at the site where the jar was found, why didn't they see the skeleton that was there in 1940?And if a 1938 NZ team can have a jar of 1923 Freckle Cream so can an American aviator in 1937.
And I will ask you again to please provide a source for your statement that New Zealand was in the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands colony.
BTW, have I asked you how long you've known David Billings?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on September 02, 2012, 06:40:32 PM

BTW, have I asked you how long you've known David Billings?

Ric - have a look at the Lambrecht thread - the whole sordid conspiracy is revealed.  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on September 02, 2012, 06:56:32 PM
What I meant by "unknown company" is that we do not know if this jar ever held Dr.Berrys ointment.
Of course it's Hazel atlas made, the glass is so marked, but who Hazel atlas sold it to, and who filled it with ointment, is the unknown company.
Unfortunately the jar did not come with a label.
I never said "the company that made this jar is unknown" but I can see where it might be read that way, so I just edited my Original.
My post should have been read "Unknown ointment MADE BY an unknown company."

I agree with what you say now that I understand it better.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on September 02, 2012, 07:29:33 PM
Quote
although this site contains the ditigal copies of this newspaper from 24 March 1870 to 31 December 1945 (23312 issues), only one ad is found for "Dr Berry's Freckle Cream" and one separate mention is made of "Dr Berry's Freckle Ointment".

Doubt very much if one advert in 75 years and 23312 issues brought in many customers.
It only takes one. ;)


Who also amazingly was the one who ended up on Gardner island? Would have liked to have a couple of bucks on those odds ;)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 02, 2012, 07:30:04 PM

...Please provide your source for your statement that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands.

...And I will ask you again to please provide a source for your statement that New Zealand was in the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands colony.


Ric,

Of course you know Harry Maude reported in his book “Of Islands and Men” that in Sept. 1937 he was,  “…directed by Sir Arthur Richards, then High Commissioner for the Western Pacific, to lead a pioneering expedition to the Phoenix Group…”

The very same Sir Arthur Richards turns up again in a news-story published in the Auckland Star on Jan 4, 1938.  Part of the text reads-
 
“...The Imperial escort vessel Wellington left Auckland [New Zealand] this morning for Suva and other islands under the jurisdiction of the High Commissioner of the Western Pacific, Sir Arthur Richards...”

“Sir Arthur made a request to Rear-Admiral the Hon. E. R. Drummond, Commodore Commanding the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy, for the use of one of the escort vessels to take supplies and reliefs on a routine cruise of the islands under his control..  Such is one of the main functions of the escort vessels, but it is not usual to make island cruises in the summer months... Probably the Wellington, which previously figured in an incident of international import at Canton Island, in the Phoenix Group, when the right to remain in the only known anchorage was disputed by the American naval vessel Avocet, will again call at Canton Island.”


Ric- if you are claiming New Zealand was NOT part of the Phoenix Island supply chain, can you please explain why you believe that?

The article is here-

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19380104.2.111&srpos=1&e=-------10--1----0supplies+to+phoenix+islands--

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 02, 2012, 08:44:20 PM
Of course you know Harry Maude reported in his book “Of Islands and Men” that in Sept. 1937 he was,  “…directed by Sir Arthur Richards, then High Commissioner for the Western Pacific, to lead a pioneering expedition to the Phoenix Group…”

It's nice of you to try to cover for Malcolm and, yes, I'm familiar with Sir Arthur Richards, the High Commissioner at the time Maude proposed the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme (PISS).  In fact, the original village site on Nikumaroro was later named Ritiati (the Gilbertese transliteration of Richards) in his honor.

The very same Sir Arthur Richards turns up again in a news-story published in the Auckland Star on Jan 4, 1938.  Part of the text reads- etc., etc.
 

This has nothing to do with the PISS.  The first work party did not arrive at Gardner until nearly a year later - December 20, 1938.

Ric- if you are claiming New Zealand was NOT part of the Phoenix Island supply chain, can you please explain why you believe that?

I'm not claiming anything.  I asked Malcolm to cite his source. 
We've made quite a study of the PISS.  TIGHAR board member Bill Carter and I spent a week in Tarawa last year reading and copying hundreds of documents in the Kiribati National Archive, many of which are on the TIGHAR website at Tarawa Files (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Tarawa_Archives/Tarawa_Archives.html).  You might especially find Report on Gardner Co-Op Store (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Tarawa_Archives/1939_Co-op_Store/1939Co-opStore.html) interesting.  At least in 1939 "Goods for the Co-Op Stores are purchased locally [in Fiji] or through Colony Agents in Australia. A few items, principally tobacco, also come from Fiji ..." 
I recall seeing later accounting files showing invoices from vendors, all in Australia.  I've seen nothing to indicate that the Western Pacific High Commission bought supplies for the PISS in New Zealand - but Malcolm stated unequivocally that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands.  Malcolm needs to either cite a primary source document supporting his statement or admit that he made it up.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Malcolm McKay on September 02, 2012, 08:49:04 PM

A few items, principally tobacco, also come from Fiji ..." 
I recall seeing later accounting files showing invoices from vendors, all in Australia.  I've seen nothing to indicate that the Western Pacific High Commission bought supplies for the PISS in New Zealand - but Malcolm stated unequivocally that New Zealand was part of the supplies source for the Phoenix Islands.  Malcolm needs to either cite a primary source document supporting his statement or admit that he made it up.

Ric - you're snookered fair and square on this one. Please don't turn it into farce. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 02, 2012, 08:58:22 PM
How well TIGHAR knows: she's been many times, worked and looked hard and found new things each time, I believe.  I further believe she has hardly scratched the surface so far - it's that big and complex.

Jeff, let me say how much I appreciate you referring to TIGHAR as feminine.  Because I'm the one who gets the bulk of the media attention, the line between me and TIGHAR is often, unfortunately, blurred.  Very few people refer to me as "she" so making TIGHAR female should help reduce that confusion. It's a convention I will adopt.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 02, 2012, 09:09:24 PM
Ric - you're snookered fair and square on this one. Please don't turn it into farce.

It's not going to work Malcolm.  You made a statement of fact that you cannot support.  That crosses a line.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 03, 2012, 08:46:58 AM
Hmmm...... what about the media reports about freckle cream jars, finger bones, debris fields. No wait don't answer, that was the media not TIGHAR - of course silly me. Tell me seriously why does TIGHAR release this sort of stuff to the media without doing proper due diligence.

Pssst...Malcolm.....your agenda is showing.  As I've shown repeatedly here, we're far more diligent in our research than you are in your sniping.
We operate with funds solicited from the general public and we have a responsibility to report our findings to our supporters.What we report to the media is accurate.  We have no control over the headlines they write.  I wish we did.

It only invites criticism that in the end works against you.

Really?  I hadn't noticed.  The response from the media and the public has been overwhelmingly positive and TIGHAR membership has skyrocketed.  Sure, reporting our findings invites criticism and there are those who seem determined to work against TIGHAR, but that's their problem, not hers.

Ric the jar could have come from New Zealand in a supply ship carrying cargo to the islands, or with the New Zealand survey party in 1938.

Or it could have been carried there by a migrating swallow - an African swallow maybe, not a European swallow.  All hypotheses are equal - right?
Re-stating a falsehood doesn't make it less false. We can find no record of a New Zealand supply ship carrying cargo to Gardner Island and it's obvious that the 1938 New Zealand survey party was never at the Seven Site.

It is TIGHAR who made the claims about it being linked to Earhart not me, not the agents of some anti-TIGHAR conspiracy - TIGHAR itself.

Show me where we made claims that the jar is linked to Earhart.  We try to identify the artifacts we find and we report the results of our research. Based on what we've learned and reported there are reasons to think that the jar may be linked to Earhart.  You may not find those reasons compelling.  That's up to you. 
What we don't do is make up "facts" to support our speculation - which is exactly what you've done - repeatedly - and that crosses a line.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: john a delsing on September 03, 2012, 12:30:22 PM
Hmmm...... what about the media reports about freckle cream jars, finger bones, debris fields. No wait don't answer, that was the media not TIGHAR - of course silly me. Tell me seriously why does TIGHAR release this sort of stuff to the media without doing proper due diligence.

Pssst...Malcolm.....your agenda is showing.  As I've shown repeatedly here, we're far more diligent in our research than you are in your sniping.
We operate with funds solicited from the general public and we have a responsibility to report our findings to our supporters.What we report to the media is accurate.  We have no control over the headlines they write.  I wish we did.

It only invites criticism that in the end works against you.

Really?  I hadn't noticed.  The response from the media and the public has been overwhelmingly positive and TIGHAR membership has skyrocketed.  Sure, reporting our findings invites criticism and there are those who seem determined to work against TIGHAR, but that's their problem, not hers.

Ric the jar could have come from New Zealand in a supply ship carrying cargo to the islands, or with the New Zealand survey party in 1938.

Or it could have been carried there by a migrating swallow - an African swallow maybe, not a European swallow.  All hypotheses are equal - right?
Re-stating a falsehood doesn't make it less false. We can find no record of a New Zealand supply ship carrying cargo to Gardner Island and it's obvious that the 1938 New Zealand survey party was never at the Seven Site.

It is TIGHAR who made the claims about it being linked to Earhart not me, not the agents of some anti-TIGHAR conspiracy - TIGHAR itself.

Show me where we made claims that the jar is linked to Earhart.  We try to identify the artifacts we find and we report the results of our research. Based on what we've learned and reported there are reasons to think that the jar may be linked to Earhart.  You may not find those reasons compelling.  That's up to you. 
What we don't do is make up "facts" to support our speculation - which is exactly what you've done - repeatedly - and that crosses a line.


   If the new Zealand survey team was anywhere on Gardner they could have left, or dropped, the jar and later someone ( piss? ? ) picks up the jar and carries it around with her for awhile and eventually discards it around the seven site.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 03, 2012, 12:44:19 PM
   If the new Zealand survey team was anywhere on Gardner they could have left, or dropped, the jar and later someone ( piss? ? ) picks up the jar and carries it around with her for awhile and eventually discards it around the seven site.

And, and, ... let's see... when they discard it at the Seven Site it breaks and then somebody decides to use one of the broken pieces to carve up a turtle because broken pieces of glass are obviously better than knives for cutting up turtles which the people who were there tell us they didn't do until they got the turtle back home to the village.

Personally I prefer the swallow hypothesis (African swallow, not European). .
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 03, 2012, 03:22:42 PM
Alan, here is an easy to find reference for the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company that states "The Hazel-Atlas mark, usually placed on the back of the product, is an 'A' nested underneath an 'H'. The mark was reportedly first used in 1923, according to trademark office records quoted by Peterson (400 Trademarks on Glass)".

Yes, thank you, I was well aware of the Wiki entry.  Also Ricker Jones posted the exact same language from a different web site back in Reply 110.  What I was discussing is whether Wiki/"Peterson" have it right, or have the entire story.  Plus, it references the "trademark office", and I believe it is not unknown for companies to use names, and logos, before going through the official filing process.  Anyway, IMO there is reason to question it, as other data are strongly suggesting that the jar is older than 1923.  That's why I am hoping the official report now in preparation can untangle this for us.

Quote
  Also the mark is not distorted as shown in this reference.http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html (http://glassloversglassdatabase.com//marks/ats00002.html)

Possibly we have different definitions of "distorted".  As I look at Randy's photo "glass4.jpg", what we believe is/was a complete block letter "A" is not really recognizable as such unless you already know what it should be.  John Kada's reference to "Babylonian cuneiform" is quite apt IMO.

Alan, as usual you have summed it up nicely. Someone can go on the glasslovers database on Wiki, and read that HA was first trademarked in 1923. Putting that information to use on jars leads to a date of 1923 or later.
Except that isn't the whole story.
Most websites agree that HA was the only symbol ever used with some slight variations.
http://hazelatlasglass.com/hazel-atlas-mark.html

Where it tends to get confusing, and where the 1923 date comes up, is that is the first year Hazel Atlas made plates. It's that simple. They moved from industrial production to the kitchen. Since most glass collectors databases are concerned with collectibles such as plates, vases, ect, the 1923 date is frequently said to be the start of the H over A use. They started producing plate and dishes and applied their trademark to such.

As Alan mentioned, most items found by search, and most collectors of glass suggest Hazel Atlas used an H over A since they merged. Now some jars, just like the plates were not marked at all. Some special containers such as milk containers were marked in different fashions, I.E, "registered" might be the only marking on the glass.( they had to reuse the glass and it was for food products). Also jam jars had variations.
But bottom line, an H over an A doesn't mean it was made after 1923. Markings are murky in general on industrial glass. The bottom of jars were not made for looks. Some plants would add even more detail than others, for example production lots and runs.
Sometimes special runs were made with a buyers name embossed in the glass bottom.

What we do know, and have found, is way back a few pages in this thread. Where it was found that in several years of the trade Journal "the National druggist", (where cream companies might buy a jar for their ointment), that this clear jar was not available for sale by hazel atlas after 1918, and was available only in opal(white).
So in my opinion, until better evidence is presented, the best evidence I have seen is this is a 1918 or earlier jar.
Whether that jar was brought to the island by New Zealanders, or tree cutters, Earnhart, birds, or tidal action is for each to decide.
Out of all of the above, I cannot fathom why Amelia would be using a 20 year old bottle of ointment and that possibility seems unlikely to me. A 1924 group of men needing sunscreen, that is a possibility perhaps.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: john a delsing on September 03, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
   If the new Zealand survey team was anywhere on Gardner they could have left, or dropped, the jar and later someone ( piss? ? ) picks up the jar and carries it around with her for awhile and eventually discards it around the seven site.

And, and, ... let's see... when they discard it at the Seven Site it breaks and then somebody decides to use one of the broken pieces to carve up a turtle because broken pieces of glass are obviously better than knives for cutting up turtles which the people who were there tell us they didn't do until they got the turtle back home to the village.

Personally I prefer the swallow hypothesis (African swallow, not European). .

   If I recall correctly you stated that ae had a knife at the seven site, I believe you found the handles. It was surmised that she attached the blade to a spear for fishing. If the turtle was cut up by a piece of the jar it seems to me that it was done by some one else as ae would IMHO have used the knife you have inferred she had.
    There is not one event that happened at the seven site that can't be easily explained without creating IMO a urban legend type story about ae living and hunting done at the seven site. Please name one event, just one, that you know that ae and only ae could have done at the seven site.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Mangus on September 03, 2012, 06:11:39 PM
Died.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: drriddle on September 03, 2012, 06:17:01 PM
   If I recall correctly you stated that ae had a knife at the seven site, I believe you found the handles. It was surmised that she attached the blade to a spear for fishing. If the turtle was cut up by a piece of the jar it seems to me that it was done by some one else as ae would IMHO have used the knife you have inferred she had.

It's just as possible that the castaway had the knife, broke it, lost the blade in the water, and then resorted to using a broken bottle.

    There is not one event that happened at the seven site that can't be easily explained without creating IMO a urban legend type story about ae living and hunting done at the seven site. Please name one event, just one, that you know that ae and only ae could have done at the seven site.

That isn't how a scientific investigation works.  TIGHAR has laid out a hypothesis, based on the evidence, of what an unknown castaway did at the site.  There is evidence that the castaway was European, based on the skeletal remains found, the way they selected, prepared ate the animals found at the site, the items found there, and so on.  There is no way to know at the moment if that was Amelia Earhart, and there is no way to say that "only AE" could have done something at the site. 

Stating that "it couldn't have been AE because you can't prove that only she did these things" shows that you're not interested in following the trail of evidence.  You've already made up your mind that TIGHAR is wrong, and nothing is going to change your mind.  So why are you wasting your time here?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 03, 2012, 09:01:32 PM
   If I recall correctly you stated that ae had a knife at the seven site, I believe you found the handles.

Please don't try to recall things. Look them up. I never stated that AE had a knife at the Seven Site. We found a knife at the Seven Site.  It's an Easy-Open bone-handled, double-bladed jack knife made by the Imperial Cutlery Company of Providence, RI from 1930 until 1945.  It does not have handles.   The knife appears to have been beaten apart with a blunt object, apparently to extract the blades.  We found almost all of the knife except the blades.

It was surmised that she attached the blade to a spear for fishing.

We didn't surmise anything.  The dates of manufacture mean that the knife could have belonged to Amelia, or Fred, or any of the Coasties, or anyone else who may have visited the site after 1930.  We do know that there was a bone-handled, double-bladed jack knife aboard the Electra at the time of the Luke Field wreck, but it was a different manufacturer than the knife we found at the Seven Site. We don't know why the blades were removed but one reason we can think of is that a castaway may have wanted the blades for making spears.  The fact that there is known to have been a castaway at the same site supports that hypothesis.  Maybe you can think of a better one - but please get your facts straight.  It's not fair to ask others to take the time to correct your errors.

If the turtle was cut up by a piece of the jar it seems to me that it was done by some one else as ae would IMHO have used the knife you have inferred she had.

I've made no such inference, but I'll point out that if you bust up your knife to make a spear you can't then use the knife to cut up the critters you kill with the spear.

    There is not one event that happened at the seven site that can't be easily explained without creating IMO a urban legend type story about ae living and hunting done at the seven site. Please name one event, just one, that you know that ae and only ae could have done at the seven site.

I don't know that AE was ever at the Seven Site.  I do know that objects have been found at the Seven Site- first by Gallagher and later by TIGHAR - that strongly suggest the presence of an American female castaway who arrived after 1933 and was dead by 1940.  I can name a specific American female who disappeared in that region during that time period.  Her name was Amelia Earhart.  We've been trying very hard to find documentation of another one but with no success.  If you really want to knock a hole in TIGHAR's hypothesis, find another American woman who went missing in the South Central Pacific between 1933 and 1940.
[/quote]
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Scott on September 04, 2012, 12:43:17 AM
Personally I find it somewhat of a stretch of the imagination to believe that, although only two ads for this product were apparently printed in these 75 years of this newspaper's publishing, we are supposed to take these two ads as proof this product was sold in New Zealand during the 1930s. Someone is going to have to come up with more than this to convince me.

I spent some time searching that site, and I noticed that quite a few keywords produce few results.  I believe that not all articles have been indexed, especially advertisements.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 04, 2012, 03:05:43 AM
Personally I find it somewhat of a stretch of the imagination to believe that, although only two ads for this product were apparently printed in these 75 years of this newspaper's publishing, we are supposed to take these two ads as proof  this product was sold in New Zealand during the 1930s. Someone is going to have to come up with more than this to convince me.

Well, it certainly seems like proof that Milne & Choyce Ltd. on Queen Street, Auckland had at least 1 jar to sell in 1930 and 1 in 1931.  Otherwise their advertising manager would be quite far out of line.  Agreed we cannot know from this whether they actually sold any of their inventory.

I spent some time searching that site, and I noticed that quite a few keywords produce few results.  I believe that not all articles have been indexed, especially advertisements.

Yes, that was also one of my thoughts, as in searching domestic publications I encountered many frustrating moments where either the document/paper was just scanned in by page and not indexed, or the text articles were indexed but the adverts were not.  Can't say for sure, but probable IMO.

Earlier posts in this thread by Randy Carson and myself (Replies 214 and 216) are tangentially relevant, as they discuss what seems to be a paucity of Berry ads in the USA.  One speculation I raised there was: the product may have been primarily marketed directly to druggists through salesmen, mailings, or in trade publications, such that the druggists would then "push" the product to their customers.  However, I don't have a specific example or reference to confirm that.  Repeat: speculation.

In any case, IMO the importance of 1930's advertising and sales should not be exaggerated, as the jar research strongly indicates that in the '30s the Berry's jar would have been white (opal) glass, not clear glass like the artifact jar, for which we have found no evidence later than 1916.  If a New Zealand or Australian ad for Berry's from that earlier time period should surface it would have additional interest.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Mangus on September 04, 2012, 04:14:29 PM
What happens if you heat a white jar hot enough to partially melt it.  Does it change color?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on September 04, 2012, 04:45:26 PM
What happens if you heat a white jar hot enough to partially melt it.  Does it change color?


Glass white or clear melts between 1400 to 1600 degrees f depending on the composition.  It is a moot point however as a typical campfire only burns at 900 degrees to 1100 degrees f.  So the freckle cream jar would not have melted in a fire and no it won't change color since when they make Milk Glass it is heated to above 1600 degrees f. to pour.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 05, 2012, 12:50:58 PM

"...jar research strongly indicates that in the '30s the Berry's jar would have been white (opal) glass, not clear glass like the artifact jar, for which we have found no evidence later than 1916.  If a New Zealand or Australian ad for Berry's from that earlier time period should surface it would have additional interest."

It may be from a "later period," but it is interesting just the same to find a New Zealand cosmetic manufacturer ran an ad in August 1942 asking readers to gather up USED cosmetic jars for recycling.  The advertiser emphasizes their own brand and, “…similar products are packed in squat round WHITE OPAL jars” and adds, “All these jars are imported. “

I’d hazard to guess the primary world-wide exporter of all cosmetic jars in that era and before, was the Hazel Atlas Co.

Maybe the jar floated to the island as trash, ... direct from New Zealand.  :)
 
http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=EP19420808.2.105.5&srpos=22&e=-------10--21----0cosmetic+jar--

Evening Post, 8 August 1942, Page 8

Jars Wanted- War Emergency

Here's an opportunity for YOU to help New Zealand's War Effort, make money, and ensure your future supplies of MONTEREY COSMETICS
 
MONTEREY CREAMS (and many other similar products) are packed in squat round WHITE OPAL jars 1 ¾” high and 2" wide, as illustrated. All these jars are imported.

Every jar that you can salvage, therefore, will be a direct contribution towards saving vital shipping space. Here's What to Do! Collect all such jars, with or without lids, and take them-to your regular Cosmetic Dealer who will pay you, provided they are the correct size and shape-

 1/3 per dozen —Cash

 Your dealer will then forward them to the factory where they will be scientifically cleaned and sterilised. Every foot of shipping space saved is equivalent to a shot at the enemy. This is your chance to do some shooting. Start saving and collecting jars NOW.




Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on September 05, 2012, 01:10:51 PM
This link is to article about AE from 1932 after one her flights
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=mVVgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=n3ENAAAAIBAJ&pg=1609,608767&dq=earhart+cosmetics&hl=en

" One english reporter was particularly interested in learning whether she had carried a vanity box with her across the Atlantic.  Mrs Putnam assumed(sic) him " You don't have any time for cosmetics flying the Atlantic, I didn't even have a comb."

Not exactly sworn testimony and vanity may have led to bend the truth a bit but still relevant.  Of course she was 5 years older for the  last trip and maybe somewhat more concerned about  her appearance.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 05, 2012, 01:24:58 PM
Of course she was 5 years older for the  last trip and maybe somewhat more concerned about  her appearance.

I don't have them at my fingertips but there are references to her having cosmetics with her on the world flight.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 05, 2012, 03:01:43 PM
It may be from a "later period," but it is interesting just the same to find a New Zealand cosmetic manufacturer ran an ad in August 1942 asking readers to gather up USED cosmetic jars for recycling.  The advertiser emphasizes their own brand and, “…similar products are packed in squat round WHITE OPAL jars” and adds, “All these jars are imported. “

I’d hazard to guess the primary world-wide exporter of all cosmetic jars in that era and before, was the Hazel Atlas Co.

Maybe the jar floated to the island as trash, ... direct from New Zealand.  :)

Another interesting post, as usual, Mark!  We do know, thanks to you (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18242.html#msg18242), that Hazel-Atlas was exporting glassware to England as early as 1915, so it's not a huge stretch to imagine their jars also going to NZ either directly from the US, or as a further movement by a British distributor.  Another avenue for exploration.  Hazel-Atlas was one of the largest, at times the largest, glassware manufacturers in the US.

Those who have old Hazel-Atlas catalogs (I do not) can look to see if the jar illustrated in your link looks like a Hazel-Atlas offering.  However, the shape is rather plain and probably not identifiable as uniquely being a single brand.  I note that the plain round jar shape does match that we have found (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18094.html#msg18094) for Dr. Berry's Poisonous Preparation in 1936, for whatever that is worth.

As a suggestion for your (apparently tireless) searches, "cosmetics" are not necessarily the only product category that could have originally been in the artifact jar.  I am not fully clear whether it is a proven fact that the jar contained mercury, but even if it is, I have found a reference in the '30's (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18212.html#msg18212) to mercury-containing "acne, blackhead, and eczema creams", which could be called medicinal rather than cosmetic; and prior to the '30's there were other medicinal preparations using mercury, see here (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18388.html#msg18388) for examples.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 05, 2012, 05:36:48 PM
All of this struggling to show that the jar could have come from New Zealand or that it could have contained something other than Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream or that it probably dated from earlier than pick-a-year misses the point.

• The jar was found at a site where we can be quite sure a castaway, probably female, died prior to 1940.
• The jar was broken, almost certainly intentionally. (The glass is quite thick. Just dropping the jar on the coral rubble would not be sufficient to shatter it.  There is damage to the lip of the jar that suggests it was broken by hammering - possibly to get the lid off. See photo.)
• One piece of the broken jar was apparently used to cut up a turtle some distance from where the jar was broken.
• All of the above strongly suggests that the jar is associated with the castaway.
• Other broken glass containers found in the same area also suggest castaway-association, are of American manufacture in the early 1930s, and are of small (3 ounce) size.  One has been conclusively matched to Campana Italian Balm, a popular hand lotion made in Batavia, IL marketed to American women in the 1930s.

 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Friend Weller on September 05, 2012, 10:19:27 PM
...and are of small (3 ounce) size. 

The TSA would be be proud!   ;D

Keep up the good work -

LTM,
Friend
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 06, 2012, 08:17:43 AM

"...It has always been the aggregate of these things that gave us an idea of what went on at the 7 site."

"...who knows what 'markers' we may yet find?"

Considering what has already been uncovered there, more ‘markers’ left by the Coast Guard will likely turn up before any artifacts positively connected to AE/FN are found.

This artifact is an important clue for example-
 
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Help/Artifact1.html

“The artifact is almost certainly associated with Unit 92, the Coast Guard Loran station at the southeast tip of the island. We know that personnel from the Loran station engaged in target practice at the Seven Site on one or more occasions. We’ve found numerous M-1 carbine shell casings and broken Coast Guard mess hall plates at the site. A burned out vacuum tube would make a good target.”

Would you agree the Campana Italian Balm bottle and the Mennen lotion bottle found at the site would also make good targets? 

“…Campana Balm was carried by every U.S. soldier and serviceman to prevent or heal burns.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Campana_Company
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 06, 2012, 08:54:08 AM
Would you agree the Campana Italian Balm bottle and the Mennen lotion bottle found at the site would also make good targets? 

Absolutely.  The fact that we found only the bottom of the Campana bottle and the scattering of the Mennen bottle pieces suggest they were shot rather than broken by some less violent means. Ditto with the fragments of a WWII era Coke bottle and an octagonal glass container that seems to match a type of large government-issue salt shaker.  Other apparent Coast Guard targets are the pieces from vacuum tubes that you mention and, of course, the shards of two ceramic dinner plates, one of which carries the USCG logo.  So we know the Coasties were shooting up stuff they brought to the site from the Loran station.  The Campana bottle may have been among that stuff or it could have already been on the site and shot as a target of opportunity.  Same with the Mennen bottle. 

We have good reason to think that a castaway died there and we know that, several years later, some Coasties did some target shooting there. Sorting out which artifacts are attributable to which activity is easy in some cases and more problematic in others.

“…Campana Balm was carried by every U.S. soldier and serviceman to prevent or heal burns.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Campana_Company

Good catch. Very interesting, and I'm surprised that our researcher missed it.  That's a pretty sweeping statement, even for Wikipedia. But if only some troops were issued Campana Balm it should still be possible to find examples of how it was issued.  Little 3 oz. glass bottles (the bottle found at the Seven Site was made in 1933)?  Or unbreakable squeeze tubes?   More research is needed.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 06, 2012, 09:21:47 AM
Here's an interesting bit of info related to the Mennen bottle-  an ad from 1946- showing the same or similar logo found on the bottle fragment.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlylehold/7390485060/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlylehold/7390485060/) or-

(http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlylehold/7390485060/)

See page three here for a photo of the bottle fragment-

http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/2010Vol_26/1110.pdf
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 06, 2012, 10:09:10 AM
I have the following response from Joe Cerneglia, our primary researcher who has been working with the Campana bottle:

 "I assure you we did not miss Wikipedia's statement that "Campana Balm was carried by every U.S. serviceman during the war.". This statement was added to the Wiki article by someone following the breaking news on the identification of the bottle as consistent with Italian Balm.  Someone else at this time also stated in the Wiki article that Amelia Earhart carried Campana Italian Balm on her last flight.  Tom and I consulted on this and decided to remove this statement.  We gave our reasons in the editorial history of the article:

 14:30, 20 June 2012‎ 198.228.201.146 (talk)‎ . . (5,173 bytes) (-426)‎ . . (→‎Notable users: Deleted. All we can conclude is that SOMEONE had Campana Italian Balm with them at the Seven Site; we have no evidence that AE had it, there or anyplace else.  Tom King, Archaeologist, TIGHAR

We believe remarks to the effect every soldier had a bottle of Italian Balm was an exaggerated, and inaccurate counter-response to the idea expressed that Campana Italian Balm was brought by Earhart on the World Flight.  A check of the history of Campana Company will confirm why the statement that every soldier carried Campana Balm is probably grossly inaccurate.

First, Campana Corporation manufactured burn ointment for soldiers.  It was supplied in tubes and carried the names M-4 and M-5.  We have no basis to know how widely it was distributed, and in any case most such ointments contained a boric acid-based emollient, very different from the ingredients in Italian Balm.

Second, the effort to supply the troops actually decreased substantially the number of bottles of Italian Balm (the product had actually been re-named Campana Balm in response to anti-Italian war sentiment) that could be produced.  Sales had already begun a decline by the outbreak of World War II. 

For more on this topic, see the section titled Impact of World War II in

http://www.bataviahistory.org/historian-vol-26-51/the-batavia-historian-vol-39/volume-39---number-2.aspx

This information may also be found in the last chapter of Batavia: From the Collection of the Batavia Historical Society, available on Amazon."


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 06, 2012, 10:23:01 AM
Here's an interesting bit of info related to the Mennen bottle-  an ad from 1946- showing the same or similar logo found on the bottle fragment.

Yes, we have that ad and many more.  The Mennen bottle is one of those artifacts that's difficult to attribute one way or the other.  That's why we don't.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on September 19, 2012, 03:49:33 PM
Ric and Joe....Stumbled upon this...this afternoon. Was wondering if any of you might have encountered  the codes off the jar or seen any of them...Let me know...thanks!!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 23, 2012, 08:02:09 PM
A forum reader who prefers not to venture on to the bloody sand of this arena sent me the following:

***********
You have some people there working real hard to discredit your hypothesis, using at least in my mind very poor application of the scientific method.   Particular attempts to data the bottle prior to 1924.
Here is what I found, in just an hour or 2 hours of ‘googling.’
1.   Hazel Glass was formed in 1885 and merged with Atlas in 1902, so the absolute earliest the bottle would be that date.
http://www.wvculture.org/HiStory/wvhs1721.html
2.   As has been noted in the thread, Hazel Atlas first trademarked the HA symbol in 1924.  What is not noted is that prior to that, it’s only trademark was Atlas, first registered in 1908.   Just go to the Patent & Trademark office site here:  http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4006:nrjtes.1.1
3.   As has been noted on the thread, this book, which appears so far to be the only ‘authoritative’ reference, says the trademark was not used prior to 1924.:
http://www.amazon.com/400-Trademarks-Glass-Arthur-Peterson/dp/0960566414
4.   This book claims the HA mark was first used in 1920:
Toulouse, Julian Harrison.  1971   Bottle Makers and Their Marks.  Thomas Nelson Inc., New York.
5.   Hazel Atlas certainly did produce what is called ‘flint glass.’  See the advertisement and the specimans in the background.
http://www.spglass.com/dgads5.html
6.   The book / pamphlet noted in the above was published at least as far back as 1939, which implies HA was a producing flint glass in quantity.
http://www.abebooks.com/ATLAS-BOOK-RECIPES-METHODS-HOME-PRESERVING/426160844/bd
7.   The following site discusses how to identify and date bottles.
http://www.sha.org/bottle/index.htm
8.   Here is information on class color:    From the jpg, I detect the straw tint:

“The term flint glass was and still is used somewhat erroneously by glassmakers to describe colorless glass that is made with low iron sand.  It is, however, not true flint glass. …. Colorless glass which was de-colorized with selenium or arsenic (or typically a combination of the two in conjunction with cobalt oxide) results in a very faint "straw" or amber tint to the thickest portions of the glass (Scholes 1952; Tooley 1953; Lockhart 2006b)…. One can be quite confident that if the fragment is colorless with a slight straw tint, it very likely is from a machine-made bottle, unlikely to date from much prior to World War 1 (i.e., mid-1910s), and could date as late as the mid-20th century (or later).
http://www.sha.org/bottle/colors.htm#Colorless

9.   Here is information on bottle closure type:   While your object is a cosmetic jar it has a closure similar to a wide mouth mason jar: 

“…Wide mouth external thread finishes are most commonly found on canning jars and other food storage jars dating back at least to the invention of the Mason fruit jar in 1858 and continuing up to the present day.  Mouth-blown external thread finish jars (usually pre-1910) have a ground rim (i.e., top surface to the finish); machine-made versions (after 1900 and almost always after 1915) have a smooth, non-ground top rim.  Jars made during the transition period from hand-made to machine-made production (approximately 1900-1915) were made by either method with increasing domination by machine-made items as the period progressed and automated technology became better, cheaper, and more available (Toulouse 1969a).  Because of the wide date range of use, the dating and/or typing of jars and bottles with this finish must be done using other diagnostic characteristics….. The aqua machine-made wide mouth external thread finish to the left is on an Atlas Strong Shoulder Mason jar that dates from the 1920s (Creswick 1987).  This example is typical of the finish found on the plethora of machine-made, wide mouth external thread fruit jars made throughout the 20th century….”
http://www.sha.org/bottle/finishstyles2.htm#Large%20Mouth%20External%20Thread
10.   Here is another – how to date machine made, screw type bottle with illustration and date ranges for screw types:
11.   http://www.bottlebooks.com/Dating%20Old%20Bottles/dating_bottles_by_their_tops_and.htm
12.   What has never been discussed is what might have been the closure of the jar.  It would have used a screw type cap.  Of what type?    “…Bakelite - an early thermosetting plastic - made its debut in 1927 as a screw cap closure material though was first patented in 1907 (Berge 1980).  This provides a terminus post quem (earliest date of use) of 1927 for bottles with the plastic cap still present…”
13.   Here is a complete section as to how to date:
http://www.sha.org/bottle/dating.htm#Dating%20a%20Bottle%20Section%20of%20Dating%20Page
14.   From the jpgs, it seems clear that this is a machine made jar.
15.   This reference has lots of good information on identifying and dating historical artifacts, including a flowchart for dating bottles.
www.alpinearchaeology.com/Historic%20Artifact%20Handbook.pdf
16.   If you want to ask questions, this looks good:
http://www.antiquebottles.com/
17.   Since the bottle has traces of Mercury, the latest date for production would be 1938-1940.  Most cosmetics compounds with mercury disappeared by the early 1940s  (page 181-182)
http://www.amazon.com/Quicksilver-History-Lore-Effects-Mercury/dp/0786435968

See also ….”.…The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 was passed after a legally marketed toxic elixir killed 107 people, including many children. The FD&C Act completely overhauled the public health system. Among other provisions, the law authorized the FDA to demand evidence of safety for new drugs, issue standards for food, and conduct factory inspections….”
http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/default.htm

**************

I ran these observations past our bottle-guru Bill Lockhart who says:

"In general, the research is good.  Just a few caveats:

2 & 3 – The actual trademark document says that the HA logo was used since July 1923.

4 – Everything in the Toulouse book should be viewed with suspicion and taken as approximate.  He did a great job with 1970 technology, but we know SO much more now.

8 – Even though I helped write some of Bill Lindsey’s webpage, the passage on “flint” glass is misleading.  Glass houses STILL use that term to mean colorless glass.  I think the glass would have to be cleaned to the point of destroying the surface to determine any straw color.  "Straw color" is actually a very faint orangish tint that is usually only noticeable when viewed beside a clean, colorless bottle or jar.  Typically, it is almost impossible to tell from glass that is patinated -- as is the ointment pot.

14 – There is no question that the jar is machine made.  First Atlas – then Hazel-Atlas – made jars exclusively by machine.

The early date of 1923 is a good one due to the trademark for the logo.  Screw lids on wide-mouth jars is more difficult to justify.  The 1940 end date looks really good."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on September 24, 2012, 06:55:45 AM
Two posts by Kada and Gillespie have been moved to a topic dedicated to the Seven Site (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,508.msg19650.html#msg19650).
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 24, 2012, 10:58:58 AM
To Mr.Anonymous Poster who disagrees with the attempts "to discredit Tighar's hypothesis using unscientific methods". in reference to the cream jar.

Nobody has tried to discredit anyone's theories.
Tighar never dated the jar, so some decided to help. More input always welcome. :)
Let's see what your SCIENTIFIC GOOGLING method of one to two hours has found-
The company start date, I think that was previously covered, Mercury last used in 1938, yes we googled that too, the merger of Atlas and Hazel, check, googled that already. However, previous posters did screen their work and did not include tidbits such as references to flint glass versus straw colored glass, versus clear glass. References to canning jars and screw top types on wide mouth jars were not mentioned, nor thermos caps were discussed so far.

I believe none of that was covered earlier because we don't have a canning jar, nor the lid. There is also no argument whether it's flint or clear, or the color differences in clear glass. This jar was offered in flint and opal based on every document I have seen. So fascinating documentation on canning jar types from the anonymous member, but most of the post had little relevance to dating the artifact jar.

In the only area where it matters, the date of the jar based on the logo patent date what was found?

3 different books giving 3 different dates, 1920,1923,1924.
Then the OP says he found a friend who says 1923 would be his choice.
I think that means a lot of people are taking a WAG on the logo date.
So using the logo to date the jar "might" give a range. It might not.
Pick another book, get another date.

The REALITY is it takes more work to date industrial glass sometimes.
I believe Tighar and Mr.Joe C. has had the jar for what two years? and hadn't definitely dated it. So more work might be necessary than 2 hours unless you get real lucky.
Sometimes dating can be done with the style jar, sometimes with the logo date, sometimes with the glass color. Sometimes it is just a date range. Collector's opinions differ as was just shown. Glass books tend to pick a date that relates to the items the author collects,or has experience with. It was previously discussed in this thread, that 1924 was the first date Hazel Atlas made kitchen wares, glass plates, dishes.(some say 1923).
So that is where some get the 1924 date. They have a hazel platter and list it as being available beginning in 1924. True. But what about the milk jug being produced in 1912, right after the merger of Hazel and Atlas,  what did it have for a logo?
Obviously Hazel atlas made milk jugs, so what was the logo then?

So you see it gets tricker dating by logo unless something is found showing a logo style change for different years. Like company documents. That would be great.

That is the way it goes with industrial glass.Sometimes no logo is on the glass at all. They did not make these mass produced jars for looks and date them like fine china.
It usually takes a few more hours of googling and then it's a guess usually.
Reference books are not geared to throw away items like cream jars and I have yet to find a reference book on glass that was completely accurate.
As the OP has found out.

What might be a bit more definitive than trying to date it off a logo nobody agrees on, would be to find some written documentation showing what color glass was produced in what year. That might work. For instance Platonite glass was produced starting in 1936. Now if clear(or flint) and Opal were both made from 1908 to 1962 in this style jar, the color type would not help in dating obviously. But we seem to have got lucky.  Catalogs for a national distributer were found for several years in a row showing this style jar was ONLY offered for sale in opal(meaning white) after 1917.

I would say that is the best proof yet that 1917 would be the latest year the jar would be made in clear.Patent dates can vary widely from production dates. A 1917 catalog date from a national wholesaler of jars would seem to be harder evidence, as I doubt the company produced these jars in clear and then did not want to sell them.
If anybody has the right date, it's the wholesaler trying to unload the things.
Short of a Hazel Atlas catalog, a wholesaler catalog is as good as it gets.

But if you prefer, call it 1920, or 1923, or 1924. It's still too old.
So back to the drawing board anonymous, we need documentation this style jar was sold in clear around the mid 30's.
More scientific googling needed.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 24, 2012, 11:53:27 AM
It is still too old a jar for the AE flight in 1937.

Not bothering to answer your questioning of the not-earlier-than 1924 date, who set a date for the maximum age of a jar Earhart had with her?  You?  Earhart cannot have something with her that was first made after 1937 (just as the bottles made in 1933 cannot have come from the 1929 shipwreck), but if, by any chance, Amelia did use the product that was in the jar we have no information about how long she may have had that jar.  If it was Freckle Cream I imagine that "a little dab'll do ya." I had a bottle of seasickness medication (meclazine hydrochloride tablets) that I took with me on expeditions over a period of 12 years - same bottle.  I've been using the same contact lens case for at least 30 years.  My wife has a container of scented talcum powder that she's had for at least 25 years.  I'm sure others could cite similar examples.
You're knocking down a strawman of your own creation.  Maybe this is the sort of thing Mr. Anonymous Poster was referring to as a very poor application of the scientific method.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 24, 2012, 11:59:14 AM
Well Ric, if the wholsaler catalog is correct the jar would be 20 years old if Amelia was carrying it with her. Yes, it's possible she used small dabs. :)
Or maybe she carried a good luck charm in it, who knows.
But a 1917 jar on a 1937 flight is not real hard evidence in my opinion.
Of course, to each his own opinion.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joshua Chaires on September 24, 2012, 02:59:49 PM
After studying the Freckle Cream jar the dimensions and look of the jar are consitant with the freckle cream jars manufactured of that time period.  My only question is the color is different from the one recovered from the seven site as compared to an original version. Do you guys believe Amelia and Fred could off burned the jar on a camp fire thus discoloring it and than using it as a cutting tool?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 24, 2012, 03:44:42 PM
Well Ric, if the wholsaler catalog is correct the jar would be 20 years old if Amelia was carrying it with her. Yes, it's possible she used small dabs. :)
Or maybe she carried a good luck charm in it, who knows.
But a 1917 jar on a 1937 flight is not real hard evidence in my opinion.
Of course, to each his own opinion.

Is the wholesaler catalog an exhaustive source such that we can know from it that there are no other possibilities?  I find that source interesting, but the conclusion to be a bit of a stretch.

Maybe she did use small dabs - I just threw out some old cologne the other day that was given me for high-school graduation several decades ago and tired of seeing the old thing that I'd never managed to use up.  It sat there for years out of a certain fondness... some of us people are most peculiar about little things like that: had it had a more useful shape / open mouth I might have used it to store doo-dads, or for transporting shampoo or something like I do with other old, re-used containers now and then...

The jar is of course not real hard evidence - but it is indirect evidence of something, and it is something in-hand that can serve as a 'marker' consider where it was found, etc.

Yes, we may each have our own opinions, of course.

No Jeff I dont think it's an exhaustive search. I have been exhausted searching hours but still haven't found what I am looking for, which is an actual Hazel Atlas catalog series for several years. I think I know where one is at, the Cornings glass museum I believe in Indiana, they seem to have a nice library. There is also one I believe in Santa Barbara. So if I was a researcher I know a couple of places that might have one or more.
Sometimes you can't get everything though given time and money constraints, so right now the National Druggist Wholesaler catalog is the best that can be found to date the artifact. Credit for that goes to Alan Harris who put some time searching for that one. I did find a hazel atlas book series on ointment jars, but it's not a master catalog. Per the books, by the 1924 at least, they were not listing any ointment pots but white. But I don't have a 1917 book to match the Wholesaler catalog.

I think a huge wholesaler should have correct information, along with the books I have on seen on Hazel Atlas. If it was a one year catalog, I might discount it as a temporary shortage of Clear glass. Several years in a row stating "available only in opal" probably means the artifact is probably WWI era glass.
 
BTW on the issue of trademark logos, a lot of jars that are Hazel don't have the HA trademark. I have the same "freckle cream" jar in white as well, with no logo at all. It has the companies name and is mid 1930's based on research I did on the the cream company. It is called vanishing cream. It could be Amelia had vanishing cream. (bad joke but true), but shows that the issue of trademark HA logos was sometimes applied, sometimes it was not. Again industrial glass is a different animal than dinner plates.

I also have another marked Hazel atlas cream jar, in a different shape, that is clear that is around 1912. So yet more confirmation that Hazel Atlas like everyone else was changing to white glass for creams.(white glass which shouldnt be confused with milk glass). By mid 1930's Ponds and Noxema and every ad found on ebay seems to be white or blue glass.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on September 24, 2012, 03:50:21 PM
Maybe she did use small dabs - I just threw out some old cologne the other day that was given me for high-school graduation several decades ago and tired of seeing the old thing that I'd never managed to use up. 
Yes, but of all the things you could have chosen to take with you on an around the world flight, you didn't choose your cologne bottle because you weren't using it. IF Earhart did choose to bring freckle cream with her an obvious conclusion is that she did use it regularly so the contents of the jar probably did not last many, many years.

gl
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 24, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
After studying the Freckle Cream jar the dimensions and look of the jar are consitant with the freckle cream jars manufactured of that time period.  My only question is the color is different from the one recovered from the seven site as compared to an original version. Do you guys believe Amelia and Fred could off burned the jar on a camp fire thus discoloring it and than using it as a cutting tool?
a campfire would not burn hot enough to change the elemental chemicals to clear. It would have to melt, and still would be white.
So little doubt it was/is a clear jar, or flint if you will,  not a white jar changed to clear through heat or exposure.
It may be discolored and probably is, but it started it's life as a clear jar. But keep this in mind, I have heard a lot of theories about AE using it to boil water. NO WAY. These are tiny jars when seen in person, like 2 ounces. It wouldn't be worth the effort to boil anything in them.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on September 24, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
Well Ric, if the wholsaler catalog is correct the jar would be 20 years old if Amelia was carrying it with her. Yes, it's possible she used small dabs. :)
Or maybe she carried a good luck charm in it, who knows.
But a 1917 jar on a 1937 flight is not real hard evidence in my opinion.
Of course, to each his own opinion.
I posted this before:
""Consistent with"  actually means "not inconsistent with". The only things that would be "inconsistent with" Earhart on the island would be a 1938 dime (or other objects with a date after 1937) or an object too large to fit in the plane. Anything else can be described as "consistent with" the TIGHAR theory. Here is an example. Let's say on the next expedition they find an old Roman coin at the seven site. Look at the requirements and you will see that this Roman coin is "consistent with" Earhart being on the island since it is not dated after 1937 and it is small enough to fit in the plane. The explanation is that Earhart could have carried it as a "good luck coin." Is there any evidence that Earhart ever owned a Roman coin, no, but that doesn't mean that she didn't, she could have. Then the skeptics will be challenged to provide evidence that Earhart never had a Roman coin and, of course, there is no such evidence so TIGHAR will continue to claim that the Roman coin supports their hypothesis."

Now just substitute "freckle cream jar" for "Roman coin," that is the sum of the TIGHAR position.

In fact, it is worse than that. With a "Roman coin" you at least know what you have, you have a "Roman coin," but with the glass jar you have no proof that it ever held "freckle cream," it could have held many kinds of unguents.


gl
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 24, 2012, 06:52:47 PM
Googling's great and I guess we all do it - but we can only get from it what someone else has bothered to load into the net when we depend on it as a source.

- I'm just not sure we can get it by - "...More scientific googling"

- Unless 'scientific googling' means more work with folks who are expert in this area and who may have more information than Google can yield.

How true.  I would go further and say that in general we also have no real idea that what someone has "bothered to load" is even correct.  The frequent garbage on Wikipedia being a prime example.  Which is why it seems IMO somewhat ironic that The Anonymous Poster takes such a firm, even pejorative, stance based on 2 hours of Googling.

As an example we have the issue of first use of the "H over A" logo on Hazel-Atlas glassware.  As posted some time ago (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18808.html#msg18808), we have the principal HA collectors' group saying the "early 1900's", and another web source saying "fruit jars dating to around 1910".  These presumably could be considered "experts" in the sense that they have spent much more time in the glassware field than most of us posting here, of course including myself.

Then we have people relying on the registered trademark from 1924, which is parroted on sites all over the web.  But Dave Burrell is certainly correct that even that may not be a hard data point relevant to an industrial jar.  To amplify what he is saying I will offer first another Google result (http://voices.yahoo.com/the-history-hazel-atlas-glass-company-2866572.html), lol, but one which I think is quite well agreed among HA experts:

Quote
After the 1902 merger, Hazel Atlas continued their production of fruit jars and commercial food storage containers, as they had for many years prior. However, fierce competition in the fruit jar industry and a desire to expand the business, led the company to seek out other lines of production. This expansion had its beginnings in the early 1920s when Hazel Atlas would first produce, something that up until that time had primarily been relegated to the pottery and porcelain industry; A dinner ware line for the average homemaker. Not a line of elegance or superiority, not a line of notable decoration and style to appeal to the wealthy, rather a simple and plain line that the common housewife could purchase inexpensively and use everyday. This concept began in 1923 when Hazel Atlas designed and began production of what we know today as the Ovide pattern.
That year Hazel Atlas would be the first glass house in America to produce for widespread use, a colored transparent dinnerware, which today we refer to as Depression Glass. The Ovide pattern, which was originally produced only in green, would become the testing ground for the large majority of the Hazel Atlas dinnerware lines over the next 30 years.
Enjoying mild success from this first venture into dinnerware, other companies took note and began producing their own lines of dinnerware as well, only expanding the idea and adding in intricate patterns.
[Emphasis added]

Now, with that 1923 event of dinnerware introduction in mind, consider the exact wording of the actual 1924 Trademark Application (http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn71191704&docId=ORC20051024235142):

Quote
Hazel-Atlas Glass Company . . . has adopted and used the trademark shown in the drawing . . . for GLASSWARE – NAMELY, TUMBLERS, DISHES AND GLASSES . . . The trademark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant's business since July 23, 1923 . . .
[Capitals in original]

Given: (1) the very specific language of what goods the TM application applied to; (2) the stated date of first use; and (3) the idea that other glassmakers soon began to compete with HA in this particular market; then it seems a reasonable inference that HA applied for the trademark specifically for the line of household dinnerware.  (In fact, from the language it would seem the HA mark was still not federally protected on any other sort of glassware –ointment jar– even after trademark registration.)  There could be several possible scenarios for HA's action, two of which are:

• HA created the "H over A" logo at the same time as the dinnerware line, and the first use of it, ever, was on the dinnerware.

• HA had used the mark earlier on fruit jars and industrial/commercial glassware prior to 1923, but did not feel the need for federal trademark registration until entering the competitive home-tableware market.  Note that per the law (http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp#_Toc275426680) "rights in a mark" are established based just on "use of the mark in commerce, without a registration".

I would submit that the evidence is not there to confirm either of these scenarios, although as stated above there is anecdotal "Google" evidence that the latter is more likely.  In summary, we really don't know about the mark/logo usage with respect to HA products such as the small ointment jar.  Likely we never will unless we find some actual HA company records.

Getting back to Jeff's post, Googling is useful when it leads us to true expertise.  That is indirectly the case here.  IMO the only information in Ric's post transmitting the Anonymous Poster that is both not previously known and relevant/useful is that which Ric was able to add after consulting with an expert, such as the unreliability of one book source, and as to glass color. 

The other case in which Googling can be useful is when it reveals copies of actual primary or contemporary documents.  Such as the Trademark Application quoted above.  Another example is the advertisements we have found that appeared in copies of the National Druggist.  (Dave, I have to make a minor correction:  that is a trade publication containing ads directly placed by the Hazel-Atlas Co. itself, not just a wholesaler.)  These clearly show that HA offered ointment jars in clear glass up till 1916 and offered them only in white ("opal") for a span of years from 1918 into the 1920's.  We have not formally "completed" that mission of searching National Druggist and similar publications all the way into the 30's, because so far those issues are not found online and no one has traveled to a library for hard copies.

To close this ridiculously long post, I have to admit to a certain amount of confusion as to why this detailed talk about the jar has come up again.  I understood Ric's Post #267 (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg19595.html#msg19595) to say that the provenance of the jar, and the nature of its contents, are of small importance; the points being that the jar was somehow there for a castaway to find/use, and what the castaway then did with it.  Maybe I am not "getting it", wouldn't be the first time.   :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 24, 2012, 07:07:32 PM
IF Earhart did choose to bring freckle cream with her an obvious conclusion is that she did use it regularly so the contents of the jar probably did not last many, many years.

Not necessarily.  I have a bottle of sunscreen that I rarely use here in Delaware but I've brought it along on several expeditions. I can easily see AE having only occasional use for freckle cream but definitely wanting to have it for a trip around the world in the tropics.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 24, 2012, 07:19:19 PM
I understood Ric's Post #267 (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg19595.html#msg19595) to say that the provenance of the jar, and the nature of its contents, are of small importance; the points being that the jar was somehow there for a castaway to find/use, and what the castaway then did with it.  Maybe I am not "getting it", wouldn't be the first time.   :)

To repeat myself:
"• The jar was found at a site where we can be quite sure a castaway, probably female, died prior to 1940.
• The jar was broken, almost certainly intentionally. (The glass is quite thick. Just dropping the jar on the coral rubble would not be sufficient to shatter it.  There is damage to the lip of the jar that suggests it was broken by hammering - possibly to get the lid off.)
• One piece of the broken jar was apparently used to cut up a turtle some distance from where the jar was broken.
• All of the above strongly suggests that the jar is associated with the castaway.
• Other broken glass containers found in the same area also suggest castaway-association, are of American manufacture in the early 1930s, and are of small (3 ounce) size.  One has been conclusively matched to Campana Italian Balm, a popular hand lotion made in Batavia, IL marketed to American women in the 1930s."

I'll add that whether the jar contained freckle cream, vanishing cream, or whipping cream, the design of the jar strongly suggests that it was marketed primarily to women.  Hence, it joins other artifacts found in the same context which are gender-specific to females, i.e. the mirror and cosmetic presumably from a compact, the Campana Italian Balm bottle, and the part of a woman's shoe found by Gallagher.  Add to that the modern re-evaluation of the bone measurements that the skeleton was probably that of a white female of Earhart's height and you get a preponderance of evidence that speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on September 26, 2012, 08:56:37 PM
This "Topic" has been split.  Please continue your comments about what Ms Earhart and Fred Noonan left behind HERE (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,967.0.html), and resume the conversation of the Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream jar on this thread.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 26, 2012, 10:07:06 PM
Hello All,

This is my first post to the Amelia Earhart Search Forum.  I should introduce myself briefly by saying I've been a member of the Earhart Project Advisory Committee for more than 2 years.

http://tighar.org/wiki/Earhart_Project_Advisory_Committee

In between a demanding work and travel schedule, I try to help Ric, Tom King, TIGHAR and the whole team to examine and interpret the strands of evidence gained by TIGHAR's work on Nikumaroro. My specialty has been interpreting glass artifacts. I've been known to venture an opinion on just about anything.  Recent posts on the jar seem to require additional detail I may be able to help provide.  I will try to fill in some gaps and respond to objections and queries as best I can. What I will say is, of course, subject to modification by those more expert than myself, but I'd like to begin with the quotations below from August 19, 2012.


Well I suggested that perhaps it was once more opaque and Ric said he talked with collectors who said that Milk glass would not turn clear. Never mentioned there were other milk glass examples that were practically clear to begin with. Case closed, and the reason we have all been looking for clear glass. Have we all been looking for a clear jar that never existed? Maybe.

- We have evidence we will be presenting, based on elemental analysis, that suggests the jar is not clear.  Obviously, it's not white either.  We will be presenting this information in an upcoming report.

So it appears this jar was either a very early pre WWI example or Ric's advice from collectors was incorrect, and it indeed faded to clear (maybe after being mostly clear to begin with). In fact one chemist on another article suggested just that. That milk glass made of tin and antimony would probably change color if heated in a fire pit.

- I've personally inspected the jar. I see no signs of heat damage. It has a consistency of appearance that suggest to me it has not been heated, in my opinion. 

You should provide more evidence of your claim the jar could not have been made after World War I. The only thing a 1918 trade journal ad with opal jars proves is the jar was made in 1918. Any one-year source has little meaning for any other year.

I don't know. I am not a chemist, nor have I conducted heat tests on milk glass.
But I think it should have been done.

- We thought about heating some milk glass samples but have not yet done so. Other lab-based experiments that appeared to be more revealing in prospect took precedence.  You are welcome to conduct these experiments if you'd like to assist us.

I think that is the only option left if this is to be a relevant artifact dated to the right period. Either it was weak milk glass that turned clear and could have been Earharts, or it was clear glass all along, and has no connection with Earhart as the bottle would be too old.

- The older it is, the lower the odds the castaway brought the jar, but unless the jar was made after spring 1940, those odds never reach zero. We have some interesting lab results we think may give us a better idea of the jar's production date range.  We will be presenting this information in an upcoming report.

I do find these announcements made to the press too early to be concerning. For instance when it was first found, all newspaper articles said Dr.Berrys was the ONLY glass found that matched this jar. The implications was there. This was a Dr. Berrys. There was no mention of 6 other products. I didn't find that on any press release by any news agencies. I found that information here and by doing some quick googling in a week.

-  I asked Randy Conrad to post the other products here for you to read about.  I researched and found several products the jar may have contained in addition to Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment.  We informed Discovery of these products prior to their printing their first story on the freckle ointment connection. They chose not to mention them.  Since all of these products were women's cosmetic products, they probably felt they were reporting what was most newsworthy about the story, which was the possible freckle ointment connection.  They had every right to do this.  TIGHAR does not control what media outlets say. TIGHAR reports accurately what it knows usually very soon after it knows something. The best source for TIGHAR information is nearly always this website.


As late as last month, newspaper reports said that not only did this product match Dr.Berrys', it was the ONLY item found that contained mercury.
Again not true. I brought up Velvetine which was a skin lightener, and skin lighteners contained mercury. Same jar style, shape and size and also opaque.

- This claim is large and could use some substantiation. Had you said this on EPAC it would have generated discussion for a week or more. Do you have a photo of the ad in question?

Yet There is Breaking news, right now on this site, from Mr.Cerniglia that Dr.Berrys was the ONLY product that used this jar and contained Mercury. NOT TRUE!  I am not sure if the theory is if it's repeated long enough it makes it true. How many times has he told this to some gullible reporter?

- I said it was the only product that we know contained mercury that was also sold in the same style jar.  If the media reported otherwise, it was not what I stated, but I believe they quoted me exactly in this instance. Your statement above appears to distort what the media stated by conflating two separate stories into one.  Ric asked me to prepare a summary of what we had learned recently, and I complied with his request.

How many news stories have been done stating the same.
So the Mr C. is to this day putting out incorrect information in press releases and interviews possibly. Not good.

- See above. I stand behind my statements.


In the beginning of this thread it was suggested that the example be tested for mercury on any residue remaining. Ric said there was no residue to test for mercury.
So there is no residue, but finally 2 years later the glass is tested for mercury? If there is no residue, how can the glass itself show mercury?

A scientist, Greg George from Sherry Labs in Oklahoma, read the story about the freckle ointment and stated in a comment thread on the Discovery website that further testing we had neither considered nor known was possible could be conducted.  I contacted Greg, and the result is what you have heard.  You'll be hearing much more soon.  We've collected much new information, thanks to Greg.  This is the scientific method, slow, laborious and deliberative, but it works.  We as TIGHAR researchers don't claim to know everything when we release information.  You're watching the process unfold and, we hope, assisting us as well.

Glass is inert, and I do not believe it absorbs the surrounding elements.

- Greg informed us, in some cases, it does absorb some surrounding elements.  More later.

But it took all this time to test it?
And it was tested by a guy who just happened to hear the story and took it upon himself to do some testing?

- I know it may be a surprise to you, but this really happened. 

I understand budget constraints, but seems like the artifact evidence is being analyzed haphazardly, if at all, some by volunteers who happen to read a news story. Some by Tighar forum members.

- We're not NASA or the CIA. What you stated is true, except for the haphazard part. We're dedicated people doing the best we can.

I think all the science should be done professionally, and an exhaustive search done for any clear bottles

- Do you believe we're not trying?

, also testing to find whether an opaque bottle heated to near red changes color(not just relying on the word of a glass collector), and finally any other known examples shared with the public as well.
Like I said, I understand budget constraints, this is being done on a shoestring compared to the navy sponsoring Dr.Ballard,  but It took Joe.C two years to find the above ad from National Druggist in 1921 that this jar was produced in opaque only?

- Incorrect. I found that National Druggist ad in early 2011, a few days after spotting the freckle ointment as a possible match to the jar, and I then shared it with EPAC.  TIGHAR shares its most relevant findings from EPAC, but we couldn't possibly share every discussion, observation or research work we generate. The EPAC, upon seeing the ads, came to a somewhat different conclusion than you did concerning this ad.

I have been looking at jars for a week and found these same references in Google books.
So not to discredit Mr.Cerniglias work, he is probably working for nothing, but a lot of press releases were made that this was the only bottle found that matched this shape, now it's released to the public, Dr.Berrys was the only bottle found of this shape that had mercury.
It seems like folks wanted to believe something and released it as news, because neither of those press releases were exactly correct.
Now, like the movie JFK, the internet stories have been done with an incorrect version of the truth. you can't take it back. There are a lot of people out there who think that absolutely a mercury containing freckle cream from Dr.Berrys has been found with an exact bottle that matched the time of the flight.
Not proven. Do the science right, take your time, then do the press release.

- I believe this is precisely what we are trying to do.

Just my opinion and probably not a popular one, so shoot away.
I still believe Gardner is it based on the radio transmits, but this glass stuff was put out way too early before testing and exhaustive archive research and it creates a perception that may be invalid, and once that perception is put out there by NBC, CNN, Discovery, its tough to modify it.
Otherwise, if new information does come up, it looks like Tighar wasnt professional or thorough enough and raises credibility doubts.

- If we waited until we had perfect knowledge, the public would lose interest and TIGHAR's mission would weaken and wane. True, a balance must be found between anxiously reporting too soon and waiting too long. TIGHAR is not supported by the government or by foundations but by people like you and me. I think it strikes the right balance.

(Not from me I hasten to add, but there are rumblings out there even Ric  and Tighar members are keenly aware of).

- I hope I've responded to some of the rumblings.  I agree you are probably not the only individual who has felt or voiced these concerns.  I hope that this message might provide some alternative points of view for you to consider.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on September 26, 2012, 10:35:09 PM
Hello All,

This is my first post to the Amelia Earhart Search Forum.  I should introduce myself briefly by saying I've been a member of the Earhart Project Advisory Committee for more than 2 years.

http://tighar.org/wiki/Earhart_Project_Advisory_Committee

I'm pretty sure that Alan Caldwell is no longer an editor of the Wiki as stated at the above link.

gl

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on September 26, 2012, 10:43:49 PM
I'm pretty sure that Alan Caldwell is no longer an editor of the Wiki as stated at the above link.

I created a lot of people as editors when I set up the wiki, hoping that they would, in fact, contribute to it.

Alan still has an account with editing privileges.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on September 26, 2012, 11:05:33 PM
I'm pretty sure that Alan Caldwell is no longer an editor of the Wiki as stated at the above link.

I created a lot of people as editors when I set up the wiki, hoping that they would, in fact, contribute to it.

Alan still has an account with editing privileges.


Well then, just don't expect him to do much editing, see below from the Texas State Bar (http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Advanced_Search&template=/Customsource/MemberDirectory/MemberDirectoryDetail.cfm&ContactID=162288).

---------------------------------------------------------


photo of Lawyer
Mr. Alan L. 'Al' Caldwell

    Bar Card Number: 03614800
    Work Address: 108 Pheasant Trail

    Bastrop, TX 78602
    Work Phone Number: 512-321-8060
    Primary Practice Location: Bastrop , Texas

Current Member Status
    Deceased
-------------------------------------------------------


gl
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 27, 2012, 02:23:04 AM
Just to address a couple of things that immediately caught attention:

You should provide more evidence of your claim the jar could not have been made after World War I. The only thing a 1918 trade journal ad with opal jars proves is the jar was made in 1918. Any one-year source has little meaning for any other year.

To be more accurate, we have a continuous 5-year series of ads in that trade journal, from 1918 to 1922, that state "Ointment Pots . . . in Opal Glass Only".  In 1917 that journal had no Hazel-Atlas ad.  In 1916 and earlier, by spot checks, the ad says "Opal, Flint, and Amber Glass".

Additional ads for 1923 and later have not been examined to date because copyright restrictions apparently prohibit posting the full-text journal contents from those later years.  This can be approached both by searching for other sources not so restricted and/or by visiting libraries to view paper originals.  We are aware of several other journals and publications that carried Hazel-Atlas ads.

The above addresses only the specific data with which I have personally been involved.  I believe Dave Burrell may have additional information relating to production of opal and clear glass in the years between WW1 and 1935.

Quote
The older it is, the lower the odds the castaway brought the jar, but unless the jar was made after spring 1940, those odds never reach zero.

Could you please clarify the "spring 1940" as opposed to May 1937?  I assume that is intended to include the widest possible range of arrival times for the skeleton reported to Gallagher (even though the bones appeared several years old when discovered)?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 05:15:03 AM
To be more accurate, we have a continuous 5-year series of ads in that trade journal, from 1918 to 1922, that state "Ointment Pots . . . in Opal Glass Only".  In 1917 that journal had no Hazel-Atlas ad.  In 1916 and earlier, by spot checks, the ad says "Opal, Flint, and Amber Glass".
Alan, I appreciate the research. I can find 3 ads that have been attached from prior posts in this thread. Two of them, which you cited, are on this page

http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.180.html

One of the ads, which has a file name stating it is from 1916, does not picture our ointment jar. A narrow interpretation of this particular ad might suggest they were referring only to those jars pictured, not to our ointment jar style. The other ad in this set is from 1918.

There are other ads mentioned, but not attached. For the sake of completeness, I think it would be useful that documents be attached. You're asking many people to take your word in citing these others. Even so, I'm certainly willing to believe you saw these, since I saw a number of these myself and remarked upon them to the EPAC in early 2011.

There is another ad from December 1921 that Randy Conrad found.  This jar is on this page:

http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.165.html

As of now, to the best of my knowledge from what I can see digging back into this thread, there are two verified drawings in ads from National Druggist that match the artifact jar in style.  One is from 1918.  The other is from 1921.

Bill Lockhart, who is an archaeologist with a specialty in 20th Century bottles, said yesterday to the EPAC: "Any one-year source has little meaning for any other year -- and possibly not even for all of that year." I hope he will not mind me quoting him in this instance.

It would be safe to say, I think, that we have all found the process of identifying exactly what Hazel-Atlas was doing with glass in specific periods of the Twentieth Century to be a fairly daunting exercise.

By applying this reasoning from Bill, we can say for certain that Hazel-Atlas, for all or perhaps part of these 2 discrete years, was offering the jar in opal (white) glass only. I certainly agree white glass was popular.  In two years of searching, I've been able to find only one example of the jar in clear transparent glass. After comparing this clear example with the artifact jar, the glass from the clear jar does not seem a good visual match to the glass in the artifact jar. We're still finishing up analyzing our lab work on the artifact jar.  We have the complete elemental breakdown of the glass that may tell us more.

The above addresses only the specific data with which I have personally been involved.  I believe Dave Burrell may have additional information relating to production of opal and clear glass in the years between WW1 and 1935.

I haven't seen this information. Perhaps I missed it. I would be interested in any information anyone has relating to these production dates that specifically addresses what type of glass was offered by Hazel-Atlas in these years 1922 to 1937. I have located and printed all of the Sears Catalog jars in a binder and have found this style of jar was not offered in the catalog after spring 1933.

Additional ads for 1923 and later have not been examined to date because copyright restrictions apparently prohibit posting the full-text journal contents from those later years.  This can be approached both by searching for other sources not so restricted and/or by visiting libraries to view paper originals.  We are aware of several other journals and publications that carried Hazel-Atlas ads.

That was my understanding as well. I have not had the time either to find and visit a library that would have these. I will be in Corning, New York this weekend and may be able to check the glass museum library there.



Could you please clarify the "spring 1940" as opposed to May 1937?  I assume that is intended to include the widest possible range of arrival times for the skeleton reported to Gallagher (even though the bones appeared several years old when discovered)?


The thirteen human bones, including a human skull, were discovered on the island in spring 1940.  A good chronology of this event is here:

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Bones_Chronology.html

You are correct that in the interest of objectivity I provided the 1940 date to include the widest possible times for the castaway's presence.

I should probably try to be concise in my posts, but we have a lot of research from many different people, both here and on the EPAC. By pooling our efforts, we might be able to discover some facts we did not know before. Again, I appreciate the effort of you and the others. We're all on the same team here. Let's work together.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on September 27, 2012, 06:17:03 AM
Mr. Alan L. 'Al' Caldwell
Current Member Status
    Deceased

May he rest in peace.  He was a great contributor. 

I don't see any traffic in the EPAC group about his death.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on September 27, 2012, 07:43:14 AM

We're still finishing up analyzing our lab work on the artifact jar.  We have the complete elemental breakdown of the glass that may tell us more.

Joe, I would be very interested if that analysis will tell us whether there is Selenium, Manganese or Tin Oxide in the elemental breakdown.  I believe that is the "Holy Grail" as to dating the jar.  Would you be revealing that anytime soon?  Thx
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 27, 2012, 08:24:14 AM
I have to say I enjoyed Joe Cerniglia's rare posts here for reasons of technical thought and reasoned application, fairness and balance of approaches to research and publicity (realities for an outfit like ours) and spirit of common purpose.  Suddenly I realize he's an example of one who's labored a great deal more than we tend to realize because he doesn't wade into this forum fray so much.  In fact his first two posts seem to have only just appeared.

Joe is one of our most dogged and productive researchers.  He was hesitant to join the forum fray, in part because of the hostility that sometimes mars these otherwise civil discussions, but also because of the time it takes.  I'm delighted that Joe has taken the field.  Thanks Joe.
I've attached a photo of Joe and a friend at last year's Amelia Earhart Festival in Atchison, KS.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 08:29:28 AM
Bob,

Thanks for your interest.  Greg George, a research chemist who works for a reputable aerospace engineering lab, has graciously volunteered to interpret our results free of charge and out of courtesy and regard for him and some others who are helping out I don't wish to release any information of that sort before he and they have had ample opportunity to complete their work and subject it to vetting from the EPAC.

I would caution, however, that while interesting results can often be obtained from this type of glass analysis, the Holy Grail that admits no room for debate - in any aspect of this Project - is very difficult to obtain. Having said this, the analysis is still, in my opinion, well worth doing. 

Rest assured, everything will be made available as soon as we feel confident we have a better grasp of what we got, probably in a few weeks. We need to avoid any perception of haphazardness.

(Thanks for the encomium, Ric.)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on September 27, 2012, 09:17:14 AM
Many thanks Joe.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 27, 2012, 02:36:26 PM
Bob,

Thanks for your interest.  Greg George, a research chemist who works for a reputable aerospace engineering lab, has graciously volunteered to interpret our results free of charge and out of courtesy and regard for him and some others who are helping out I don't wish to release any information of that sort before he and they have had ample opportunity to complete their work and subject it to vetting from the EPAC.

I would caution, however, that while interesting results can often be obtained from this type of glass analysis, the Holy Grail that admits no room for debate - in any aspect of this Project - is very difficult to obtain. Having said this, the analysis is still, in my opinion, well worth doing. 

Rest assured, everything will be made available as soon as we feel confident we have a better grasp of what we got, probably in a few weeks. We need to avoid any perception of haphazardness.

(Thanks for the encomium, Ric.)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Joe, isn't this the same Chemist that has already evaluated the artifact back in late July?
I remember it being tested for mercury, a facebook page of yours saying it was being tested around the last week of July, and then some mercury results coming in.
Does that sound about right to you?
If it's a different guy, sorry, just thought this testing was already done.
Not asking for specifics of his work, just is this the same man, performing additional testing?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 04:29:51 PM
The situation with the testing and the chronology of the testing is understandably confusing, and I'm happy to have the chance to help explain what has been going on. As the media reported it, the new round of testing was prompted by Greg George for the reasons I stated.  This was a true statement, and was not meant to imply that Greg personally did this lab work.  He did not, and I indicated this in my summary at the time.  Instead, TIGHAR contracted with Evans Analytical Group for this work. Evans was most helpful to us as in its past work with the Campana Italian Balm bottle. Greg was and is providing outstanding service to TIGHAR in the interpretation of the results of this work and for the experimental design as well.

Even with all of this excellent support both in and outside the lab, designing the most effective tests for extracting and analyzing surface material from a decades-old jar that has been sitting on an equatorial island for decades is challenging and a story unto itself.  I know of no textbooks for how to do this with certainty. I won't tire you with the details of this here, but I can tell you it was a multi-stage process of trial and error that we had to adapt to the situations as we went along. In experiments of this nature, choices must be made at every step of the way.  The shape of the glass, the need for adequate controls, the need to conserve the piece properly while still extracting data from it - all these entered into the equation. One needs to know before the experiment is even started how one is going to interpret every contingency, and be prepared for possible disappointment at every moment.  Getting the media to report in this kind of detail is at this stage an unreasonable expectation.  I hope to share more detail to satisfy whatever curiosity that may exist about these experiments. I want to do that as soon as I can review everything we think we have learned. 

I will add that we have additional experiments to run as controls on our work to try to ensure that we are observing what we think we're observing, and even to attempt to disprove what we think we're observing, if we can accomplish this.  Whichever way these experiments go, we will keep everyone informed.

We would like when we are finished to try to satisfy the demands and questions posed by this article I will pass along to you and the group.

http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm

I would be most grateful if when this process of testing the jar is fully complete you and the rest could let us know if we met the test posed therein, or not. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 27, 2012, 04:56:09 PM

Alan, I appreciate the research. I can find 3 ads that have been attached from prior posts in this thread . . . There are other ads mentioned, but not attached. For the sake of completeness, I think it would be useful that documents be attached. You're asking many people to take your word in citing these others. Even so, I'm certainly willing to believe you saw these, since I saw a number of these myself and remarked upon them to the EPAC in early 2011.  There is another ad from December 1921 that Randy Conrad found . . . As of now, to the best of my knowledge from what I can see digging back into this thread, there are two verified drawings in ads from National Druggist that match the artifact jar in style.  One is from 1918.  The other is from 1921 . . . By applying this reasoning from Bill, we can say for certain that Hazel-Atlas, for all or perhaps part of these 2 discrete years, was offering the jar in opal (white) glass only.
Joe, in my post you referenced (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18376.html#msg18376), I was starting from Randy's post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.165.html) showing the 1921 ad and working backward, looking for the year that glass production changed from "Opal, Flint, and Amber" to "Opal Glass Only".  In my post I stated that "HA's ads for 1920, 1919, and 1918 are identical to the one Randy showed for 1921".  Literally identical, and it seemed silly to show multiple images of exactly the same thing.  I have since looked at 1922 also, and it is again the identical ad.  Hence my statement yesterday that there is a continuous series of the same "Opal Glass Only" ads for each year from 1918 to 1922 in The National Druggist.  I don't quite see how posting the same picture 5 times would provide convincing verification, so I respectfully suggest instead that those who wish to verify for themselves may go to the web site where I saw them (http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000053564).  Likewise for pre-1917, identical ads ran for several years and I imaged 1916 as a representative example.

Quote
Even so, I'm certainly willing to believe you saw these, since I saw a number of these myself and remarked upon them to the EPAC in early 2011 . . .

By pooling our efforts, we might be able to discover some facts we did not know before.
That's very interesting, would you care to share your findings with us as to what years they covered and whether they supplement, or possibly contradict, what has surfaced here in the forum so far?

Quote
One of the ads, which has a file name stating it is from 1916, does not picture our ointment jar. A narrow interpretation of this particular ad might suggest they were referring only to those jars pictured, not to our ointment jar style.
I understand what you're saying, however –and speaking for myself only– I find such a narrow interpretation much less plausible than that Hazel-Atlas was generally advertising their entire line of "Ointment Pots, Cold Cream Jars, and Patch Boxes".  Had the pre-1917 ad been intended to refer specifically to the four jars shown, it would have given identifying numbers for each, instead of inviting readers to ask for the "Druggist's Catalog".  And a much more telling sign of the ad's "generality" is that the illustrations do not even show a Patch Box, yet such Boxes are specifically included in the main header line.  (I believe "Hazel–No. 2" in the other, post-1917 ad series is in fact a Patch Box.)

Quote
I have located and printed all of the Sears Catalog jars in a binder and have found this style of jar was not offered in the catalog after spring 1933.
Throughout this exercise I have had to keep reminding myself that it is not known or proven that the artifact jar in fact contained the specific Dr. Berry's product that has been postulated.  So for precision I suppose it best to say that Sears after 1933 was selling Dr. Berry's in a different style jar (see, e.g., the '36-'37 Fall/Winter Sears catalog page (http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015009227433;seq=697;size=150;view=image)) and, perhaps, sold no other product in Hazel-Atlas No. 1995 jars.  But Hazel-Atlas might well have still been producing that style.  I hasten to add that that does not in any way contradict your statement, I am just rehashing my own mental gyrations.   :)

Quote
I have not had the time either to find and visit a library that would have these.
I have in theory located a nearby source but, as luck would have it, those library collections are temporarily closed due to building renovations and relocation of materials.  Maybe someday.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 05:06:13 PM
By way of clarification, I forgot to add a few more details. 

The first phase of this new round began in July of 2012 to test for whether any surface mercury might be measured on the surface of the jar.  The most recent phase of testing, this month, tested the composition of the glass itself.  The final phase, ongoing, will be the controls I mentioned earlier. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 06:15:41 PM
Hi Alan,
I've gone through my files, digging through emails that are now nearly 2 years old. My research with The National Druggist for the particular ad showing Hazel #1995 comprised 1918 only. In reviewing my work, I see now the angle I was pursuing was to review ALL National Druggist ads I could find for Dr. C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment, not Hazel Atlas specifically. This particular ad, 1918, is the same one you found. Your list of Hazel Atlas ads that you have brought out today is far larger. I did not locate the website you found organizing them as they did, for as many years as they did. For this particular publication and this particular ad, you've exceeded the depth I was able to reach, and I thank you.

When we speak of the work "I" did on the EPAC, you must understand also that my work is only one link in a chain of unseen but considerable expertise and service by numerous people who constitute the EPAC. We evaluate all of it, but we know that we cannot see, find, or evaluate everything.  But it's a lot of data we evaluate, and not by any means for just this one thing.  I have literally thousands of messages from EPAC over the past 2 years.  I say this not to overwhelm but to give a sense of just how much research volume we have to sort when we go back and research these questions. 

Also, I will say as an aside that I never imagined how much more unwieldy it is to work with this format of messaging via Forum than it is for just simple, straightforward e-mail.  This is not the fault of ourselves or our moderators but of the technology itself.  You guys have a great deal more patience than I ever imagined!

I agree with - and concede to - your statements about the different scenarios for what the ads meant when they omitted showing Hazel 1995.  Your interpretation is well-considered.

We should be able to make a final determination of whether the glass from the jar is opal, flint, amber, or other. I have hints of the answer but won't tip my hand yet until the EPAC can evaluate. Those results could affect how the Hazel ads you found are interpreted.

Also, bear in mind, that when we speak of a "switch" from flint to opal, or opal to clear, we may not have all the facts.  Was it an irrevocable switch?  Could switches ever be reversed back?  What are the reasons?  The last thing I want is to be coy here, but we are, as you say, rehearsing these scenarios.

Let me add that we're not at this point dismissing any possibilities. When the report comes, however, it must, I think, suggest probabilities, to the best that we've been able to interpret them.

By the way, since we're both collecting ads in pursuit of the identity of 2-9-s-1, I thought you might enjoy one of the most interesting ones I've found (attached). 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 27, 2012, 08:08:59 PM
Hi Joe -

Um, please forgive me as I am the least scientific guy on this forum.  I find it difficult to keep up with all this stuff about the artifacts.  I'm trying to simply this whole jar thing.

So, once you have all the results of your tests, what will you have accomplished?  i.e. - will you be able to state definitively that Earhart was or was not on Gardner?  Or is your exercise merely to determine if the jar was possibly owned by Earhart?

Or, I guess, can you list the possible scenarios that may have occurred - depending on the results of your testing?











Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 27, 2012, 09:15:14 PM
Now there's the type of question a new Forum member likes.  None of this "Hello, how are you" stuff.  Just a good, straightforward "will you be able to state definitively that Earhart was or was not on Gardner."

Amelia Earhart herself was probably never asked such a tough question, but I'll try to answer it as straightly as I can.  I don't think either of the scenarios you list adequately describes the exercise.  We hope merely to advance understanding of this artifact, in relation to itself and its context with other artifacts, seeking only to explain. We hope for a result you will consider favorable to the Niku Hypothesis, but we can't mandate that you - or we, or I for that matter - will. I personally see nothing wrong with asking the question, was this Earhart's?  But I don't expect that kind of definition, and Tom King has stated why that type of definition isn't always the end goal:
---------
"...There are still all those little bits and pieces. And whether or not we ever “prove” the hypothesis to the satisfaction of every critic, it remains a fact that science is every bit as much about the collection, analysis, and application of “little bits and pieces” as it is about finding the big, obvious, indisputable and uncontroversial piece of data (like an airplane) that in one great flash proves the case.

Archaeological and historical research are applications of science that most particularly depend on the collection and interpretation of little bits and pieces -- whether they're little bits and pieces of hominid bone and crude tools in east Africa or little pieces of jars, bottles, and cosmetics from the Seven Site on Nikumaroro..."
----------------
For Tom's full post from April 16, 2012, see this link:
http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.com/2012/04/scientific-evidence-and-search-75.html

He says it far better than I can.  I have certain philosophical thoughts I can share at some point for why I think this matters, but I'll save that for another time.

By the way, the magnitude of your question flatters me beyond words. You're far too kind.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 28, 2012, 05:11:09 AM
Thank you Joe.

Say, as an aside - you're doing this part time - right?  Your main job is a politician?   ;) ;D :D ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 28, 2012, 09:56:47 AM
By way of clarification, I forgot to add a few more details. 
The first phase of this new round began in July of 2012 to test for whether any surface mercury might be measured on the surface of the jar.  The most recent phase of testing, this month, tested the composition of the glass itself.  The final phase, ongoing, will be the controls I mentioned earlier. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Joe, you and EPAC has had this jar for two years and yet the first round of chemical testing began in July 2012 correct? Isn't it true that in those first two years there were no scientific testing? In fact the only research was to skim ads in old Sears catalogs and googling other glass publications and/or Ebay trying to find a jar that looked similar, and researching basic Hazel Atlas company information? In those two years you admit you found a copy of the National Druggist Publication showing solid proof this style of jar was offered in White ONLY by 1918. Is that not correct? Other copies of the same publication indicates that white was the only color offered after 1918.
It is not totally conclusive evidence, but it is strong evidence that by the time of  Earharts flight, 1937, any bottles of this style jar would have probably been in white.
It is also true that you admit that most other style mid 1930's ointment jars you have found in your research are white. You have seen hundreds of mid 1930's ointment jars and they have been overwhelmingly white in color, correct? White was the popular color in the 1930's, and used almost exclusively in ointment jars, correct?
Therefore a clear ointment jar(like our artifact jar) was much less likely to have being made in the 1930's.
So why was that contradictory evidence you found, that did NOT support the Tighar theory, witheld? It was withheld from the media, general public, and Tighar members themselves. It is not as if you found several additional years when this jar was offered in clear. By your admission you had, and have no idea what DECADE this jar was made based on any publication in your possession, except that it was likely NOT mid 1930's based on advertisements from that period, and actual jars you viewed.

Yet despite all the evidence you had in your possession, arguing against a mid 1930's date, by the time of the early 2012 media blitz, this jar was called a 1930's jar by Tighar.

What is the point in EPAC if it is not to report the truth BEFORE the media is alerted? Is any one person responsible? "I just do my part, EPAC does their part, Tighar does their part".
It sounds to me this is an attempt to limit liability. If there is a question about an artifact's age and relevance, like the one being asked, the researcher can point to another person, or point at the media themselves!

The media did not invent the term "1930's jar", nor did they invent the term "Dr.Berrys Freckle cream", nor did the media go on every news outlet that would listen and proclaim that this jar fits what Amelia Earhart might have carried considering she had freckles.
The media had no idea of your or Epac's research, or lack thereof, they accepted the word of Tighar that this was a mid 1930's jar. Now if we would like to review Ric talking on soundbites about this mid 1930's jar, and how Amelia had freckles, I can provide that. I do not feel it necessary, as everyone heard the same thing. It went global, or viral as they say. Tighar called this a 1930's jar. Period. Long before Epac or yourself could prove that. True or not?

The reality is that you had no clue this was a 1930's cream jar, and TO THIS DAY do not know. In fact every clue you have, including the ND publications point to this jar being much older than the 1930's.
Is that true or not?


While I look forward to even more research, isn't it the truth this jar was promoted by Tighar, with advice from EPAC, as being something it was not?
Which is confirmed by your recent statement to Alan Harris.

I agree with - and concede to - your statements about the different scenarios for what the ads meant when they omitted showing Hazel 1995.  Your interpretation is well-considered.


So in closing on the issue of the media campaign conducted by Tighar, I find it pseudoscience to put it mildly and irresponsible is closer to the truth. This is history we are dealing with. The argument that it was done to keep public interest, before the public interest "wanes" you said, is not how a historical society should record history.History both oral and written should only be altered after the most careful eye and detail has been applied, and even then marked with words of caution unless multiple correlations are found to substantiate the claims.
History is not to be changed to fit a personal theory, and it certainly should not be changed with any variable being public interest and donations.
Yet on one hand you admit this jar's relevance was released too early, which is obvious, on the other you said EPAC and Tighar was being responsible in this release and content.
You cannot have it both ways. There was no fine line being walked here.
The information about this jar was released for one reason and one reason only, public "interest", and it was not just interest Tighar wanted from the Public. Read that how you will. It is the truth.

There is an ethical standard that must be applied, and if all the research you have by January 2012 did not substantiate, and in fact tends to disprove the connection to AE by dating, then that should have ALSO be presented to the media and not just in fine type at the end of a long memo to a producer.
To be safe, and avoid distorting the historical record, perhaps it should not have been released at all simply to generate publicity.

 Tighar is a historical society, not a UFO watchgroup. It has a responsibility to care for history, not create it, and certainly extreme caution has to be considered when commenting and shaping public opinion as possible new historical artifacts are unearthed, documents found, research performed. There can be no role in altering reseach, or in this case omitting known research just to fit a certain theory or bias for the sake of quote "keeing the public interested".
Meaning in semantics, keeping the public interested in donating.


You mention in one note that there must be a control on the lab work to avoid the appearance of "haphazard" work.
I strongly agree!!
I think the history of this glass jar examination shows the very Haphazardness you speak of. What is told to the Tighar members varies day to day. We hear it second hand. We hear it from facebook pages. We hear Joe is examining the jar. No, correction a friend of Joes is examining the Jar. No, correction, some guy watching the discovery channel offered his services. No, correction we have hired another lab to do testing. Per Ric Gillespie at first there is no residue to test( see the start of this thread) for mercury, now we find another chemist that will indeed find mercury after 75 years laying exposed on an open atoll, exposed to reef bleaching elements, UV and Gamma Radiation, Typhoons, and an unknown amount of Water dilution...on and on.

When those results are questioned, and more importantly the jar research history continues to show it to be older than mid 1930's, based on its clear color,  yet ANOTHER laboratory group has been hired for the purpose to determine the correct color. Two years after it was found, and right when this jar was taking heat for being too old based on it's color in comes another chemist who will claim in your words, "it is neither clear, nor white"

That should cover all the bases!

This being a non profit historical society, in care of finding and documenting history, I find this ease of media announcements alarming. Glass artifacts were shown for publicity BEFORE any testing done with actual testing protocols. Now that they are starting to be conducted it appears to be amateurish and somewhat clandestine for purposes unknown. Some of this analysis is volunteer apparently, some professional and paid, and all of this latest research seems in direct response to quiet skeptics, not for the goal of historical accuracy. Otherwise why wait two years to begin?  It almost seems like the pattern here is to release an artifact to the media, with Provenance unknown, date unknown, relevance to the Earhart case unknown. Just to Get "public interest". Then worry about finding a lab or scientist with a PHD behind their name to back the claims afterwards if necessary.In this case done only after several people object and provide documentation that contradicts the published original announcement. In two years no tests were run, I cannot emphasize that enough. Yet tighar, against it's own evidence, made darn sure the associated press thought a mid 30's cosmetic jar was found. Possibly containing freckle cream.

In the end run, I feel it only hurts Tighar's reputation no matter the outcome of subsequent testing, how this artifact was handled start to finish.  It should be done with caution and by professional unbiased scientists in a timely manner, with a protocol defined in testing. Perhaps a politician feels differently, maybe not.( In edit, no I am not singling out Joe, I do not know his true role. It's been explained differently at different times. I didn't know of the existance of this EPAC, and I am sure I am not alone. But if there was an advisory group you were part of, and you had evidence this artifact was not 1930's, I would hope you shared that information with Ric and other researchers before the announcements were made on the major media outlets. Who actually made the call to say this was a 1930's jar, I do not know. Therefore I assign no blame or responsibility to Joe.) The responsibility ultimately lays with Tighar the organization to accurately describe recovered artifacts. It just has become increasingly hard to determine who is "calling the shots" so to speak, when it comes to media relations. If Ric wants to claim responsibility for the media release, I would ask why do it at all if Joe's evidence pointed to an earlier date?
Who exactly came up with the term "mid 1930s" is the big question. I know the why. In any event it was wrong to do without any documentation or testing. I'll leave it at that. I am glad some testing has finally begun at last.

I do wish Good luck with the new and improved elemental tests to prove the glass is not clear after all. It just looks that way. Black is white and white is black, into the looking glass we go.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 28, 2012, 10:27:52 AM
Black is white and white is black, into the looking glass we go.

Dave, don't pick on Joe. I'm the guy you hate and, unfortunately, I don't have time right now to answer your ridiculous accusations. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 28, 2012, 01:39:48 PM
Joe, you and EPAC has had this jar for two years and yet the first round of chemical testing began in July 2012 correct?
No, allow me to enlighten.  The jar went through at least 2 prior rounds of testing as I recall.  The first was for lithic edge wear analysis, in January 2011. Dr. Geoffrey Cunnar, a scientist with knowledge of lithic edge wear, did the first round.  The second was at Winterthur Labs in August 2011, for an evaluation of the gasket-like thread found nearby, and for an analysis of visible residuum on the jar itself.  As I stated, we are not NASA, the CIA or even a general purpose chemistry lab.  As of a few months ago, we did not even have a chemist on staff.  We're not an academy or a university either.  Most of the work is done by volunteers who care. A small amount is contracted, but since services often cost money, I don't think this should be surprising.  I fail to understand the obsession with how long this takes.  Are you saying we withheld information too long, and then in the very next sentence we don't wait long enough?  I'm thoroughly confused. 

Isn't it true that in those first two years there were no scientific testing?
See above.  I fail to see why the answer matters, however.  What if we had waited?  Just as an example, it took 58 years or so for the discovery of the bones to be re-discovered by a TIGHAR researcher in archives.  It's been 75 years since Earhart's disappearance.  You're surprised it's taking a long time?

In fact the only research was to skim ads in old Sears catalogs and googling other glass publications and/or Ebay trying to find a jar that looked similar, and researching basic Hazel Atlas company information? In those two years you admit you found but one copy of the National Druggist Publication showing solid proof this style of jar was offered in White in 1918 is that not correct? 

I and we have researched a lot more than this in 2 years.  The emails on EPAC alone on this jar would clog your inbox.  I have a disk full of files. Some of them are dead ends. Some of them are positively fascinating, and enlightening.  It's not classified, but it would be a lot of work sharing this all at once, and even if we did share it all at once, how would this satisfy your requirement?  We work together, accept our frailties, rejoice in our collective strengths, and move on.  Why does this even need stating?


Why was that contradictory evidence you found, that did NOT support the Tighar theory, witheld? It was withheld from the media, general public, and Tighar members themselves.
I don't recall sending you our personal emails. Did you read them?  I've already stated that the media didn't get this perfectly correct the first time. I'm not aware any information was withheld.  The media is working on it.  So are we.  We live in a society with a free press.  This allows them to be excellent, or as the case may be and budgets allow, not so excellent at all times. I assume their good intentions.  So should you.  It's one thing to make an unsupported allegation about data. It's quite another to make an unsupported allegation about people.


It is not as if you found several additional years when this jar was offered in clear. By your admission you had, and have no idea what DECADE this jar was made based on any publicatioin in your possession.
Neither I nor anyone else here ever made any representation to the media or anyone else regarding certainty about the dating of the jar.  Our research does not rule out a 1930s association. Does that imply we know more than we actually do? 


Yet despite all the evidence you had in your possession, by the time of the early 2012 media blitz, this jar was called a 1930's jar by Tighar.
"We think it MAY have been from the 1930s," may have been said somewhere, by someone at some time.  People interpret things all the time. We're only human, after all. I highly, highly doubt that anyone with an I.Q. above 70 would have said "it's a 1930s jar."  This is an allegation you have made that you must support.


What is the point in EPAC if it is not to report the truth BEFORE the media is alerted? Is any one person responsible? "I just do my part, EPAC does their part, Tighar does their part".
The truth?  The truth?  What is the truth?  I once wrote "the truth is" in a paper in college.  I think the grade received was C-, and I was publicly called out for that in the class.  And what I said was "truthful" was probably a pretty vanilla statement.  We don't have a monopoly on truth.  Things are debatable.  It's debatable what I had for dinner 3 nights ago.  We're seeking to understand, so far as we're led to be able to understand, what became of Amelia Earhart on July 2, 1937 and afterward.  Do you really think we're ever going to know "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" on this event?  The standard you set is so high as to be unbelievable. This does not mean we have one particle of reckless disregard for truth and truthful things. But this is not your point, anyway.  Your point is we lied or misled.  I don't always know what's true, but I know the allegation in that previous sentence is untrue.


It sounds to me this is an attempt to limit liability. If there is a question about an artifact's age and relevance, like the one being asked, the researcher can point to another person, or point at the media themselves!
Were I to take credit for all the research here, I would be properly guilty of the untruthfulness you cite, would I not?  Nor would this be fair to all those who have helped me, and who have far surpassed my efforts in this regard.


The media did not invent the term "1930's jar", nor did they invent the term "Dr.Berrys Freckle cream", nor did the media go on every news outlet that would listen and proclaim that this jar fits what Amelia Earhart might have carried considering she had freckles.

If you're going to quote Ric, you ought to cite properly.  Link to an article, a video, what have you.  You are surprised at the way the media ran with the story.  I initially was also, never having been given this kind of inside look at how stories rise and propagate (and I'm a journalism M.A!)  So I'll grant I can understand how you may have assumed that we misled them, but your assumption is inaccurate.  And, truth to tell, their job in reporting this was better than might have been expected, given all of the complexities and twists involved.


The media had no idea of your or Epac's research, or lack thereof, they accepted the word of Tighar that this was a mid 1930's jar.
I suggest you look up all the definitions of the word "media."  The media mediates, some more than others.  It may be a 1930s jar; the evidence I'm looking at is more suggestive of that idea than what you've probably seen. Again, TIGHAR never said it definitively was, not ever, and still probably will not ever.  If you want to argue about how it "cannot possibly" be from the 1930s, that it "is" definitely from World War I or prior, that's another argument entirely.  I assume that's next.  We have evidence that would dispute that logic. I won't be presenting that until I'm done with all of the research.


Now if we would like to review Ric talking on soundbites about this mid 1930's jar, and how Amelia had freckles, I can provide that. I do not feel it necessary, as everyone heard the same thing. It went global, or viral as they say. Tighar called this a 1930's jar. Period. Long before Epac or yourself could prove that. True or not?
I've been pretty attentive to the media stories, probably more attentive than I even should.  I have noticed no such exaggeration coming from us.  If you have such evidence, it's time you showed it.  Statements such as "Earhart is known to have been concerned about her freckles," are statements of demonstrable fact. 


The reality is that you had no clue this was a 1930's cream jar, and TO THIS DAY do not know.
Do you really believe I am so unintelligent as to make statements of fact I know can be disputed two seconds later?


In fact every clue you have, including the ND publications point to this jar being much older than the 1930's.
Is that true or not?[/b]
It absolutely COULD be. My EPAC emails may even have some paragraphs in which I myself took this position, for the sake of argument.  But, no, we also have a body of evidence that suggests it could also be later than the "not later than" the World War I date you have cited in earlier posts.  I'm putting that together, and it will take time. Would I like to be more thorough in that than the media have had occasion to be?  Certainly.  And would I think that an even-handed approach, highlighting all the arguments, including the Forum's ought to be included?  Absolutely. 


While I look forward to even more research, isn't it the truth this jar was promoted by Tighar, with advice from EPAC, as being something it was not?
Which is confirmed by your recent statement to Alan Harris.
My quote to Alan Harris was to congratulate him on conducting more detailed research into the question of Hazel-Atlas advertisments for the publication and time frame in question than I had had time or initiative to do myself.  There are other areas of research in which I am sure he would grant me the same, as is the wont of fellow researchers.


So in closing on the issue of the media campaign conducted by Tighar, I find it pseudoscience to put it mildly and irresponsible is closer to the truth. This is history we are dealing with. The argument that it was done to keep public interest, before the public interest "wanes" you said, is not how a historical society should record history.
History both oral and written should only be altered after the most careful eye and detail has been applied, and even then marked with words of caution unless multiple correlations are found to substantiate the claims.
History is not to be changed to fit a personal theory, and it certainly should not be changed with any variable being public interest and donations.
Others could give better insight on the organization than myself, but I would say, from observation that we're not a historical society. We're a team of folks interested in responsible aircraft preservation, archaeology and research that has become involved in the most compelling instance of that subject we have found.  I find the historical accusation to be lacking.  History is not one person's idea of the truth.  History is what people write. It's a subject of debate, a work in progress.  I think it can take care of itself just fine without any help from TIGHAR.  I don't see the argument that we've duped history in the interest of public interest.  I just don't see it. (History, by the way, seems to have done a pretty even-handed job in reporting the disappearance of Amelia Earhart. I don't see them rushing to judgment in any sense of the word.)  You give us much more power than anyone really has.

Yet on one hand you admit this jar's relevance was released too early, which is obvious,
Again, false.  I think the timing was just about perfect.  I never said otherwise.  I said TIGHAR seeks a balance and generally strikes the correct balance.

on the other you said EPAC and Tighar was being responsible in this release and content.
Yes, TIGHAR was being responsible in this release and content. I cannot be more in agreement.




You mention in one note that there must be a control on the lab work to avoid the appearance of "haphazard" work.
I strongly agree!!
I think the history of this glass jar examination shows the very Haphazardness you speak of. What is told to the Tighar members varies day to day. We hear it second hand. We hear it from facebook pages. We hear Joe is examining the jar. No, correction a friend of Joes is examining the Jar. No, correction, some guy watching the discovery channel offered his services. No, correction we have hired another lab to do testing. Per Ric Gillespie at first there is no residue to test( see the start of this thread) for mercury, now we find another chemist that will indeed find mercury after 75 years laying exposed on an open atoll, exposed to reef bleaching elements, UV and Gamma Radiation, Typhoons, and an unknown amount of Water dilution...on and on.
You expected TIGHAR to make one final and unimpeachable announcement?  I suppose we could all disappear into a cubby for 20 years and then come tell you what we found?  That is an organizational model.  I just don't see how it works with the setup we have.  Nor, as far as I can tell, do any of my fellow members.  I'm not idealistic about this at all and don't know what good idealism would do.  It's like wishing for a bus to come at 8:30 when it's on an hourly schedule. 

This being a non profit historical society, I find this ease of media announcements on unproven theories, artifacts shown for publicity BEFORE testing done, the actual testing protocols, to be amateurish and to some clandestine for purposes unknown. Some of this analysis is volunteer apparently, some professional and paid, all at different times over a two year period in apparent response to questions on the jars age. It almost seems like the pattern here is to release an artifact to the media, with Provenance unknown, date unknown, relevance to the Earhart case unknown. Just to Get "public interest". Then worry about finding a lab or scientist with a PHD behind their name  to back the claims afterwards if necessary.That is not finding and documenting existing history.
I believe the scientific method, again, can be messy.  It's conducted by humans, with flaws and, don't forget, strengths. The timing of the lab work is purely based on how much we know and when we know it. We act upon what we know as soon as we know. I for one have not hesitated to test that which I knew to test, once I knew what could be tested.  I think the same could be said for anyone else here.

 
Perhaps a politician feels differently.
You are saying this without even the slightest knowledge of who I am.

Look, folks, I wanted to say a few things here, and I've said them.  I'm going to be taking the weekend away from emails or communication of any kind in order to run my 12th marathon.  I may need to step back from here for a while in order to have time to review the very great work that has been done on this piece by the team.  I think the work deserves an effort to pull it all together.  I thank those of you who've been supportive.  If you've not been supportive, I'm trying to understand your point of view, learn what I can, but challenge what I think to be not factually based.  Thank you all.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 28, 2012, 01:48:50 PM
  We live in a society with a free press.  .......{snip}........ I assume their good intentions.  .....{snip}
Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Let this be the only thread drift.......

Joe, a whole buncha years here working with the media.  Learning to use them and using them to my advantage.  Ya gotta keep this one fact in mind:  the media are a bunch of parasites on society.  Be very careful, how you present to the media. Don't ever assume their intentions.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 28, 2012, 02:13:18 PM
Bill, thanks for the suggestion, but as one who spent years working to learn the craft and working with members of the press, I have to say, they're a fine group of people overall.  Only my opinion, of course.  This isn't about press griping, it's about ensuring we are all honest and fair with one another and toward each other.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 28, 2012, 02:17:31 PM
Bill, thanks for the suggestion, but as one who spent years working to learn the craft and working with members of the press, I have to say, they're a fine group of people overall.  Only my opinion, of course.  This isn't about press griping, it's about ensuring we are all honest and fair with one another and toward each other.

Have some fun with your marathon.  But keep this in mind - now that you've advised us of the marathon, you have a responsibility to let us know how you did.   ;) ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 28, 2012, 02:39:25 PM
Quote
...as one who spent years working to learn the craft and working with members of the press, I have to say, they're a fine group of people overall.

OK, Bill, now I have to admit - Joe may be a politician after all...  ;)

Now that's funny.........

........and you may have killed this thread......... ;D :D ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 28, 2012, 02:58:30 PM
Joe I didnt say you personally made the announcement this was 1930's glass. So I am not implying you are stupid. But it was said, and implied. I will put a quote from Ric below.
You decide how this would read to the public.
I have never read one of your EPAC emails in the media where you state the artifact "absolutely could be older than 1930's"
That is my point. Those never made the NY times or Reuters.

History is what is agreed upon, by the mostest. :)
What was done is present a superficial review, very one sided, to the most people, that supports this being possibly Earhart related.

When a little counterpoint could have been added for accuracy, like saying "well it could also be from New Zealanders for sun burn cream"... so we have to be cautious, but testing continues...

There was no counterpoint or words to be cautious in these interviews.
When this is history and public perception we are dealing with.
There are now a million people that think a 1930's freckle cream jar was found.
Which is exactly what was wanted. So let's not pretend differently.
This had nothing to do with presenting historical evidence in the right context.
But whatever, it's not my organization, I wouldn't have felt comfortable making these kinds of statements, others feel it's great.
That is where I am coming from.

Ric Gillespie stated-
“This is one of several bottles that we’ve identified from the castaway campsite that seem to be and, in some cases, are very definitely personal care products that were marketed exclusively to women in the United States in the 1930s.”


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/246339/amelia-earhart-jar-of-freckle-cream-could-be-latest-clue-to-solving-mystery/#wBJYYG3bvqGGXLPR.99
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on September 28, 2012, 03:28:41 PM
I ought to be on the road, but I'll respond once more.  From what you're saying here in this latest, I think it might be fair to say you intend no harm in what you're saying, so let me say then...no hard feelings.  You are raising some important points that go deep and wide.  Obviously, I disagree with many things.  You should not assume that certain things weren't said by TIGHAR at the appropriate times.

You're looking forward to the additional research.  Glad to see you're interested.  Maybe this next round when all is said and done, you'll say, I didn't like how that came over the first time, but the second time they really got me thinking....

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on September 28, 2012, 03:38:54 PM
I just wanted to take a few moments and express my concern on recent pokings by certain individuals on this wonderful forum. This forum is to be used as per say a science lab, debate discussion, data collection, and anything else you can come up with. However, its intentions are not to bring down the work of those who have tiredlessly given their all to see puzzle pieces fall into place. I am highly motivated by the work that Ric, Joe, Tom, and the rest of this team has done in the past 20 years. As Joe has mentioned....its taken a long time to get where we are now!!!! As for those wondering about a test on milk glass...my girlfriend's 7 year old son and I did an experiment several weeks back on a similar milk glass jar with ointment cream in it. Sat it in a coffee can and got it as hot as I possibly could. It burned for quite some time like a candle, before it was quickly burned out by the oil. As for the glass...it blackened it, but did not discolor it. As a matter of fact, it didnt make the jar clear. However, if contents did exist in this jar, and it was on this island...it didnt last long! As for testing and research on this jar...alot of people have taken great effort in finding a similar jar...but no luck yet. However, like Joe and Ric, and many others...we are searching diligently as we speak. I just wanted to touch base with Ric, Tom, and Joe...that I still haven't gotten word back from the National Glass President who is overseer of the Duncan and Miller Glass Museum in Washington, PA. This is the town where Hazel-Atlas got its first start. Anyway, the lady in charge of the museum informed me that the pictures and information were sent in regards to the jar and this website was included to better inform him of things that have transpired in the past several years. She informed me that he was excited about getting into this. So hopefully willing, we will hear something from him in the coming days!!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 29, 2012, 04:43:41 PM
Also, bear in mind, that when we speak of a "switch" from flint to opal, or opal to clear, we may not have all the facts.  Was it an irrevocable switch?  Could switches ever be reversed back?  What are the reasons?  The last thing I want is to be coy here, but we are, as you say, rehearsing these scenarios.

Let me add that we're not at this point dismissing any possibilities. When the report comes, however, it must, I think, suggest probabilities, to the best that we've been able to interpret them.

I at first assumed these questions were rhetorical, but in case not, I will provide what comment I can.  "We may not have all the facts" is certainly right, and IMO we never will – unless someone finds a pile of cardboard boxes containing all of HA's production and sales records for all plants for 1902 to 1940, lol.  As to thinking that the ca. 1917 switch to "Opal Only" was not later reversed during the period of interest: pending review of further advertisements in journals and other publications, one of the reasons I currently think it was not reversed is that HA Catalog No. 1 (http://www.worldcat.org/title/opal-glassware-cold-cream-and-ointment-jars-patch-boxes-druggists-sundries-etc/oclc/12356205) was titled "Opal glassware: cold cream and ointment jars, patch boxes, druggists' sundries, etc.".  HA published this catalog from the late teens/early '20s until at least 1933 with the same title.  Examples from 1926 ("7th Edition, 2nd issue") and 1933 ("12th Edition") survive in West Virginia and New York libraries but I have not viewed one.  Searches have revealed numerous other HA catalogs for, e.g. Tableware, Fruit Jars, Fountain Tumblers, etc. but no others with title suggesting additional (non-opal) production of ointment/cream jars.  This alone, to me, has considerable weight on the scale of "probabilities" that you mention.

As to your other statement, "coy" is not a word I would normally use, and I certainly feel no desire to use it here.  However, lol, I will admit that your sequence of semi-leading questions does have a certain flavor of information held but not revealed.  You likely are not old enough for black-and-white TV shows, but as a child I often wondered how the poor witnesses felt while being grilled by Perry Mason, who alone had already solved the mystery.    :D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on September 29, 2012, 10:06:50 PM
If the Hazel-Atlas jar did in fact contain freckle cream or a cosmetic skin lightener of some kind, I believe it’s time to seriously consider it was a Kiribati woman who brought it to the island, rather than Amelia E.

It’s sad but true that Polynesian and Asian cultures value lighter skin tones over dark skin tones.  And of course- unfortunately- they are not alone.  For ample evidence of the wide-spread interest in ‘fair’ skin among Asians and Pacific Islanders, [and some reasons for it,] see-

http://www.city-data.com/forum/asia/1646010-why-tan-skin-not-considered-attractive-8.html

http://samoanwoman.com/tag/samoan-ideas-of-beauty/

Kiribati people, as it turns out, placed such a high value on light/fair skin that they confined brides-to-be in a darkened room inside of a 'ko' or 'bleaching house' for up to eighteen months before the actual marriage ceremony, to ensure the bride was not exposed to the darkening rays of the sun.  Who would argue these people would not clamor for a modern product that offered a way to speed up the ‘bleaching’ process- as freckle cream would?

Many brands of freckle cream were readily available via Australia and New Zealand in the 1930s- and even Dr. Berry’s very own concoction was exported from the USA to NZ in the early 1930’s, and perhaps later on.
 
The account, below, dates to the 1920s or 1930s and is from Sir Arthur Francis Grimble’s book 'Migrations, Myth and Magic from the Gilbert Islands' (http://books.google.com/books?id=PB-z649FL4wC&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=in+allusion+to+the+fairness+of+her+skin,+is+to+pay+her+the+highest+compliment,+nor+would+it+be+taken+amiss+by+a+man&source=bl&ots=bBsy4NTzce&sig=hbFSTS4IXN656Za26cDbk1V5NzE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CINnUKaLOOjt0gGd6IHoCw&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=in%20allusion%20to%20the%20fairness%20of%20her%20skin%2C%20is%20to%20pay%20her%20the%20highest%20compliment%2C%20nor%20would%20it%20be%20taken%20amiss%20by%20a%20man&f=false) [published in 1972, Rosemary Grimble, editor.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Grimble

http://www.janeresture.com/kculture/index.htm

Key lines IMHO –

"...though the formalities of the ko have long been abandoned, many Gilbertese (Kiribati) women to this day continue to bleach themselves in private...  they still attempt by artificial methods to hark back to the glorious ancestral types"

------------------------------------

“…Sometimes a maid might marry within a few weeks of coming to puberty, but far more often she would pass the next year or eighteen months in the ko, or bleaching house, where her skin might be whitened ere she became a bride. For this purpose a small house was built at a good distance from the family settlement and generally, but not always, on the eastern side of the island. From the eaves to the ground all round the house a screen of coconut leaf was hung; and in the interior a small cubicle of mats was rigged up on a light framework, leaving an alleyway of three or four feet clear between its sides and the outer screens. The deepest gloom reigned within this cubicle, and therein the girl must live, deprived of sunlight and unseen by the people. Only her parents and grandparents were allowed near her; her only constant companion was her adoptive grandmother, who attended to all her wants. She was allowed to wash and perform her toilet between the outer screen and the cubicle, but as soon as that was done she must retire again into the inner darkness. Thus she was obliged to live in utter manual idleness, since there was not enough light to guide her fingers at work, but to compensate for this she learned all the spells her grandmother could teach her, most of them being connected with love, healing and the culinary arts.

During this time of solitary confinement the girl's skin was carefully attended to. Every day at sunrise her body was rubbed over with the creamy juice expressed from the flesh of ripe coconuts, and when this was dry it was washed off with fresh water. At mid-day her ablutions were made in sea water, and at sunset the cream was again applied, left to dry and washed away. In addition to this she was constantly massaged from head to heel by her grandmother, coconut oil being used as an unguent; special care was given to the moulding of her arms, shoulders and breasts so that these might appear to advantage in the sitting dance.

After a few months of such treatment, in a seclusion which no sunray ever pieced, the rich and dusky olive tint left her skin, and she became pale with the dark paleness of some Spanish lady, who never leaves her house until sunset. One still has the chance of judging what her appearance may have been because, though the formalities of the ko have long been abandoned, many Gilbertese (Kiribati) women to this day continue to bleach themselves in private. The constant massage leaves the skin silken in texture, and the beauty of the subject, though no longer of a merry and full-blooded type, is certainly enhanced by etiolation.

To call a girl kamoa n te roki, i.e. an inhabitant of the bleaching-house (lit. contents of the screens) to this day, in allusion to the fairness of her skin, is to pay her the highest compliment,  nor would it be taken amiss by a man. The whole idea underlying the bleaching process is closely connected with a race-memory of certain ancestral gods who, like the famous Tangaroa of Polynesia, were fair of skin and of a marvellous beauty. These lived in Matang, a bourne of departed souls and one of the ancient fatherlands of the folk, and although their descendants have become dusky by intermarriage with Melanesian and [as I believe] negrito peoples, they still attempt by artificial methods to hark back to glorious ancestral types.

When the grandmother thought that her skin could be improved no further, the girl was conducted from the bleaching house to her home. There she was arrayed in festal ornaments and led by her mother and grandmother to a dance given in her honour, of which she was to be the central figure…”
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on September 29, 2012, 11:18:32 PM
Mark and Alan...Wanting to know what your guys expertese is on this particular jar of Freckle ointment?  This particular jar was found in a antique store in the town I work in. It was found the same day I encountered the freckle cream box as shown throughout the net. Anyway, this particular jar had two different locations for a manufacturer on the side of the jar. Chicago and Paris??? If this is the case...then why wasn't there a listing for those two that  I posted the other night for manufacturers from the Hazel-Atlas Company. Maybe its possible that this jar came from another source overseas. I have to agree with Alan...that we wont get anywhere until we have a listing of bookwork, sales records, and etc. Anyway, give me your insight...thanks!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on September 30, 2012, 01:00:24 AM
Mark and Alan...Wanting to know what your guys expertese is on this particular vile of Freckle ointment?  This particular vile was found in a antique store in the town I work in. It was found the same day I encountered the freckle cream box as shown throughout the net. Anyway, this particular vile had two different locations for a manufacturer on the side of the jar. New York and Paris??? If this is the case...then why wasn't there a listing for those two that  I posted the other night for manufacturers from the Hazel-Atlas Company. Maybe its possible that this jar came from another source overseas. I have to agree with Alan...that we wont get anywhere until we have a listing of bookwork, sales records, and etc. Anyway, give me your insight...thanks!!!

Wow, Randy, another puzzle.  I don't have any great insights to offer, only speculation.  It looks closer to the Dr. Berry jar in the 1936 Sears catalog (http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015009227433;seq=697;size=175;view=image) than anything else.  Same shape outline and dark color -- but the lid is quite different and the label a little bit.  I have not noticed "Paris" on any label before.  But we do know the Dr. Berry ointment was being sold overseas by the '30's, so I guess it's not a huge surprise.  Based on the shape, color, and the "Paris", I would guess that it is a 1936 or later product.

I'm confused about the "New York" and "Paris" you mention: do those appear molded in the glass somewhere?  Or are you referring to the label, which to me appears to say "Chicago" and "Paris"?  I believe Chicago would be one of the known locations for the Berry Co. products.

Also, is there a Hazel-Atlas "H over A" mark on the bottom, or any other glass manufacturer's mark?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on September 30, 2012, 07:15:33 AM
Alan...Thanks for the catch. I do apologize for that mistake. It was Chicago!!!! Sorry bout! However, I don't know off hand if that small jar has hazel-atlas stamped on the bottom of it. I sent that on to Ric. It is of a milk-glass content! I'm really puzzled by the Paris thing though!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: dave burrell on September 30, 2012, 10:09:19 AM
Alan...Thanks for the catch. I do apologize for that mistake. It was Chicago!!!! Sorry bout! However, I don't know off hand if that small jar has hazel-atlas stamped on the bottom of it. I sent that on to Ric. It is of a milk-glass content! I'm really puzzled by the Paris thing though!!!
I would not be puzzled. Its probably just marketing and making up exotic sounding cities to put on the label. Paris has been a high fashion culture center for 100 years. Of course any American maker would want to put the words Paris on a cosmetic bottle. It attracts women. Perfume makers and cosmetic designers to this day love to put the name paris on their products.
No huge mystery.

But This jar looks black.
Why do you say its milk glass colored, and since it is totally different than the artifact found what relevance do you see between this jar and the Niku jar?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 30, 2012, 10:18:19 AM
If the Hazel-Atlas jar did in fact contain freckle cream or a cosmetic skin lightener of some kind, I believe it’s time to seriously consider it was a Kiribati woman who brought it to the island, rather than Amelia E.

That possibility was seriously considered from the moment we identified the jar as possibly having contained freckle cream.  There is no argument that, in Gilbertese tradition, fair skin was seen as desirable and it may be that women from the Gilbert Islands residing on Nikumaroro during the colonial period shared that prejudice but:
•  We've found nothing in the extensive historical record of the colony (some, but by no means all, of which is on the TIGHAR website (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Tarawa_Archives/Tarawa_Archives.html)) to suggest that they did.
•  In the many weeks of archaeological work in the regularly-inhabited parts of the island we've found many, many glass containers of various descriptions but never anything like the bottles we've found at the Seven Site.
• The jar at the Seven Site was clearly in a context that suggested association with the castaway.

You did not ask whether we had ever considered that an I-Kiribati woman might have brought the jar to the island.  You made the assumption that we hadn't and then proceeded to try to build a case based on generalities about Kiribati culture.  TIGHAR has looked at this question far more closely than you have and with infinitely more resources than are available to you.  Of course, no one can say for sure whether the jar was brought to the island by an I-Kiribati woman, or brought to the island by a Coast Guardsman hoping to trade it to a local woman for sexual favors, or that it fell out of a passing airplane and happened to land an break at the Seven Site (one fragment bouncing to where somebody cut up a turtle). What we can say for certain is that none of those explanations is as plausible as the jar being associated with the context in which it was found. 

TIGHAR's critics often try to dismiss our specific, exhaustively researched findings with vague generalities.  That's not a legitimate methodology and we won't entertain it on this forum. 
 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bill Roe on September 30, 2012, 11:23:28 AM
....... (one fragment bouncing to where somebody cut up a turtle).

Just curious - are there still turtles on the island?  Also, "In the many weeks of archaeological work in the regularly-inhabited parts of the island..." did you find remains of any other turtles?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on September 30, 2012, 12:11:08 PM
Just curious - are there still turtles on the island?

There are no terrestrial turtles on the island.  Sea turtles are common but they only come ashore to lay eggs.  They seem to prefer the windward side beach (the Seven Site is on the windward side of the island).


  Also, "In the many weeks of archaeological work in the regularly-inhabited parts of the island..." did you find remains of any other turtles?

No, but neither have we found fish bones or bird bones.  We've made a concerted effort to find any kind of fire pit or cooking area at house sites in the abandoned village but all we've found are places where there is some ash and charcoal.  We know the workers and their families ate fish, turtles, clams and occasionally birds but they apparently cleaned up after themselves and got rid of the garbage. Not a bad idea on an island with big populations of rats and crabs.

 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 01, 2012, 12:01:16 AM
Dave...the inner part of the jar is milk-glass colored! Its basically like the other milk glass ointment jars that we are seeing...except its small, and painted black on the outside. As for association with the artifact jar...I was merely going off the idea of wondering why Paris was labeled on the outside of this jar, and the supposed artifact jar that we assume was manufactured around 1917-1921 by association of the classified ad that was shown was made in Virginia. The places that were mentioned were not in Paris!!! What's even more baffling is this small black jar was found in an antique case that was centered around time frame of 1920. The case held items from a doctor back then. It was rather interesting to see!!!! So I wonder what the time frame of manufacturing was for this little small black jar. Also, another baffling thing is on the actual freckle ointment box that is shown on the website, New York is printed along with Chicago!!!
  Also, with the research that I've been doing at the Fort Hays State University Library...finding that Dr. C.H. Berry never sold his goods in the main spotlight...such as the New York Times, Kansas City Star, and the Saturday Evening Post, along with a few other women magazines back in that time frame. Thinking that I might had missed something...I searched volumes at random throughout the 1900's and found nothing. It was really puzzling!!! Anyway, however in the Pharmecutical Journals I did find it among every journal that I looked at during that time frame. Its as if only Drug Pharmacies sold his wares, such as the freckle cream and etc. So I'm trying to understand why he would put New York and Paris, on a label when he never manufactured there. Or did he? Anyway, very interesting!!!! Also, just for fun...here is a picture of a Dr. Berry Deodarant Can that I found on the web...Kinda neat!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 01, 2012, 11:23:04 AM
So if an I Kiribati women had said jar why was it found where it was found and why was it associated with other diverse objects such as a jack knife, buttons, zipper pull and the remains of camp fires, bird, fish and turtle bones.

Of course, just because a thing is next to another thing does not mean they are related - but in the case of the Seven Site we have a group of artifacts, faunals, and features that are anomalous to the sites known activities (Coast Guard target shooting and a failed coconut planting) and do appear to be consistent with the efforts of a western female castaway to survive in that environment.  The ointment pot jar is significant more because it fits that context than because it may have once contained freckle cream - but the fact it does seem to have contained freckle cream, and because the notion of a toxic ointment to make freckle fade is so weird, the freckle cream aspect of the whole thing has gotten way more press than it probably deserves.

For me the thing I am missing is the recent TIGHAR research which due i'm sure to Rics Hurculean schedule this past year has just not been sifted, sorted, graded and put out for the hungrey forum members to devour.  I just love the snippets that come from TIGHAR central when the debate hots up.

I feel your pain.  I'm working on an update for the TIGHAR website on debris field analysis as we speak.  Hoping to have it finished today and maybe up on the website later tonight.  It'll be worth the wait.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 03, 2012, 10:09:24 PM
Hi all. I'm back from my trip and wanted to add just a few discussion topics to this thread. (I was 4:07 in the Wineglass Marathon, just above the median. Thanks for asking, Bill Roe!) If my discussion here veers off the thread, someone I'm sure will correct me and put it somewhere else. Thanks in advance.

Ric has said in a media article on the freckle ointment, quoted earlier:
"This is one of several bottles that we’ve identified from the castaway campsite that seem to be and, in some cases, are very definitely personal care products that were marketed exclusively to women in the United States in the 1930s."

This statement rightfully does not confirm absolutes, but it does suggest possibilities. But what are the several bottles and what do they suggest in the aggregate?  Dave was right for noticing the absence of these details from many of the media's stories that appeared.

There WERE a good many details that may have been of interest. The EPAC has discussed them for years.  To address some of this gap between what the EPAC knew and what the Forum has been discussing, I have put together this simple database of bottles at the Seven Site (attached).

Here are some statistics that can be taken from the data:
- 7 of the 8 are known to be American in origin and all 8 could be American in origin.
- 4 of the 8 are 3 ounces or less in volume and appear to be personal care items.
- 4 of the 4 small personal care items are known to be American in origin.
- 2 of the 8 have a probable connection to the Coast Guard.
- 6 of the 8 have a possible association with the 1930s. 1 of them definitely does.
- 2 of the 8 have a strong connection to an American female.
- 6 of the 8 may be associated with the castaway, whose bones most likely lay on the same site  and
- 8 of the 8 were man-made!

These statistics as cited above are Ric's brainchild entirely. The numbers have changed a bit as we learned more about the bottles, but we would see these kinds of discussions regularly on EPAC in late 2010 and early 2011.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 03, 2012, 11:12:06 PM
Could someone refresh my memory as to what EPAC means? Also, kinda curious what the name of all the 8 bottles were that were found at the site? I already know what two of them were...but not sure of the others!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 04, 2012, 05:02:29 AM
Good stuff and the EPAC insight is appreciated.  Can you advise as to how the likelihood of a 'castaway association' among certain of these items was determined, other than by the articles being at the site?   
Thanks Jeff.  You and the rest can easily see why it's easy to get carried away and I don't intend to do that.  What I'm saying is that I can cite you reasons why the putative castaway is one of the possible associations for certain of the artifacts.  By no means does that mean I'm saying it is the only association. Also, a "no" in my database does not mean that there are no conditions you could imagine under which another group of people could be associated with this item.  The database I've set up is merely a convenient way to discuss it, a shorthand if you will.

Some, but my no means all, outlets in the media (and by media I include blogs and discussion groups, though whether I should may be another topic),  could take the database and say "6 of the 8 belonged to Amelia Earhart."  This would be a distortion.

Basically, when I use the word association, I'm saying no more than that "this could have been."   

Again, I've provided more details, but not all.  Hundreds of emails underlie this database. There are people on EPAC who would disagree with the categories and conclusions I've drawn.  The database is not EPAC's; it is my summary of EPAC's discussion, and it overlays a point of view.  I can get into more specifics of where the discussion with each piece went over time.  I may not be able to respond immediately today.  Last week I was on vacation and could really take the time to get into the details and respond very quickly.  This week I'm back at work.

I can see from the attached spreadsheet that some of those 'castaway' items bore evidence of being in the fire, are of the right era, etc. which suggests someone was doing something with them in a fire at some time, and that they could possibly fit a castaway situation.  It would be interesting, however, to understand what trait was found in common among those articles (possibly 6?) that would support an association with the castaway more strongly than the likelihood of some other use, or another means of arrival and deposit at the site.

I cannot draw a straight line with a single trait through all the artifacts.  The melted features of the green bottle and the beer bottle are most interesting.  The beer bottle has been determined by archaeologist Bill Lockhart to be prewar, export, and American.  The green bottle cannot be dated so precisely, but the fact it was found in the remains of a cooking fire with the same melted features suggests it is paired with the green bottle.  Others on EPAC have not been so effusive about this evidence. Tom King, for the sake of argument and equitability, suggested the scenario of a Coast Guardsman involved in the making of a distillery on the site from old bottles he (the Coast Guardsman) took from home.  He called him "Benny the Brewer".  This should underline the fact that we are very careful to construct alternate hypotheses to explain the bottles when we think the discussion has become too absolute.

The database is mine, but others could adapt it to suit their own hypotheses, or even to defend positions they don't necessarily hold but with which they would like to experiment.  This could be an interesting exercise.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 04, 2012, 05:08:08 AM
correction to above post:  "The green bottle cannot be dated so precisely, but the fact it was found in the remains of a cooking fire with the same melted features suggests it is paired with the beer bottle."

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 04, 2012, 06:35:35 AM
From what TIGHAR know about the coastguards, how likely is it?

About as likely as Terry-the-Transvestite to explain the gender-specifc artifacts.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: JNev on October 04, 2012, 06:56:10 AM
Ooops...

Ric, I keep an old compact mirror in my guitar shop tool kit... not sure then just what your comment might suggest about me...  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 04, 2012, 07:03:43 AM
Ric, I keep an old compact mirror in my guitar shop tool kit... not sure then just what your comment might suggest about me...  ;D

We also found cosmetic. Do you also keep some rouge in the tool kit?  The Seven Site as guitar shop ... I'll admit it's not an alternative hypothesis that we've considered.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 04, 2012, 10:03:11 AM
Quote
About as likely as Terry-the-Transvestite to explain the gender-specifc artifacts

Lets not open that debate up again please  ;D

Agreed!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on October 04, 2012, 11:15:09 AM
Gentlemen, there is still a huge problem identifying the Campana’s Italian Balm bottle as “gender specific”, as pointed out earlier by me, Diego Vásquez (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,599.msg17887.html#msg17887), and John Kada. (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18723.html#msg18723)  From the time the product was first marketed in Canada in the 1920’s and until it started to fade away around the late 1950’s, it’s sales pitch was directed to both sexes.  The company's newspaper ads included lines such as- 
 
“…Men like its soothing "after-shave" effects." (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=GiFkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=THsNAAAAIBAJ&pg=5679,1824132&dq=men+like+its+soothing+after-shave+effects+campana+balm&hl=en)

“…Men like it after shaving…. (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=SalkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=vm4NAAAAIBAJ&pg=3199,703414&dq=men+like+it+after+shaving+campana+balm&hl=en)

“…Men use a drop on the brush when shaving. (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Qd1EAAAAIBAJ&sjid=aLoMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5957,3907008&dq=men+use+a+drop+on+the+brush+when+shaving+campana+balm&hl=en)

"...Relives all irritations and soreness caused by sunburn and perspiration.  Good for every member of the family.” (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=WhwuAAAAIBAJ&sjid=gD0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=1483,6685040&dq=caused+by+sunburn+campana+balm&hl=en)

“…Soon the children will be coming home with red rough hands…Campana's Italian Balm… — excellent for men and women too… (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=9I5jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KXoNAAAAIBAJ&pg=6053,4986563&dq=campana's+italian+balm+excellent+for+men+and+women+campana+balm&hl=en)

“…The bottle should be kept in the bathroom- handy for the entire family...  Every youth should have a bottle in his room as a fixer for the hair." (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DW4tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xosFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3996,3510947&dq=campana's+italian+balm+the+bottle+should+be+kept+in+the+bathroom&hl=en)

“…Every Member Of The Family Can Use It for Their Hands (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=CipkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=nXsNAAAAIBAJ&pg=2287,2560256&dq=every+member+of+the+family+can+use+it+for+their+hands+campana&hl=en)

“...The Commander had ordered the men to stay clean-shaven and protect their faces and hands by using (Campana Italian Balm) (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=GfMxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=LeMFAAAAIBAJ&pg=2611,3596035&dq=campana+balm+men&hl=en)

"...A Fluid Skin Softener used by millions of men and women is known as Campana Italian Balm. Ask for it..." (http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=Every+Member+Of+The+Family+Can+Use+It+for+Their+Hands+campana&oq=Every+Member+Of+The+Family+Can+Use+It+for+Their+Hands+campana&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i400.2642.7297.0.8424.9.1.0.8.0.0.68.68.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.1.zn3hB_lpA-U#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&gl=us&tbs=ar:1&tbm=nws&q=which+is+used+by+millions+of+men+and+women+is+known+as+Campana+Italian+Balm+Ask+for+it+at+toilet+goods+counters+everywhere&oq=which+is+used+by+millions+of+men+and+women+is+known+as+Campana+Italian+Balm+Ask+for+it+at+toilet+goods+counters+everywhere&gs_l=serp.12...3551719.3551719.4.3553707.1.1.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.1...1c.15lSInljnHc&pbx=1&fp=1&biw=1600&bih=662&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&cad=b&sei=XLhtUNXXG4qF0QHt_IGYDw)

Sorry, but I don't see how TIGHAR"S claim, "Campana Italian Balm, and hand lotions in general at the time, were marketed solely to women," holds up under scrutiny.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 04, 2012, 12:01:18 PM
Gentlemen, there is still a huge problem identifying the Campana’s Italian Balm bottle as “gender specific”

Point taken.  Campana Italian Balm, although undoubtedly popular with women, also appears to have been marketed to men.  The small bottle found at the Seven Site therefore should not be considered to be gender-specific in the same way as, for example, the compact mirror and cosmetic.

Sorry, but I don't see how TIGHAR"S claim, "Campana Italian Balm, and hand lotions in general at the time, were marketed solely to women," holds up under scrutiny.

I don't know who said that. You haven't provided a source.  I speak for TIGHAR on matters of evidence, either by my own writings or by approving the publication of the writings of others on the TIGHAR website or in press releases. 

TIGHAR's is an on-going investigation.  We report the results of our research as we go along.  Sometimes further research brings in new information that allows us to correct previous impressions that were not correct.  We're grateful when that happens.  When new research appears to be legitimate we happily incorporate it into our understanding and interpretation of the evidence.  We do it all the time.  But language like, "Sorry, but I don't see how TIGHAR"S claim...holds up under scrutiny." is hostile and accusatory in tone.  It is detrimental to the maintenance of this forum as a place for reasoned discussion and research.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 04, 2012, 12:47:29 PM
Wow, nice piece of research, Alan. 

Ric, the quotation Alan references is from the Research Bulletin I wrote in February.  True, the source should have been cited.

Still, an excellent piece of cultural research.  I did not catch these ads, nor did the EPAC.  You did.  Based on your earlier research, I am impressed but not surprised.  I've seen your tenacity in earlier posts.

In the spirit of a defense of my claim Campana's focus was women, which I hope you will not mind me making - and is in no way meant to undermine your research - in America of the 1930s, the Campana story may have been far different.  The U.S. 1930s ads I've seen include nude female silhouettes, women sponsors, and women's narratives.  Their factory entrance featured an art deco mural of stylized women in various depictions.  The radio ads I've heard from the First Nighter Program are all aimed at women. (I will provide links and files when I get back to the laptop.)

Granted, you have one 1959 Boston Globe ad that pitches to men and women, but this date is 26 years after the date code on the bottle itself, which is 1933. By then the product, which had experienced drastic sales declines, could well have tried a new advertising approach.

I have a question in to Bill Lockhart as to whether a U.S. to Canada bottle supply chain may have existed for Canadian versions of Campana. (The artifact is stamped with a Bridgeton, New Jersey factory stamp.) To my knowledge, there was a  sizable Toronto base of operations.

If you can find a U.S. ad from the 1930s that specifically mentions men, you've got something even more interesting, but I would still say that a random sampling of the U.S. ads would show a target market for women, and that U.S. hand lotions in the 1930s followed this trend.

But who knows?  It would be a balanced approach as well, if you find something, to mention whether you ran into any of the kinds of ads that I saw.  Give us your impression of the ratios encountered.

Still, nice work.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on October 04, 2012, 01:43:13 PM
Wow, nice piece of research, Alan. 

Ric, the quotation Alan references is from the Research Bulletin I wrote in February.  True, the source should have been cited.

Joe, I appreciate any and all credit (and accept blame) when it is due, however, in this case the person you should be responding to is Mark Pearce, it was his post.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 04, 2012, 01:54:43 PM
Potentially silly question, but if one never asks, one never learns...  I did not find the answer in any Google searches of tighar.org.

How is the Date Code "3" on the bottom of the Campana jar known to represent "1933" and not "1943".  I did find some debate online of when Owens-Illinois switched from 1-digit Date Code to 2-digit Date Code, but did not find a definitive answer to the question for 1933/1943 years.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/03bottlebottom.jpg

Thanks in advance.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 04, 2012, 02:30:06 PM
How is the Date Code "3" on the bottom of the Campana jar known to represent "1933" and not "1943".

Not a silly question at all. Thanks for paying such close attention.  A paper on the Society for Historical Archaeology website by bottle guru Bill Lockhart (http://www.sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/OwensIll_BLockhart.pdf) explains:

"At some point in 1940, someone in the Owens Illinois Glass Co. seems to have realized that a zero could indicate either 1930 or 1940, so a new code needed to be
developed.  The answer was to add a period indicating a manufacture of 1940 or later."

 Our bottle has no period after the 3.  The bottle was therefore manufactured in 1933.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on October 04, 2012, 02:30:12 PM
Potentially silly question, but if one never asks, one never learns...  I did not find the answer in any Google searches of tighar.org.
How is the Date Code "3" on the bottom of the Campana jar known to represent "1933" and not "1943".  I did find some debate online of when Owens-Illinois switched from 1-digit Date Code to 2-digit Date Code, but did not find a definitive answer to the question for 1933/1943 years.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/03bottlebottom.jpg

Thanks in advance.


This may help Jeff
 http://www.sha.org/research/owens-Illinois_article.cfm   (http://www.sha.org/research/owens-Illinois_article.cfm)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 04, 2012, 02:33:31 PM
My apologies to Mark.  I'm still getting acquainted with names here, and typing quickly as I do.  Congratulations to Mark Pearce.

Here's a link to a radio spot for Campana from 1944 from the First Nighter, a coast-to-coast radio program. One can hypothesize a Coast Guard connection to the Campana Italian Balm bottle, but one also must assume that the Coast Guardsman had been exposed to these stateside ads:

Link:
www.vstreff.org/Scripts/Chinese_Gong.pdf

Announcer:
Everywhere you go, women are doing extra work subjecting their hands to
extra punishment. Yet, have you noticed how some women keep those busy
hands well groomed? Soft and youthful looking?
 
Woman:
You can do it too, by choosing Original Campana Balm when work and
weather threaten to make your hands look coarse and unlovely. Beginning
tomorrow, use Original Campana Balm before you start work. It’s
protection against dirt and grime. And be sure to use it every time after
your hands have been in water, also, to help bring back the adorable
smoothness that your [skin] loses when you scrub frequently with soap and water.
Original Campana Balm acts so quickly and with such positive results, that
you too will soon be calling it the before and after lotion. Remember that
smooth, protected, un-chapped hands add to your efficiency, bolster your
morale, and please the man who holds them.
 
Announcer:   
Lack of certain basic ingredients, for a while, caused a shortage of Original
Campana Balm. We’re happy to say that these ingredients are again
available, and your dealer can now obtain supplies of Original Campana
Balm. If he does not have it, ask him to order it from his wholesaler.
 
Woman:
If you prefer a lighter lotion, ask for the new Campana Cream Balm, the
creamy lotion with Lanolin.
 
Announcer: Be sure you get either the Original Campana Balm in the green and white
carton or the new Campana Cream Balm in the yellow and white carton.
###

I see evidence, too, however, that there were various angled pitches aimed at those worried about sun protection.  Clearly, they weren't trying to exclude men.  Maybe the Company was even trying to pick up a male clientele, while all the while maintaining the customer base of females. 

I'd also say that the context of other artifacts found nearby - the possible compact case piece, the mirror, the rouge, the feminine-styled ointment pot - establish a contextual point of reference that help establish plausibility that this was a hand lotion, belonging to a woman. It would have been handy as a powder base or a sunscreen.

But...Mark Pearce's analysis once again makes clear why establishing a single smoking gun artifact, or even excluding whole segments of the population from such an artifact indisputably, is fraught with difficulty.  The patterns of evidence will always make the stronger case.


Joe Cerniglia
#3078CER

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Victor Hayden on October 04, 2012, 02:46:07 PM
Would it be likely then that one of  the coastguards at the Loran station in 1944 brought with him a 1933 bottle of Campana Balm? The contents of the 11 year old bottle of balm must have been used even more sparingly than the freckle cream.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 04, 2012, 03:44:23 PM
In googling for other bottles manufactured under Design Patent 85925:

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on October 04, 2012, 06:41:05 PM
is this jar the same one Tighar purchased a while back ?

 http://www.junkwhat.com/antique%20vintage/6204n5%20lot%20of%205%20pcs.htm
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 04, 2012, 09:33:24 PM
Richie...I don't think so. I believe the one Joe was telling me about was on the www.worthpoint.com website!!!  According to this website, the jar actually has freckle cream still in it!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 04, 2012, 10:54:09 PM
Richie...I don't think so. I believe the one Joe was telling me about was on the www.worthpoint.com website!!!  According to this website, the jar actually has freckle cream still in it!!!

The jars you and I have collected, Randy, are different.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 04, 2012, 11:45:51 PM
Several nights ago, I stumbled upon a website, which I believe may solve this riddle as to the infamous jar found on Niku; if indeed it really belongs to Amelia. In reference to a Wikipedia discussion page, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AAmelia_Earhart/Archive_10) I firmly believe now that Amelia never used to treat her freckles with freckle cream, but to treat blemishes caused from the surgical procedures she had over the years when she suffered from chronic sinusitis. If most of you will look back in history over pages of photographs you might notice that its very hard to notice a picture of her with freckles. Most of them have a fine white tint to her complexion. Was she using freckle cream at the time? Maybe...maybe not! Anyway, according to the link on wikipedia, Amelia had been plaqued with sinusitis for most of her life. So here are some questions we could ask in reference to this .......

1. Did Amelia seek employment with Dr. C.H. Berry when her sister and mother moved to Chicago in 1914, while Amelia was completing high school?

2. As a nurse's aide at the Spadina Military Hospital in Toronto, Canada while visiting her sister Muriel, (while suffering from sinus problems) was Amelia aware of the ointment at that time?

3. When Amelia moved with her mother to Boston, and went on to Columbia University to study medicine...was she aware of the ointment then?

4. With her knowledge with Chemistry and Pharmacy and Nursing...would you say that she had the freckle cream on board, along with the other bottles? Did she use these for her flying laboratory?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 05, 2012, 05:43:15 AM
That's some very interesting research, Randy...I may have something interesting in my files on this.  Let me look into it and see if I can suggest possible angles worth pursuing further.

I've had recent discussions with a few of our EPAC researchers in which we were pondering how Earhart's freckles do not seem to match up from one photo to the next.  This may be an indication that she was using cosmetics such as rouge at various times to conceal them.

Attached is the best image I have found of Earhart's freckles.

Best,

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 05, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
-----
Hello all.  I'm having trouble with file attachment limits, so I am sending this post in installments.  The attachments will come separately, one per post.  My apologies if this results in this message posting twice:
-----
In reference to our recent discussion about Campana and Mark Pearce’s outstanding recent research yesterday on Canadian advertisements for Italian Balm aimed toward men (!), I had a chance to go through my files and compile a quick synopsis of the American version of Italian Balm advertisements from the 1930s and 1940s.  Files are attached.

I also have included a brief excerpt about Campana's U.S. markets from the book "Batavia: From The Collection of the Batavia Historical Society."

The U.S. version of the product apparently used a different marketing strategy than Canada's, one that would seem incompatible – from a marketing standpoint –  with a separate U.S. campaign aimed towards men.  (However, I remain open to suggestions to the contrary from this outstanding team!)

Bill Lockhart's preliminary answer to my query on Canadian supply chains is that "Many Canadian firms used bottles made by U.S. glass houses." He has some specific historical files he can check that may provide information on whether Owens Illinois (the maker of the artifact bottle) ever sold bottles like the artifact to Canada.

IF the artifact was purchased by a 1940s Coast Guardsman as a result of an ad aimed toward men, rather than toward women, I think he read that ad in Canada, not the U.S.  I can't find any U.S. ads from 1930-1946 (the probable - but arbitary - time frame I selected, during which owners of a 1933 Campana Italian Balm bottle would have seen them) that were aimed at men, but they might be out there for others to find.

Ric, did any of your research and interviews with surviving members of Loran Unit 92 turn up any U.S. Coast Guardsmen who had lived in Canada?

The ads I've attached provide a cultural context that led me to my original statement that this product was marketed exclusively to women.  I would suggest perhaps that we modify our Research Bulletin (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm) to reflect the new exceptions, pending, of course, further research that might modify it further.

The bottles of Skat Repellent with U.S. Patent 85925, which Jeff Carter located, would not seem to match the artifact because - so far as I can tell from these photos - they do not have the distinctive stamp on the bottom that the artifact does. I have, however, placed a question to the eBay seller inquiring about base markings/stamps, so that we might be more certain.

It's possible an insect repellent could have ingredients that might be confused with a hand lotion.  Ric's earliest assessment of this bottle was based on Winterthur scientist Jennifer Mass' conclusion in her lab report, which stated her spectral analysis was "consistent with its having been used as a lotion or skin cream bottle."

I've done a search for ingredients of Skat but have been unable to find any but the active ingredient lists.  It would be interesting if someone could find evidence that insect repellents in the 1930s commonly had things like Tragacanth Gum, lanolin, and rapeseed or linseed oil, because these were the spectrally identified ingredients found on the bottle.  First, however, we really would need a picture of the Skat bottles that shows that distinctive stamp (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/03bottlebottom.jpg).

I appreciate all the amazing research members are accomplishing here.

Best,

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 05, 2012, 08:30:51 AM
Here are the attachments I had promised to include in the earlier post but had been unable due to server constraints:

Attachment 1.
File name: Campana Factory.jpg

Excerpt from "Batavia: From the Collection of the Batavia Historical Society" by Jim and Wynette Edwards.  Arcadia Publishing, 2000.

A synopsis of Campana products and Campana Company's target market in the U.S.

Attachment 2.
File name: Campana Life Magazine Feb 15 1943.jpg

This advertisement is typical of American ads I surveyed from the Coast Guard Loran Station era on Nikumaroro.

Attachment 3.
File name: Campana_Skin.jpg

This advertisement would have been typical of a 1930s American ad for Campana products.  The caption is telling.

The contrast with the Canadian ads Mark unearthed is most interesting.

That's all I have for now.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 05, 2012, 10:09:07 AM
The seller of the Skat (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-glass-bottle-insect-SKAT-MILITARY-KIT-New-York-NY-USA-3-4-Mosquito-/300787349179?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item460852b6bb&autorefresh=true) confirms the stamp does match 2-8-s-2a in general characteristics.  I've put in a bid.  We may at some point wish to test this by FTIR to see whether it might match the artifact.  I can see from a preliminary web search that lanolin (lanolin alcohol), Tragacanth Gum (as an emulsifier), and linseed oil (natural repellent properties) cannot necessarily be excluded from insect repellents.

This insect repellent angle is the first product I've seen that actually might be an alternative to Campana Italian Balm.  It's problematic to my hypothesis the artifact was Campana Italian Balm in that it apparently had a military first aid kit application.  Most interesting!  We may need to revise the Lotion bulletin in time to include this alternate product.   The other interesting angle, of course, is that I have a line of research suggesting that insect repellents may have been important things to have on the world flight.

Only a test now may tell for sure if this product really is a good match.

I'll be away from emails or posts for the long weekend.  Have a great weekend everyone!

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 05, 2012, 10:22:34 AM
On the other, other hand there are no mosquitoes on Niku.  I don't know exactly how that affects the probability a Coast Guardsman intentionally brought insect repellent there.  He may not have known what to expect in any case.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 05, 2012, 11:15:48 AM
On the other, other hand there are no mosquitoes on Niku.  I don't know exactly how that affects the probability a Coast Guardsman intentionally brought insect repellent there.  He may not have known what to expect in any case.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

2 oz. insect repellent appears to be part of the standard "Kit, Jungle, Medical, Individual, M-2" which was supposedly "supplied to each soldier fighting in jungle areas".  Would it have been also issued to the Coast Guard?
http://www.med-dept.com/individual_kits.php





Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on October 06, 2012, 01:37:23 AM
2 oz. insect repellent appears to be part of the standard "Kit, Jungle, Medical, Individual, M-2" which was supposedly "supplied to each soldier fighting in jungle areas".  Would it have been also issued to the Coast Guard?

The "M-2" kit is no doubt Army.  This 1943 pamphlet (http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/going_south_pacific.htm) issued by the Commander Air Force Pacific Fleet [i.e. Navy] contains guidance for "naval personnel about to go to advanced bases in the South Pacific".  On pages 3 and 20 it confirms the Navy (and perhaps by inference, the Marines) also issued insect repellent.

Quote
Recent correspondence indicates that an insect repellent is being provided for all units in the South Pacific.

Note, however, that this info does not mention "Skat" by name, and of course still doesn't answer your question about the Coast Guard.

Also, for a good, clear 1943 illustration of a Skat bottle, see this eBay ad (http://www.ebay.com/itm/1943-Skol-Skat-Insect-Repellent-Soldiers-in-Jungle-WW-II-War-Illustrated-Ad-/330666138611).  (Interesting that the ad is priced higher than the actual bottle on eBay.)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Greg George on October 06, 2012, 12:20:46 PM
Randy Conrad writes:


Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply from Randy Conrad on: October 04, 2012, 11:45:51 PM (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg20412.html#msg20412) »

Quote

"I firmly believe now that Amelia never used to treat her freckles with freckle cream, but to treat blemishes caused from the surgical procedures she had over the years when she suffered from chronic sinusitis. "

Randy, I'm a chemist assisting with the project.   This is certainly one possibility.    As you know, mercury has anti-microbial and anti-fungal properties, and was sometimes prescribed in skin creams for this purpose.   It is possible that she treated the wound from a small sinus drain tube with the cream.   With her background in chemistry and experience working in the pharmacy, AE would have dispensed many mercury based compounds which were in very common use during the period she was in nursing training.   I have observed elsewhere that mercury vapors, which would be released on enzymatic methylation of the metal by the tissues, are documented to cause sinusitis, as described by a German researcher in 1926:

http://www.stanford.edu/~bcalhoun/stocketcMatsHansen.pdf

If she used the cream, it may have actually exacerbated her sinus troubles.   A more likely purpose in applying the cream, I think, might have been to lighten a scar caused by the sinus drain tube.    Mercury of course inhibits melatonin pigment formation through known pathways and can actually lighten darkened scar tissues.   You make a very good observation that the cream may have had another purpose.

"1. Did Amelia seek employment with Dr. C.H. Berry when her sister and mother moved to Chicago in 1914, while Amelia was completing high school?"

No evidence for this.   The cream was likely manufactured in Aurora, IL for Berry.   The cream was available throughout the country including other locations AE frequented, such as Albequerque.

"2. As a nurse's aide at the Spadina Military Hospital in Toronto, Canada while visiting her sister Muriel, (while suffering from sinus problems) was Amelia aware of the ointment at that time?"

See above.   It is doubtless that many mercury-based drugs were dispensed at this time, and AE worked in the pharmacy.

"3. When Amelia moved with her mother to Boston, and went on to Columbia University to study medicine...was she aware of the ointment then?"

Berry's President had set up major operations in New York by this time.   The cream was in fairly widespread use, and there were many competitor's products with similar formulations.

"4. With her knowledge with Chemistry and Pharmacy and Nursing...would you say that she had the freckle cream on board, along with the other bottles? Did she use these for her flying laboratory?"

Its not clear what kind of experiments she would be doing.   Having access to the best medical care of the day, it seems unlikely she would experiment on herself.   She may well have been advised to use the cream, as you suggest, for its medicinal properties, or as I have suggested in order to lighten scar tissue.   The effects of mercury medicines were very well understood by this time, including toxicity, which was regarded as a manageable side-effect.    The use of the cream to treat freckles still seems a good bet for AE.

- Greg G.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on October 06, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
Hi All

Gary's thread about Earhart pistol, On the link, There is an article near the bottom of newspaper with an interview with Noonans wife and it say's she owned a beauty parlor is that correct ?

If so surly she would know what cosmetics Earhart carried with her an there use.

Have Tighar Interviewed Noonan's wife ? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 06, 2012, 08:19:50 PM
Hi All

Gary's thread about Earhart pistol, On the link, There is an article near the bottom of newspaper with an interview with Noonans wife and it say's she owned a beauty parlor is that correct ?

If so surly she would know what cosmetics Earhart carried with her an there use.

Have Tighar Interviewed Noonan's wife ?

Mary Bea was Fred's second wife. They were married in April 1937 while the airplane was being repaired. She ran a beauty parlor in Oakland. I know of no reason to think she knew much of anything about Amelia.
Mary Bea died long before TIGHAR was founded.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 07, 2012, 10:29:30 AM
I have some new information about Skat Insect Repellent that may be of interest.  According to a registration with the Canadian Patent Office, Skat's earliest use date was September 29, 1942.
http://books.google.com/books?id=btUnc0c7_AoC&q=skat+insect+repellent+1937&dq=skat+insect+repellent+1937&source=bl&ots=eohK9RWM9W&sig=FiCtHDny1AdNRhpNRKqCLJgzD34&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bPVwUJPcOqep0AHL34CwCg&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAQ

This information is consistent with the August 9th, 1943 edition of Life Magazine, which states that Skat was then a "new insect repellent" for troops that would soon be but was not yet available to regular consumers.

http://books.google.com/books?id=T1AEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=skat+insect+repellent+first+introduced+in&source=bl&ots=9WhqAtv1sk&sig=jBASaehLBVFz4oFOuNVXuvTAvVY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HfZwUJGuH6230gGpyIHoCQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=skat%20insect%20repellent%20first%20introduced%20in&f=false

The bottle of Skat for sale on eBay is dated with a "3" for the year code on the base of the bottle.  The seller informed me this morning that his bottle of Skat, which is labeled in such a way as to suggest it was for troop use (mentions uniforms), has a period after the numeral 3, which means, according to a rule that has been established by TIGHAR's bottle expert Bill Lockhart, that the bottle dates to 1943. 

The Niku bottle also has a 3 on its base but no period afterward (again, according to Bill's rule concerning periods). It therefore dates to 1933.  What this tells me is that for the Niku bottle to be a bottle of Skat, it would have to have been filled 10 years after it rolled off the line in 1933 Bridgeton, New Jersey.  That seems possible but unlikely. It also helps confirm that Bill's "period rule" should be reliable for dating these Owens-Illinois bottles. (The rule applies only to Owens-Illinois bottles, of which the artifact, and Skat, are examples.)

In many other ways, I can see a high potential for confusing Skat with the artifact bottle.  Both bottles have the Bridgeton, New Jersey factory code of 14.  That's one mighty coincidence. If the period had not been on that Skat bottle, I would have had serious doubts about whether in fact the Niku bottle might not really be a bottle of Skat.  But the period resolves my doubts. 

I would maintain the Niku bottle, 2-8-s-2a, is not a bottle of Skat.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 07, 2012, 11:40:52 AM
Did you win the auction? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 08, 2012, 04:50:33 AM
Did you win the auction?

Yes, I did.  I'll get some photos up of the base of the bottle of Skat Insect Repellent as soon as I can.  It occurs to me as well that if the Niku artifact bottle is a bottle of Skat, the makers of Skat would need to be supplementing the 1943 bottles they are known to have used in its earliest confirmed year of production - 1943 - with other bottles from 1933.  The odds of this happening would appear to be vanishingly small.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 08, 2012, 12:53:11 PM
Did you win the auction?

Yes, I did.  I'll get some photos up of the base of the bottle of Skat Insect Repellent as soon as I can.  It occurs to me as well that if the Niku artifact bottle is a bottle of Skat, the makers of Skat would need to be supplementing the 1943 bottles they are known to have used in its earliest confirmed year of production - 1943 - with other bottles from 1933.  The odds of this happening would appear to be vanishingly small.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Good auction grab.  Will be really interesting to see how the dimensions compare.  Possibly would nail down the 2 oz. size of the bottle.

I think the question is whether Owens-Illinois might have used an outdated bottle mold base plate in manufacturing.  One can easily envision the following scenario: the factory, in an effort to fill a sudden large bottle production order for a military contractor, uses an old mold base plate from the factory storeroom until time could be found to modify the date code on the mold.  In that scenario, a large number of  bottles could have been manufactured with incorrect date codes until the mold base plate was updated.

Looking forward to the bottle pictures.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 08, 2012, 02:17:47 PM
That's an interesting question, Jeff.  The use of incorrect mould stamps is something that would seem to me to be difficult to document, since verification or disverification of date codes on bottles requires separate knowledge of the label on the bottle and the history of the product.  In the case of Skat, though, we have those things: the label on the bottle, the 1943 Life Magazine ad for Skat, which cites this product as new, and the trademark notice of an earliest use date of late 1942 all add significant credibility to the 1943 date code on the eBay Skat bottle.  That's at least one case where it's perfectly reasonable to think the date stamp is correct.

Bill Lockhart's article (http://www.sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/OwensIll_BLockhart.pdf), which seems to have been exhaustively researched on the question of deciphering the date codes on Owens-Illinois bottles, lists 4 reasons that a bottle maker would have an interest in stamping bottles correctly:

1. Identification of the bottle, particularly for customers placing orders.
2. Mould and inventory control of the factory.
3. Quality control for bottle production, i.e. bottles with defects can be used to identify the defective moulds that produced them.
4. Production liability, e.g. should a bottle burst, the mould number, in combination with trademarks and date codes, can tell how old the bottle was and what company produced it.

The idea that the artifact's date code is incorrect - and thus was supposed to have a period after the 3, indicating an actual production date of 1943 -  is always a possibility, but it seems unlikely to me.  There was no reason to jump to that conclusion prior to finding out about Skat.  The Skat, on its own merits, seems to offer no reason to jump at that possibility.  In fact, it seems to verify to some extent Bill Lockhart's contention that Owens Illinois was one glass house that left behind enough information on its bottle codes to date these bottles reliably to within a single year. 

None of this is absolute, and I don't want to sound that way (but I often do, I know).  This is simply the way the odds seem to lean for me.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

I think the question is whether Owens-Illinois might have used an outdated bottle mold base plate in manufacturing.  One can easily envision the following scenario: the factory, in an effort to fill a sudden large bottle production order for a military contractor, uses an old mold base plate from the factory storeroom until time could be found to modify the date code on the mold.  In that scenario, a large number of  bottles could have been manufactured with incorrect date codes until the mold base plate was updated.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 08, 2012, 04:14:13 PM
The idea that the artifact's date code is incorrect - and thus was supposed to have a period after the 3, indicating an actual production date of 1943 -  is always a possibility, but it seems unlikely to me.

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem (entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity)
Occam's Razor

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 08, 2012, 05:57:36 PM
A bit of trivia that shows a whole lot of 2 ounce bottles were being manufactured (obviously not all by O-I), Pond's alone claimed to have sold 70 MILLION bottles by 1949:  http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1338&dat=19490620&id=I-NXAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pvUDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2843,2106338


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 09:07:02 AM


Jeff Neville is right. Unfounded speculation that the bottle was incorrectly dated is a good example of a topic that is Too Dumb To Live.  Let's have no more on that subject unless and until someone can provide documentation that Owens-Illinois bottles were incorrectly dated.

But, demonstrating that Earhart brought the bottle raises another challenge against the razor, I suppose - but we do seem to have a 1933 bottle(?).


Yes, we have a 1933 bottle.  Occam's Razor says that "entities" (explanations for all of the many and varied pieces of archival, tidal, photographic, artifactual, and faunal evidence) must not be "multiplied beyond necessity."   In other words, the single hypothetical event that explains everything is the most likely to be true.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Harry Howe, Jr. on October 09, 2012, 01:09:41 PM

[/font][/font][/font]

Ric
I believe that you have attributed Albert Einstein's paraphrase of Occam's Razor to Occam himself.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 01:57:30 PM
I believe that you have attributed Albert Einstein's paraphrase of Occam's Razor to Occam himself.

If so, I'll apologize to both Occam and Einstein, but you'll need to document your allegation.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 09, 2012, 03:17:11 PM
Did you win the auction?
Yes, I did.  I'll get some photos up of the base of the bottle of Skat Insect Repellent as soon as I can.  It occurs to me as well that if the Niku artifact bottle is a bottle of Skat, the makers of Skat would need to be supplementing the 1943 bottles they are known to have used in its earliest confirmed year of production - 1943 - with other bottles from 1933.  The odds of this happening would appear to be vanishingly small.
Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Here are a few more 2oz Insect Repellent bottles that might be worth investigating.  Both bottles appear to have the 85925 patent with the O-I mark without a dot visible by the rightmost digit.

Skat Bottle:
(http://i.minus.com/jfpHokzZE6BRj.jpg)
URL:  http://i.minus.com/jfpHokzZE6BRj.jpg

(http://i.minus.com/jk0W2Urda0BN8.jpg)
URL: http://i.minus.com/jk0W2Urda0BN8.jpg

6-12 Brand (may not be WWII era, may be post-war)
(http://i.minus.com/jbiIsiXCj2vbIi.jpg)
http://i.minus.com/jbiIsiXCj2vbIi.jpg

Let me know if you want me to send the URL to the online seller's website. 




Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on October 09, 2012, 04:01:42 PM
I believe that you have attributed Albert Einstein's paraphrase of Occam's Razor to Occam himself.

If so, I'll apologize to both Occam and Einstein, but you'll need to document your allegation.

Ric, you should not have to apologize to either.  As a student of Latin, there are many ways to say basically the same thing.  Latin semantics I do believe and a darn hard language to learn. 

"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate"  Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily

"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"  "Things must not be multiplied beyond necessity"
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 05:08:15 PM
Ric, you should not have to apologize to either.

Good.  That was going to be tricky.  They're both dead.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 09, 2012, 05:11:08 PM
Bill Lockhart's article is instructive:

"In several cases, the initial 4 has been added as an afterthought, frequently slightly out of alignment with the other digits associated with the logo. Occasionally, a mold engraver forgot to change the code. The initial bottle used by the Illinois Brewing Co. of Socorro, New Mexico, for example, was made in 1946 but has a single 6 to the left (note from Joe: should say right) of the Owens-Illinois manufacturer’s mark but with no period after the number. However, I have found few exceptions to the period rule. By 1947, the change to double-digit date codes appears to have been completely adopted by all the plants."

When I look closely at the photos of the bases you have sent, I notice that in the first case, the surface of the base has been "pinched" in such a way that a period to the right of the 3 may have had no room to show up in the stamp.  It may in fact be there.  The photo is blurry.  The second example has alignment problems on the date code and the period may be there to the right of the top half of the 8.  The date code and factory code are upside-down relative to the orientation on the Niku bottle.

The Niku bottle has no such defects.  The stamp is clear, there are no misalignments and no obstructions that would be in the way of the period, had the stamp contained a period, as it properly should if Owens-Illinois was following protocol.

The fact that these were official wartime supply repellents would seem to preclude a Coast Guardsman carrying these in luggage.  I hope Ric will not mind me quoting him, but I have this from research from Ric on Coast Guard supplies:

10/7/2010:

"We have 55 cargo manifests for U.S. Navy PBY resupply flights from Canton Island to the Loran stations on Gardner and Atafu spanning the period from October 1944 to October 1945.  Lots of butter, eggs, meat and fresh veggies of various kinds, apples, oranges, Coke, beer, etc. and on one trip 30 lbs of mayo. No ketchup.  That doesn't mean the Coasties didn't have ketchup but it does mean that any suggestion that ketchup bottles were delivered to the Coasties is a stretch."

Ric, are there any mention of insect repellents in these cargo manifests?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 05:11:42 PM
Here are a few more 2oz Insect Repellent bottles that might be worth investigating.  Both bottles appear to have the 85925 patent with the O-I mark without a dot visible by the rightmost digit.

Remind me why we're doing this.  We've already matched remnants of the bottle's contents to Campana Italian Balm. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 05:20:31 PM
Ric, are there any mention of insect repellents in these cargo manifests?

No.  There's really no need for insect repellent on Niku.  Very few flying insects and none that are bothersome.  No mosquitos.  No gnats. We've never used any kind of repellent in our many trips there.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 09, 2012, 05:40:51 PM

Remind me why we're doing this.  We've already matched remnants of the bottle's contents to Campana Italian Balm.

Well, here's the deal.  Three ingredients were identified in the artifact: lanolin, oil of rapeseed or linseed, and tragacanth gum.  The tragacanth gum was a positive match between the artifact's remnant and remnant on a 1930s bottle of Campana Italian Balm.  Traces of ester (lanolin is an ester) were also found on both bottles.

The problem is esters can be formed as degradation products simply by combining oils and alcohol in the presence, often, of a catalyzing acid.

The bottom line is I can envision scenarios in which a pre-DEET era repellent might have oils and tragacanth gum. The latter is an emulsifier, and the former has natural insect-repellent properties.

If it came down to a test by FTIR comparing Skat and the artifact, I still think a match would be difficult to obtain. But I'd rather avoid a situation where this seemed necessary.

By your checking the Loran supply inventories, I'm satisfied an FTIR test is not necessary.  I assume you would agree.

(I would, by the way, add that with Mark Pearce's analysis of the ads from Canada targeting men for Italian Balm and a few sparse American ads from the 1930s touting the benefits for the family, I would not mind if the research bulletin I wrote on the lotion bottle be amended to read that Campana Italian Balm, and hand lotions in general in the 1930s and 1940s were marketed mainly to women.  Previously I had said exclusively to women.)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 09, 2012, 06:00:43 PM
(I would, by the way, add that with Mark Pearce's analysis of the ads from Canada targeting men for Italian Balm and a few sparse American ads from the 1930s touting the benefits for the family, I would not mind if the research bulletin I wrote on the lotion bottle be amended to read that Campana Italian Balm, and hand lotions in general in the 1930s and 1940s were marketed mainly to women.  Previously I had said exclusively to women.)

We don't amend published bulletins.  If new research makes a bulletin obsolete (happens all the time) we publish a new bulletin.  The old bulletin remains with a notation that it has been superceded by a new one. That way we have an historical record of the progress of the research - known to our critics as "changing our story."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 09, 2012, 07:24:26 PM
If the process requires that the bulletin be made "obsolete," that's obviously not the way we would want to go.  Nothing was made obsolete on that bulletin except a slight change in one word, which changes none of its overall conclusion.

Since you have aptly raised the issue of Occam's razor, it's worth summarizing, for those who have not been following every word of the discussion closely, what entities we must multiply to entertain some of the possibilities discussed, and why, Ric, you're right on target in framing the discussion this way.

For the bottle to be something other than 1933 Campana Italian Balm and other than something belonging to the castaway, some combination of the following must be true:

1) The date code must be in error, a period should have been placed after the 3, the bottle actually is from 1943 AND a better spectral match must exist for Skat than for Campana Italian Balm.  (Note that Skat did not exist in 1933, and so for the bottle to be Skat, 2 entities must be "multiplied beyond necessity.")
2) The date code is correct and a Coast Guardsmen brought 1933 Campana Italian Balm to the Seven Site.  Judging by the ads I have seen and the radio programs I have heard from the 1940s with Campana ads targeting women, this seems unlikely from a socio-cultural standpoint, notwithstanding the exceptions noted.  Life Magazine and the First Nighter radio program, which both spoke of the product as an ideal way to attract men, had a combined audience share of the majority of Americans living in the 1940s.
3) The date code must be in error and a Coast Guardsman brought 1943 Campana Italian Balm to the Seven Site. This option looks to be nearly impossible. Ads I've seen from the Sears Catalogs show that by 1943, the bottle style for Campana had changed to a rounded side, rather than the straight side seen in the artifact.  See attached file from the Spring 1943 Sears Catalog (notice the lovely hands).

It should be emphasized that no one is saying the above is impossible.  We are, I believe, saying that the most obvious answer to this exhaustively researched (and I know because I did exhaustively research it) question is the one most obviously before us:

The bottle is most likely from 1933 and contained Campana Italian Balm, the most popular hand lotion of the era, marketed mainly to women.

(Even having said all this, I find nothing wrong with entertaining the possibilities.  We must remember, however, that contextually, alongside rouge, a compact, a mirror from a mirror compact, fragments of a compact, pre-war liniment, and possible freckle ointment, one more cosmetic item is hardly unusual - unless one considers the even larger context of the island itself, whereupon it becomes positively unusual.)

And even beyond this, lest we become too wrapped up in one artifact as the next most likely "smoking gun," we need to remember what Tom King said in his blog earlier this year:

"It’s far more common in archaeology, and more trustworthy, to base our conclusions on a pattern of clues – artifacts, faunal remains, the organization of sites, and so on – that collectively give us a plausible story, a reasonable picture of what happened in the past. I know that kind of research is hard to present in screen shots and sound bites, but that’s how we actually piece the past together. And that’s that kind of a reasonable picture we think we’re seeing come together at the Seven Site. It’s still murky, and it’s still possible we’re misperceiving it, but if we are, it’s because we’re misinterpreting the patterns of evidence, not because we’re missing some specific definitive artifact."



Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 09, 2012, 09:25:39 PM
In a half day spent e-mailing a few online bottle sellers, two different 2oz Owens-Illinois "DES PAT. 85925" bottles were found that didn't match the supposed marking and dating scheme for O-I bottles.  I suppose each person can decide for themselves how that affects their opinion, if at all.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on October 09, 2012, 10:55:51 PM
In a half day spent e-mailing a few online bottle sellers, two different 2oz Owens-Illinois "DES PAT. 85925" bottles were found that didn't match the supposed marking and dating scheme for O-I bottles.  I suppose each person can decide for themselves how that affects their opinion, if at all.


Joe reports in "Notion of a Lotion" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm)- "We were also able to locate a bottle, sans label, that matched this style."

What about size?  Does artifact 2-8-S-2a match up with the dimensions of the 2oz Owen-Illinois bottles? We know they were used to bottle Skat insect repellent during WW2, but are there any print ads, radio commercials, etc., that would suggest Campana Italian Balm was being distributed in these same 2oz bottles around the year 1937? 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 02:35:21 AM
That is a fair statement.  For added perspective, it might be useful to know what were the counts for those sellers you emailed who did have bottles that did match the scheme.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 05:16:31 AM
Joe reports in "Notion of a Lotion" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm)- "We were also able to locate a bottle, sans label, that matched this style."

What about size?  Does artifact 2-8-S-2a match up with the dimensions of the 2oz Owen-Illinois bottles? We know they were used to bottle Skat insect repellent during WW2, but are there any print ads, radio commercials, etc., that would suggest Campana Italian Balm was being distributed in these same 2oz bottles around the year 1937?

Hi Mark,
We don't know the exact ounce size of the fragment found on Nikumaroro.  Ric listed it on EPAC
as 3 oz. or less.  As a result, the only way to match sizes to candidate bottles is to compare them, and even in this regard we only have the base to compare, not the top. 

As I mentioned in my Background report, a precursor to Notion of a Lotion (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Bottle/BackgroundofOrganicLabAnalysisReport.pdf) we have not been able to locate a bottle in the exact size as the artifact.  Skat may be a good match as far as size is concerned.  I will need to check when the Skat arrives.

In the fall of 1937, Campana Italian Balm was listed in the Sears Catalog in 3 sizes, 29c, 44c and 79c.  File attached.  We don't know the ounce sizes.  Attempts to find all three sizes today from sellers to compare have not been successful.

It is interesting to note as an aside, in going back over my binder containing all the Campana ads I collected from the Sears Catalogs, I find a few interesting coincidences -

a) The date code on the bottle appears to be 1933.  While Jeff has suggested here it may be 1943, the bottle cannot be earlier than 1933 (1923, for example) for the simple reason that the patent was issued in 1931 and thus the style did not exist that much earlier. (Bill Lockhart's article lists separate reasons why the 1923 date is impossible, but I will leave that to those who would like to study it.)

b) Further, while the date code on the bottle reads (apparently) 1933, this style of bottle is not pictured in the Sears Catalog ads for Campana until 1935.  The style apparently fell out of favor for Campana in 1941, the year they introduced the "wave" style I sent last evening.  Assuming the artifact is for Campana, this sets a tentative date of arrival to Niku even more proximate to Earhart's disappearance than the date code would even suggest, and not much later than the time in which the castaway's bones were found.

As in all things here, with the exception of things like the tail of Earhart's plane emblazoned with the Lockheed logo, we're not about eliminating possibilities.  As Greg George has pointed out to me, moulds could be purloined, bought, sold, reused by any manufacturer who wished to use them at any time.  This is not to say it happened; only that it - and a number of other things about which we have no knowledge - could have happened.  What my research on the Campana was meant to suggest was probabilities.  How probable is it that along with a green bottle and a beer bottle, positively dated to before W.W. II and burned in a fire in what appears to be an attempt to purify (distill fresh?) water, and a possible freckle cream jar (almost assuredly some type of cosmetic), and a compact with a mirror and rouge, that some other type of cosmetic hand lotion was found nearby?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR#3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on October 10, 2012, 08:20:36 AM
In a half day spent e-mailing a few online bottle sellers, two different 2oz Owens-Illinois "DES PAT. 85925" bottles were found that didn't match the supposed marking and dating scheme for O-I bottles.  I suppose each person can decide for themselves how that affects their opinion, if at all.

I guess the question is why would you email bottle sellers of Owens-Illinois in the first place?  They would be the least to know anything about a balm bottle imo.  O-I is a large conglomerate of many glass manufacturers in the US and abroad.  One and most importantly is Owens Brockway Glass Container Co. Inc who through acquisition became the sole owner of, Hazel Atlas.  Fact is that Owens Brockway owns all of Owens Illinois manufacturing plants worldwide.

Now, I have spent the greater part of two days researching where the archives of Hazel Atlas are.  One thing I have found is two entities that have large displays of not only Hazel Atlas Glass but others as well.  One of those entities is the University of Toledo, OH, a repository of a large collection of vintage glassware.  The other is the West Virginia Northern Community College.  I have made contact with both entities to see if they have anything that relates to the artifacts that we have in hand.  That research is presently ongoing. 

I have also found a woman who worked for Hazel Atlas during the time frame we are dealing with here.  She is now 95 years old and is a resident of an assisted living facility.  She graduated University with a degree in Industrial design and was employed by Hazel Atlas Corp. She was responsible for many of the designs of HA.  As of Feb 12, 2012 she was lucid and I have two contacts that know her who I will try and contact today.  She decided after retirement to donate her collection of HA glassware to an entity that I am in the process of conversing with to see if any of those match the artifact we have.  In reading her story, she has a wealth of information that could most likely date the Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream Jar and at the very least let us know where the records of Hazel Atlas are today.

"That rare melding of the two elements of glass making has occurred for an area organization that collects a line of Wheeling-made glass. Newly-discovered vintage Hazel Atlas glass has been added to the historic collection owned by the Alumni Association of West Virginia Northern Community College.

The designer of the glass, 95-year-old xxxxxxx xxxxxx of Pittsburgh, donated these pieces along with original company catalogs to the association's collection." 

I am not sure she is still alive but if she is I x'd out her name from the above quote for her privacy till I can get permission from those who know her to speak with her.  Hopefully there is more to come from this endeavor.

To Joe Cerniglia, if you are interested in pulling the reigns on this project, I would be most happy to hand them off to you with all the data I have collected and the contacts.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on October 10, 2012, 09:18:59 AM

I'd like to hope for DNA on some of this stuff still, but to borrow Joe's own phrase in a similar circumstance, it seems the odds of that after all this time are 'vanishingly small'.  :(

Ah yes Jeff, oh for that bit of touch DNA be it Mitochondrial or Nuclear that could link Earhart to the artifacts.  'vanishingly small' may be an understatement by Joe.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 10, 2012, 09:31:49 AM
Ah yes Jeff, oh for that bit of touch DNA be it Mitochondrial or Nuclear that could link Earhart to the artifacts.  'vanishingly small' may be an understatement by Joe.

Forget "touch DNA."  We've learned that the environment on Niku is so hostile to the survival of DNA that getting contact or "touch" DNA is out of the question.  Getting DNA from human bone is even dicey. A bone that has been sitting on the surface for 75 years will, in all likelihood, no longer yield enough DNA to sequence.  We'll need a bone that somehow got buried early and has been protected from the sun, rain, and rats.  There are ways a bone could get buried.  A crab could drag it into its burrow.  Bioturbation (the stirring of the ground caused by plant growth) could bury a bone.  Or, of course, Amelia might have buried Fred.  But those all sound like long shots.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 10, 2012, 10:14:01 AM
In a half day spent e-mailing a few online bottle sellers, two different 2oz Owens-Illinois "DES PAT. 85925" bottles were found that didn't match the supposed marking and dating scheme for O-I bottles.  I suppose each person can decide for themselves how that affects their opinion, if at all.

I guess the question is why would you email bottle sellers of Owens-Illinois in the first place?

The email was simply to several bottle sellers on Ebay and Etsy to ask for a photograph of the bottom of the bottle they were selling so we could have a look at any markings on the bottom.  That was all. 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on October 10, 2012, 01:18:59 PM

(I would, by the way, add that with Mark Pearce's analysis of the ads from Canada targeting men for Italian Balm and a few sparse American ads from the 1930s touting the benefits for the family, I would not mind if the research bulletin I wrote on the lotion bottle be amended to read that Campana Italian Balm, and hand lotions in general in the 1930s and 1940s were marketed mainly to women.  Previously I had said exclusively to women.)


If the artifact found on Niku is truly part of a Campana Italian Balm bottle, how can we be sure it didn't belong to Gerald Gallagher?  There is clear evidence Gallagher owned at least one bottle of skin lotion during his time on the island.  The list of his personal effects (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Gallagereffects2.html) includes-

Item 24. 1 Tin box marked G.B.G. containing:- "...2 bottles hair cream, 1 bottle skin lotion, 1 bottle medicine, 1 bottle pills...,"

All the Campana Balm bottle labels and nearly all the advertisements I've seen pitch the product as the "Original Skin Softener".  The product was marketed not so much as a hand lotion, but as a general skin lotion.  Apparently Gerald Gallagher turns out to be one of those rare men who used some brand of skin lotion in the 1930s.  Gallagher could have purchased bottles of Campana's Balm before he left England.  According to Joe's "Background" paper (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Bottle/BackgroundofOrganicLabAnalysisReport.pdf) a publication from 1935 reported- 

"...The manufacturing plant at Toronto now supplies not only the Dominion, but Australia, England and New Zealand. Demand for the product from many other foreign lands has required a distribution plan which will make the lotion available in every quarter of the globe.”   

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 10, 2012, 02:15:51 PM
If the artifact found on Niku is truly part of a Campana Italian Balm bottle, how can we be sure it didn't belong to Gerald Gallagher?  There is clear evidence Gallagher owned at least one bottle of skin lotion during his time on the island. 

We, of course, can't be sure it didn't belong to Gallagher any more than we can be sure it did belong to Amelia Earhart, but if it did belong to Gallagher is certainly wasn't the bottle listed among his personal effects after he died.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 10, 2012, 04:33:27 PM
 Hi! I wanted to send this out to you guys to let you know the status of my search with the museum and its curator. Hope this comes in handy Joe!

Russ,

Thanks for replying to Randy.

Jo

Joanne Hott, Docent
Duncan & Miller Glass Museum
The National Duncan Glass Society
525 Jefferson Avenue – POB 965
Washington, PA  15301-0965
(724)222-9950

www.duncanmiller.net (http://www.duncanmiller.net)

-----Original Message-----
From: rcrupe@nsasecurityforces.com [mailto:rcrupe@nsasecurityforces.com]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 8:15 AM
To: unclerandy43@aol.com; dmmuseum@verizon.net
Subject: Hazel atlas jar

Hello Randy,

Sorry for a delayed response. Hazel-Atlas Glass Company manufactured thousands of various jars in a multitudes of designs. Your jar is a style that was used as packer jar for various items (e.g. jelly, ointments, paint). The milk glass jar can easily be hazel-atlas as they did not mark all their wares.

The paper label would have been added by the customer. Hazel atlas offered fired on color labels on jars or bottles.

I realize this isn't much help but most company records were destroyed when Continental Can bought Hazel Atlas in 1956.

I collect all sorts of Hazel Atlas and haven't seen any records of Dr. Berry. I have a few bills from another company that sold similar items.

Russell Crupe

Edited to remove excess spacing.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 05:58:42 PM

Your jar is a style that was used as packer jar for various items (e.g. jelly, ointments, paint). The milk glass jar can easily be hazel-atlas as they did not mark all their wares.

Thanks Randy, and Thanks to Mr. Crupe and Joanne Hott.
I am grateful for their assistance.  We might be able to provide some information that may have been unavailable to them at the time of their inquiry that might enable them to help us further.

We have found mercury in quantity sufficient to have been considered part of the original contents on the inside of the jar.

The jar is less than 3 ounces and is of a style stated in Hazel Atlas's ads to be for ointments.  I think ointments might be a more fruitful line of inquiry than paints, but if he has some paints he can show us in that jar, there would be interest.

We have from Bill Lockhart evidence that the jar was in fact designed for a specific purpose: "the original design this jar was based on was a Toilet Cream Jar on page 29 of the 1896 Whitall Tatum & Co. catalog.  The jar was also in the ointment pot section of the 1902 catalog, although I have not found it in later Whitall Tatum catalogs."

This is exhaustively researched, and specific information that might be of interest to collectors and museums who are looking at the piece.  With the databases they have available, it might even give them a great starting point for further research!

They may like to know we have found 7 documented products we know appeared in the jar: Burnham Kalos Skin Rejuvenator, Gervaise Graham Hygienic Skin Cream, Gervaise Graham Skin Food, Woodbury Violet Face Cream, Dr. Berry's Creme Elite, and Dr. Berry's Massage Cream, and Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment.

We would very much like to see other cosmetics, or food or paint products but so far have been unable to locate these.  Maybe they could help us.

We have additional research on this that I'm saving for a bulletin, in partnership with Bill Lockhart, Tom King, and Greg George, but it will take time to assemble.  I think much may be new in this bulletin to those who read it. 

Thanks again for looking into this Randy!

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 06:38:20 PM
There is clear evidence Gallagher owned at least one bottle of skin lotion during his time on the island. 
I had been noticing that about a year ago, and yes, it bothered me, too.  Maybe our British readers could tell us whether "skin lotion" was the way one referred to after shave.  That would be convenient if it was, but I don't know if linguistically that is true.


All the Campana Balm bottle labels and nearly all the advertisements I've seen pitch the product as the "Original Skin Softener".  The product was marketed not so much as a hand lotion, but as a general skin lotion. 

Certainly, it was the "original skin softener."  Very true and it's on the label.  There are probably ads speaking only of it as a general skin lotion.  But in  Life Magazine and some others (https://www.google.com/#q=campana+hand+lotion&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ei=gA52UNWsNKH00gH0goDAAg&ved=0CA0Q_AUoAA&prmdo=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=2cacd87502f37287&bpcl=35243188&biw=1024&bih=566), you can find lots of ads for Campana as a hand lotion.  I wouldn't say they traded one pitch at the expense of another.

The radio ads for this product are really interesting, and I've listened to many here that can be downloaded. (http://www.oldradioworld.com/shows/First_Nighter_Program.php) We have a definite research need to listen to more of them.  Try O Little Town of Bethlehem (first 6 minutes) in the link and you'll see, hand lotions and women prominently mentioned. 

Also, it may bear mentioning that in America the bottles of this product featured a drawing of a woman touching her hand to her face, from Fall 1935 to Fall 1946.  Files attached.  You may need to magnify them to see.  It might mean something to check out the kinds of products that share the same page with Campana.  Now, in Canada and elsewhere that situation may be different.  Here's another research need.  Find ads or photos with the bottles pictured in other countries and see whether there is a woman on the front.  Maybe those bottles are in fact different.  However, I really think having a woman on the front of the bottle might dissuade the average man from buying, but I can't say for sure.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 06:54:31 PM
To Joe Cerniglia, if you are interested in pulling the reigns on this project, I would be most happy to hand them off to you with all the data I have collected and the contacts.

Thanks Bob, but I have my hands full just interpreting and pulling together all the scientific data from the labs on the jar.  We're not even done with the experiments.

Thanks for thinking of me.  Maybe when I'm in the clear, I can take a look but it won't be for a while.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Pearce on October 10, 2012, 08:54:04 PM
There is clear evidence Gallagher owned at least one bottle of skin lotion during his time on the island. 
I had been noticing that about a year ago, and yes, it bothered me, too.  Maybe our British readers could tell us whether "skin lotion" was the way one referred to after shave.  That would be convenient if it was, but I don't know if linguistically that is true.


Campana's Balm was used as an aftershave lotion in the 1930s by men here in the USA.  I think it's safe to say men in England used it for the same purpose.  Gallagher probably went through a lot of 'aftershave/skin lotion' while he was on the Island.  He looks clean shaven in photos. Google "Campana's Italian Balm barber shop".

THIS WONDERFUL OLD BARBER SHOP BOTTLE WAS STILL MOUNTED ON THE WALL OF THE OLD DOWNTOWN BARBER SHOP BEFORE IT WAS TORN DOWN, THIS IS MARKED CAMPANA'S ITALIAN BALM AND WAS USED AS AN AFTER SHAVE LOTION.  A NICE EARLY BARBER COLLECTABLE (http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/wall-mount-barber-bottle-campanas-italian)
--------------------------------------

This is a Great Barber Bottle with a White porcelain Shaker/pouring top! The bottle is made of a Clear Glass with a Basket weave pattern in the middle of the bottle.  It has raised lettering on the bottom that says Campana Italian Balm. (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Campana-Italian-Balm-BARBER-BOTTLE-w-Shaker-Top-/360492350336?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53ef04bb80)

--------------------------------------

Vintage Antique Glass Lotion Bottle Wall Mounted Campana's Italian Balm
Up for grabs is this beautiful Campana's Italian Balm bottle. It would have been used in a barber shop and held an aftershave type product.
(http://www.etsy.com/listing/83072305/vintage-antique-glass-lotion-bottle-wall)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 10, 2012, 10:07:00 PM
The email was simply to several bottle sellers on Ebay and Etsy to ask for a photograph of the bottom of the bottle they were selling so we could have a look at any markings on the bottom.  That was all.

Jeff, let me say first of all that your research on the Skat is probably some of the finest work I have seen in my association with TIGHAR.  When Robert Ballard spoke of putting his students "through the ringer," in the State Department's announcement of Earhart Search 75, he surely had someone such as yourself in mind.  I can't compliment this work enough.

You've shown that it is definitely possible that at least 1 additional product besides Campana Italian Balm carried the same distinctive OI stamp with date code, factory code, maker's mark and patent number as the artifact.

I have some good news to report as well regarding the Skat:  I think we can safely eliminate this product from consideration as a possible identity for the artifact bottle.  Tonight I stumbled upon the complete formulary for "Gallowhur Skat."  (Gallowhur Chemical Corporation is the name on the 1943 bottle Jeff initially brought to our attention.)

From Marion Gleason, Clinical Toxicology of commercial products, 1957, the following ingredients are listed:

2-ethyl hexanediol-2, 3: 20%
Alpha, alpha-dimethyl-alpha carbobatoxydihydro-gamma-pyrone: 20%
Dimethyl phthalate: 60%

A screen print of the relevant page is attached.  Gleason's is the same book used to verify the ingredients in Campana Italian Balm.  Both EAG Labs and Jennifer Mass at Winterthur Labs thought it authoritative enough to cite in their own reports.  These reports showed from lab testing that both the remnant on the artifact bottle and Campana Italian Balm contained Tragacanth Gum.

The ingredient list for Skat does not contain Tragacanth Gum, nor does it contain rapeseed oil or linseed oil, all compounds identified from the testing.

Therefore, it is impossible for Skat to be the identity of the bottle on Niku.

This is the good news.

The bad news is that any other product with the distinctive stamp (attached) found, if any, must undergo the same process of elimination, based upon chemical analysis and ingredient matching. 
Since some of the 1943 bottles did not have periods, we must evaluate any products with the stamp on the merits of their contents, not their stamp date codes.

For now, at least in my opinion, Campana Italian Balm is still amply shown to be the most probable match for the artifact.  It matches on enough FTIR spectra to make this, in the words of one scientist, a "very good spectral match."  The putative date range on the stamp (1933-1943) is safely within the production dates for the product; however, the fact that Campana was not using a straight-sided bottle after 1941 would seem to indicate that the 1933 date is much the favored.

The good news is - for now - a delight to me.  My research on this bottle can stand, until proven otherwise.  The bad news has a silver lining - it is true news, the only kind really worth reading about.

Thank you again for your assistance.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 11, 2012, 08:45:17 AM
Campana's Balm was used as an aftershave lotion in the 1930s by men here in the USA.  I think it's safe to say men in England used it for the same purpose.  Gallagher probably went through a lot of 'aftershave/skin lotion' while he was on the Island.

If that chain of speculations were true, I would expect him to buy his 'aftershave/skin lotion' in bottles bigger than 2 or 3 ounces and I would expect him to have more than a single bottle in his inventory at the time of his death (he had just returned from Fiji where he presumably could have stocked up if he was getting low).  Amelia, on the other hand, might be expected to have "travel size" bottles of personal care products with her.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 11, 2012, 09:32:52 AM
His guvmint kept a lot of records - might there be more about Gallagher's where-with-all buried somewhere?

As I recall, there were some invoices that had to be settled after his death.  I'll check the file (we have lots of stuff from the WPHC records that is not yet digitized).
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 11, 2012, 09:46:09 AM
I'll check the file (we have lots of stuff from the WPHC records that is not yet digitized).

Nope.  Nothing there.  In fact, there are no references in the correspondence of Gallagher ever ordering anything for himself.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Irvine John Donald on October 12, 2012, 12:56:43 AM
I might argue that "travel" to Gallagher, in this case, was for much longer than your average Vegas weekend.

His assignment was for many months, if not years, to the South Pacific.  In his case the travel size bottles would run out far too quickly. He likely had larger containers.  His initial supply of products from home could be his only supply for many months.  Its not like he could resupply at thevlocal airport gift shop.  Even you noted Jeff that when you found a rare supply of Brut you bought bulk as well.  Likely because you weren't sure of future supply. Could this not likely rule him out as a candidate for the source of the small bottles?  Please note the use of he words "likely" and "could".
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 12, 2012, 05:23:05 AM
I just received the Skat bottle in the mail.  I do believe we've removed Skat from comsideration as a match to the artifact based on comparison of its complete ingredient list to the substances found on the artifact.  The union of those is a null set.  However, because the question was asked and I presume some would still like to know, I will provide the base dimensions. It is 1" exactly in width and about 1.75" in length at the longest possible side.   The bottle itself looks to be a size match to me to the artifact.  Checking back through my emails, Ric confirmed the width of the artifact is 1".  I'm almost certain the length is right.

Had there been a match between even one of the many ingredients compared, I would have wanted this tested and would have arranged to see that done.

Impressions: Seeing this type of bottle whole in what I presume to be the correct size for the first time is exciting.  It looks like a cosmetic bottle that has been borrowed for the wartime purpose.  The period after the 3 is clearly visible.  I have no time to post photos right now, but I will next week.  Again, I may be away for much of the weekend and unable to reply immediately.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 12, 2012, 04:48:56 PM
Don't know if anyone is still buying Freckle Cream jars, this one claims to still have some material in it.
http://www.junkwhat.com/antique%20vintage/6204n5%20lot%20of%205%20pcs.htm



Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Irvine John Donald on October 12, 2012, 11:24:51 PM
Hi Jeff. Thanks for your much appreciated comments.

The TIGHAR board and advisory members have to be the ones determining how the scarce funding dollars are spent. My hope is that the finding of the debris field doesn't stop any other initiatives from being considered. As has been pointed out in prior posts the ROV search consumes vast sums of money.  A land based search costs less. But the finding of the new debris field has to take priority in terms of funding priorities. Just as you suggest Jeff. It's now the "low hanging fruit" that needs to be harvested.  I look forward to more of Ric and Jeff Glickman's updates as I am sure everyone does.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 17, 2012, 08:03:53 AM
Jeff, let me say first of all that your research on the Skat is probably some of the finest work I have seen in my association with TIGHAR.  When Robert Ballard spoke of putting his students "through the ringer," in the State Department's announcement of Earhart Search 75, he surely had someone such as yourself in mind.  I can't compliment this work enough.

Thanks for the kind words. 

In regards to the Campana bottle sizes of the 1930s, the 25 cent size that was offered during the mid 1930s was apparently a tube.  Attached is an ad from "Motion Picture" magazine.

(http://i.imgur.com/Eg3Yz.jpg)
http://i.imgur.com/Eg3Yz.jpg

This is the first evidence I have seen that Campana was also available in tubes.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 17, 2012, 06:05:30 PM
In the fall of 1937, Campana Italian Balm was listed in the Sears Catalog in 3 sizes, 29c, 44c and 79c.  File attached.  We don't know the ounce sizes.  Attempts to find all three sizes today from sellers to compare have not been successful.

I have found some newspaper ads which give the ounces in the Campana Italian Balm bottles for sale.  Most newspaper ads don't list a size in ounces, but occasionally the ads do.  But, as with everything, sources don't agree. 

First the good news, for the 1930s, all newspaper ads I found seem to agree on 4 1/2 ounces for the medium 60 cent size.  The large $1.00 size is not mentioned very often, but one or two ads mentioned 9 ounces.

Now, the bad news (where the newspaper sources don't agree with each other).  For the small 35 cent size bottle:
     The Oshkosh Northwestern22 Nov 19342 oz.     (might be old square bottle)
     The Oshkosh Northwestern     31 Jan 19352 1/2 oz     (also in July, Aug. & Nov. 1935 ads)
     The Hammond Times.18 Jul 1935.     2 1/2 oz.     
     The Clearfield Progress. 26 Sep 1935.     2 1/2 oz.   
     The Hammond Times. 21 Nov 1935.     2 1/2 oz.   
     Chronicle Telegram, The (Elyria, Ohio).      Feb. 10, 1938.      2 oz.     (Drene offer ad)
     Reno Evening Gazette. March 16, 1939.     2 oz   (savings matrix-type ad)
     The Clearfield Progress. 16 Mar 1939.     2 oz   (matrix)
     The Hammond Times. 28 Mar 1940.     2 oz.    (matrix)

One 1933 ad mentions a 1 1/2 oz. 25 cent size which I assume is the tube mentioned above.

Sample size is quite small since so few ads list ounces.  Also, one of the reasons the newspaper names repeat is that I am using ancestry.com which does not have very many newspapers to search.  The matrix ad lists a bunch of products and show the savings in buying the large size -- so that explains why the size is listed in the ad.  I suspect when the old "square" bottles switched over to the new bottles, and both size bottles worked thru inventory, advertisers needed to be clear which size was being advertised, and then no longer felt the need after the old bottles were totally depleted.

So did the Campana bottle sizes change?  Did Campana start putting less liquid in the bottle? 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 17, 2012, 06:29:29 PM
Refresh my memory.  When and how did we decide that the bottle bottom found on Niku was from a 2 oz. bottle?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 17, 2012, 07:51:58 PM
If question is in regard to my "bad news" reference, I only meant that the newspaper ad sources don't all agree.  I'll edit the post to reflect that.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 17, 2012, 08:37:51 PM
My question was as I stated it.  When and how did we decide that the bottle bottom found on Niku was from a 2 oz. bottle?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 18, 2012, 07:33:57 AM
If we have the found bottle, what can be the mystery about the size of the bottle?

All we have is the bottom.  We know from the patent number that the bottle is an "Imperial Oblong" and we know that they came in many sizes including 2 oz. and 3 oz. but I can't tell which size our artifact is by eyeballing the bottom.  The best way to identify an artifact is to find a known object that is identical to the unknown object. What we need is an intact Imperial Oblong of the same size as the artifact bottle.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on October 18, 2012, 07:51:56 AM
If we have the found bottle, what can be the mystery about the size of the bottle?

All we have is the bottom.  We know from the patent number that the bottle is an "Imperial Oblong" and we know that they came in many sizes including 2 oz. and 3 oz. but I can't tell which size our artifact is by eyeballing the bottom.  The best way to identify an artifact is to find a known object that is identical to the unknown object. What we need is an intact Imperial Oblong of the same size as the artifact bottle.

i think that was just done with the skat bottles located. Joe Cerniglia said his 2 ounce skat insect repellent bottle arrived and it was a perfect match. Therefore Joe Cerniglia determined a few days ago that the skat bottle bottom and the artifact bottom matched. The skat insect repellent is 2 ounces. That is why mr. Carter is now trying to find a similar 2 ounce campana bottle because Joe Cerniglia has not been able to locate a 2 ounce campana bottle now that Joe determined 2 ounces was a match.This all happened in the last few pages of this thread and week.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on October 18, 2012, 08:26:49 AM
Joe did not rule out any sizes. He did not say it was impossible for example for a two ounce bottle and a 3 ounce bottle to have the same bottom. Only that the 2 ounce skat bottle was a perfect match, however joe still considered skat unlikely due to the bug repellent chemical makeup.

However, Given that a 2 ounce skat bottle does match in size and markings and was produced in the millions in ww2 jungle kits, perhaps testing the chemicals of the artifact and skat would be smart.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 18, 2012, 08:55:59 AM
Joe Cerniglia said his 2 ounce skat insect repellent bottle arrived and it was a perfect match. Therefore Joe Cerniglia determined a few days ago that the skat bottle bottom and the artifact bottom matched.

Joe can't make that determination. He doesn't have the artifact.  I do. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 18, 2012, 09:18:50 AM
Don't we already have a chemical analysis of the content remnants on this article?

Yes, and it quite conclusively matches Campana Italian Balm.  I've never really understood all the fuss about Skat. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on October 18, 2012, 09:35:39 AM
Don't we already have a chemical analysis of the content remnants on this article?

Yes, and it quite conclusively matches Campana Italian Balm.  I've never really understood all the fuss about Skat.
well i do not believe the chemical analysis conclusively matched campana. I believe Joe said the artifact had lanolin. Campana did not have lanolin.
Or any other ester. Neither has Joe found a campana bottle that matched the artifact bottom.
Therefore Mr carter thought of skat and it does match the artifact in shape size and markings. And it does contain an ester.
But in any event from reading the lab reports campana never really matched for lanolin or esters without degradation.
It seems like the first lab said it was probably lanolin so sounds like handcream not sure why campana was picked it never really seemed to match in size or for lanolin.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 18, 2012, 09:39:16 AM
Ric stated,

"Joe can't make that determination. He doesn't have the artifact.  I do."

I apologize if imprecise wording in an earlier post led to confusion.  Let me be more precise. What I meant was the base dimensions for Skat, length and width, 1.75" roughly and 1", appear from checking earlier emails from Ric to be a size match to the base dimensions of the artifact for base length and base width only.

The message snippet I used to back this could be ambiguous.  From a mesage dated Nov. 27, 2010, I was attempting to compare via EPAC email the dimensions of a Campana Italian Balm bottle to the artifact:

Joe:  "1) The base length at 2 inches is longer than the approximately 1.75 inches for the artifact base. (The width is 1 and 1/8 inches. Would that match the base width?)"

Ric: "The base width of the artifact bottle is bang on 1 inch."

Because Ric let stand my remark that the artifact was 1.75 inches in length, I have presumed this was the correct measurement.

I phrased this better when I stated in an earlier post;

"We don't know the exact ounce size of the fragment found on Nikumaroro.  Ric listed it on EPAC as 3 oz. or less.  As a result, the only way to match sizes to candidate bottles is to compare them, and even in this regard we only have the base to compare, not the top."

Knowing the base dimensions does not corroborate the volume in ounces of the container.

I have been working each night this week with fellow EPAC members to pull together more precise and thorough research regarding Skat Insect Repellent, Campana Italian Balm, and the artifact bottle.   Your patience, I promise, will be rewarded.  All the questions I have seen deserve a thoughtful answer.  Allow me a few days to present the work of my colleagues, including yourselves, in the best possible format.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 18, 2012, 11:47:46 AM
Here's a few more Insect Repellent bottle bottoms showing use of 85925 bottles on different brands.  They are being sold as WWII items, but cannot be sure if they are WWII-era.

Eveready: (looks post-war to me)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25860
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32981.jpg

Gaby Brand:  (can't make out the logo but says DES PAT 85925)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25850
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32956.jpg

This one I can't make out, looks right shape but don't see the DES PAT:
Skat
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25844

Pond's Brand Repellent apparently used some Hazel-Atlas jars of roughly the same shape.
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25865
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/dsc06703.jpg

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 18, 2012, 12:05:56 PM
Here's a few more Insect Repellent bottle bottoms showing use of 85925 bottles on different brands.  They are being sold as WWII items, but cannot be sure if they are WWII-era.

Eveready: (looks post-war to me)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25860
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32981.jpg

Gaby Brand:  (can't make out the logo but says DES PAT 85925)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25850
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32956.jpg

This one I can't make out, looks right shape but don't see the DES PAT:
Skat
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25844

Pond's Brand Repellent apparently used some Hazel-Atlas jars of roughly the same shape.
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25865
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/dsc06703.jpg


Yep.  Greg George saw them too.  Here's his message:

From: Greg
To: Joe
Subject: other insect repellants in the same bottle
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:16:12 -0500

National Carbon and Allied Product (label unreadable but mfr. inferred from my research) sold insect replellant in the exactly the same bottle.   Many companies were recruited during the war years to make the large quantities required, and so as not to have all the eggs in one basket.
 
http://fishingcollectables.com/images/

###

There is a hive of activity about this behind the scenes.  Much more to say soon.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 18, 2012, 12:07:13 PM
Here's a better link for above:
http://fishingcollectables.com/images/m269.jpg
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 18, 2012, 12:22:02 PM
Here's a few more Insect Repellent bottle bottoms showing use of 85925 bottles on different brands.  They are being sold as WWII items, but cannot be sure if they are WWII-era.

Eveready: (looks post-war to me)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25860
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32981.jpg

Gaby Brand:  (can't make out the logo but says DES PAT 85925)
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25850
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/d_32956.jpg

This one I can't make out, looks right shape but don't see the DES PAT:
Skat
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25844

Pond's Brand Repellent apparently used some Hazel-Atlas jars of roughly the same shape.
http://militaryitems.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=268&products_id=25865
http://militaryitems.com/store/images/archive/dsc06703.jpg


Yep.  Greg George saw them too.  Here's his message:

From: Greg
To: Joe
Subject: other insect repellants in the same bottle
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:16:12 -0500

National Carbon and Allied Product (label unreadable but mfr. inferred from my research) sold insect replellant in the exactly the same bottle.   Many companies were recruited during the war years to make the large quantities required, and so as not to have all the eggs in one basket.
 
http://fishingcollectables.com/images/

###

There is a hive of activity about this behind the scenes.  Much more to say soon.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER

Here's my list FWIW:

Insect Repellent Brands in "85925-Shaped" bottles.

Brands with "WWII-Military-Looking" labels (with warning about solvent on goggles, watches, etc.)

"Non-Military" Looking Labels:

[Edit: I added *** next to brands known to have an example of an O-I bottles from O-I logo visible in photographs of the bottom of bottles.]
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on October 18, 2012, 11:32:22 PM
For what it is worth, I was talking to an elderly man who owns a warehouse full of military supplies. In fact owns a very cool ww1 working tank!
He has crates of these skat type 2 ounce bottles. Pulling some at random direct from ww2 crates the list Jeff Carter gives is long and correct and probably not all.

Everybody was in on the action using these owens illinois bottles.
Some have the patent glass trademarks and some dont. Some have dates with dots and some don't. Some have private labels and some don't. Ponds, allied, skat, cpc, no real point in finding and listing them all. The military was in such a rush they were not exactly concerned with labels or vendors or purchasing direct from stores.
                                                                                                                                                                   

He did say that every crate he has seen with a stock number on the label like sf-450 were for the navy. The others non marked were for the army. But to sum it up there were millions of bottles and lots of vendors who used this bottle style Jeff is referencing. Not much sense in listing all of them or every bottle mark variation in my opinion.
The key to the jungle repellent bottles is do they match the artifact in size obviously, and would the dried remains match the graphs from the Evans lab charts in all aspects. If the white flaky remains in the artifact match bug repellent then that is pretty strong evidence.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on October 19, 2012, 05:40:41 AM
The key to the jungle repellent bottles is do they match the artifact in size obviously, and would the dried remains match the graphs from the Evans lab charts in all aspects. If the white flaky remains in the artifact match bug repellent then that is pretty strong evidence.

The match would have to be better than the match to Campana Italian Balm.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on October 19, 2012, 01:04:56 PM
I agree with Ric, so far these little bottles are intriguing cause the size seems real close and they have the same owens illinois marking on the bottoms. Most of them do anyway. But nobody knows if the chemicals in skat match the artifact. Need a lab for that.
Just my hunch but I am thinking the artifact is neither bug repellent nor campana balm.
Given the lanolin found on the artifact (or a lanolin chemical cousin), I would bet tighar had it right back in 2007 and the artifact held an unknown handcream or lotion.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on October 19, 2012, 03:27:47 PM
From Marion Gleason, Clinical Toxicology of commercial products, 1957, the following ingredients are listed:

2-ethyl hexanediol-2, 3: 20%
Alpha, alpha-dimethyl-alpha carbobatoxydihydro-gamma-pyrone: 20%
Dimethyl phthalate: 60%

A screen print of the relevant page is attached.  Gleason's is the same book used to verify the ingredients in Campana Italian Balm.  Both EAG Labs and Jennifer Mass at Winterthur Labs thought it authoritative enough to cite in their own reports.  These reports showed from lab testing that both the remnant on the artifact bottle and Campana Italian Balm contained Tragacanth Gum.

I don't own the book, and the Google preview makes it hard to read the introduction to the data, but I wonder if the book is only listing active ingredients.  It would seem very unusual if the three active chemicals added up to exactly 100% and there was not at least some other chemicals in some quantity.

Take a look at this bottle, where the exact same ingredients are listed as "active ingredients" in the exact same ratios.  (I believe Indalone is Alpha, alpha-dimethyl-alpha carbobatoxydihydro-gamma-pyrone.)
http://go-armynavy.com/index.php/vmchk/collectibles/wwii/u.s.-military-wwii-insect-repellent-single.html


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 19, 2012, 05:17:11 PM
Thanks everyone for the additional comments this week on artifact 2-8-s-2a.  I'm attaching a document I've been working on diligently this week to try to address some of the questions that have arisen on this topic, using the input I've received from chemist Greg George, bottle expert Bill Lockhart, Forum members Jeff Carter, and Mark Pearce, and others, along with a list of pertinent questions submitted by David Burrell, for which Greg and I have submitted answers.  We think the questions are ones with which anyone who studies the research material and lab reports on 2-8-s-2a will eventually grapple.  Our answers are intended to make that process simpler. 

This document is a draft only, submitted for others' corrections and adjustments.  We hope it might generate some thoughtful discussion. I have some photos to submit as well that are meant to accompany the document, which I will try to submit in subsequent posts, as size requirements allow.

Thank you.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 20, 2012, 06:21:49 AM
Photo, Comparison, Skat base and artifact 2-8-s-2a base
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 20, 2012, 08:40:16 PM
Okay! Now that we got this working...Anyway, here are a few pics I took off several journals I was looking at the other night on C.H. Berry Company. As it turns out I was dumbfounded to learn that the man I thought invented this freckle ointment, was not Dr. C.H. Berry but W.B. Forsyth. As shown. W.B. Forsyth invented Kremola in 1905 and sometime around 1906 must have invented Freckle Ointment. At this time, he became owner and President of C.H. Berry Company. I was also amazed to learn that his wife was indeed a doctor, and I wonder now, how much of an impact she might have had on these products.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 20, 2012, 08:54:41 PM
Here are a few more pics!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on October 20, 2012, 09:00:16 PM
One more set! THanks!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on October 20, 2012, 10:37:39 PM
As it turns out I was dumbfounded to learn that the man I thought invented this freckle ointment, was not Dr. C.H. Berry but W.B. Forsyth. As shown. W.B. Forsyth invented Kremola in 1905 and sometime around 1906 must have invented Freckle Ointment.

Randy, as you seem to enjoy these historical curiosities, you might also like to know there was an Ella R. Berry (a lady) that sold cosmetics and perfumes from the turn of the century into the 20's and 30's.  Based in St. Louis, she offered, yes, wait for it . . . "Berry's Freckle Cream", with the claim: "The Original (first sold in 1888)".  I have never seen a really good photo of an E.R. Berry jar or box, but in sketches the box appears similar to C.H. Berry's.  The company name was Ella R. Berry Pharmacal Co., later changed to Ella R. Berry Chemical Co.

Ella also marketed a line of cosmetics under the name "The Beautiola Company", and the original product in that line, called simply Beautiola, was also a freckle cream.

If you squint your eyes, this page (http://books.google.com/books?id=9G0gAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA167&lpg=RA1-PA167&dq=berry+beautiola&source=bl&ots=8RAqOM_kG2&sig=bCpcY8WfE22ZHJ9zJpOeEorrPYY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gnaDUJySMpLOyAHa_YG4Bw&sqi=2&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=berry%20beautiola&f=false) from 1912 has separate entries for the Beautiola and E. R. Berry companies, in the right-hand column, one near the top and the other at the bottom of the page.  Note they have exactly the same address in St. Louis.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on October 31, 2012, 06:03:10 PM

Randy, as you seem to enjoy these historical curiosities, you might also like to know there was an Ella R. Berry (a lady) that sold cosmetics and perfumes from the turn of the century into the 20's and 30's. 

This thread made mention of Ella Berry back on page 1, two years ago (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.0.html).

I have been unable to find any mention of this company later than the 1920 edition of Meyer Brothers Druggist (http://books.google.com/books?id=c8tXAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA450&dq=ella+berry+chemical&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZrGRUMbsDMH00gGS9YGQCQ&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false). If you've got something later, I would be interested.  The problem is, as you state, we have no photos or pictures of the actual containers Ella Berry Chemical used.  A search on the word "freckle" in this periodical will show just how common these freckle removers were.

Looking over the posts of the past year, I notice an impression seems to have taken root that advertisements for C.H. Berry's Freckle Ointment were scarce in the U.S.  I conducted a research survey of all of the editions of the Sears Roebuck Catalog from 1896 to 1993.  In the course of this work, I observed that these jars were for sale in the Catalog from 1908 to 1933.  While it is true the ads can be somewhat hard to find today, my survey shows they were quite common during this time period.

I thought it might be a good time to bring out the database that was the product of my research work in 2011.  I call it the "Sears Catalog Ointment Jars Database."  A few bullet points stand out from the data:
* The date between the "first use" date claimed on the H over A patent for Hazel-Atlas was 1923. The last date one of these jars can be spotted in the Catalog is 1933.
* C.H. Berry Freckle Ointment has the most appearances in the Sears Catalog, 40
* No C.H. Berry products appear in the Catalog from 1913 to 1926.

Note that the database only includes products that pictured at least one jar whose appearance matches that of 2-9-s-1, the artifact removed from the Seven Site in 2010.  One of the products, Kremola, was never pictured in the jar. However, I included Kremola because it seemed to mark the product to which the Freckle Ointment later transitioned.  Kremola was, to my knowledge, only sold in flat round tins. Note as well that the numbers listed in the cells are page numbers from the actual catalogs.  I'd be interested in your opinions and interpretations of this data.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078CER
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 02, 2012, 11:45:48 AM
Joe thank you for the database and your articles, and excellent time consuming research.
My own opinion is that neither the "freckle cream" jar or the "campagna bottom" is worthy of an association with Earhart. Reading all 31 pages of this thread and all the reports has taken much time, but what is clear from all the input and hard research-

1. No clear jar of the freckle cream type has been located. We dont have one. Alan Harris looks like he and others tried hard to find one. The evidence from the manuals he produced saying this jar was only available in Opal is good evidence. So even if it was Dr.Berrys it looks like Alan Harris and Dave Burrell posted it was older than the 1930's. So if she was carrying it then it was very old.
I have a hard time picking up items from the pre 1930's and assigning them weight as evidence. First it has to be the right decade, then proceed from there, the freckle cream for me just is not evidence at this point.

2.The campana balm at least appears to not have the same dating issues. I can see from the research that this is "possibly" a womans lotion bottle. Mark Pierce found numerous advertisements in this thread showing Campana was NOT gender specific at all. Plus, after looking at 3 different laboratory reports over a five year period, I still see no confirmation it is even campana balm.For years this looks like it was called the "lanolin" bottle. It may have been best to stick with that.
Starting with the first lab report in 2007 there was lanolin and seed oil identified.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Bottle/NikuVanalysisbottle.html

Then it was sent to another lab, EAG labs, in 2011 for more research based on some smudges that Dr.Mass the first scientist did not deem important the first time around. Clearly from Dr.Mass' report the first time she found the lanolin and worm residue as being most likely the only residue. This overall five year process is best summarized in your original Notion of a lotion article.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm

Lab two, Evans lab, tested actual campagna balm samples against the artifact. On pages 36-39 of the EAG report those graphs of the artifact don't match for Camapana. Despite the pronoucements of a consulting scientist, Greg George, the graphs don't lie.
We can speculate till the cows come home about contamination and degradation to try to make this artifact fit a campagna bottle.
The plain fact is the white residue found on the artifact does not match Campagna balm.

EAG labs did find Tragacanth gum they believed, a component of Campana based on secondary smudges on the artifact.

However while Campana had Tragacanth gum by 1957 at least, FTIR cannot differentiate between gums. Dr. Mass said that in her third and final round of testing to try to confirm what the second lab produced.
Quote-
"Figure 7, shown below, reveals a favorable comparison between gum Arabic and the
reddish residue in the Kiribati bottle. However, FTIR is insufficient to distinguish
between different types of plant gums, and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry is
necessary to definitively distinguish between gum tragacanth and gum Arabic." end quote

All of Dr. Mass's final conclusions and reports are in an embedded PDF in the link on your notion to a lotion bottle.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm

She seems quite clear on that. She was brought in for a third time to resolve the gum issues found at Evans lab.


So while in your question and answers to Dave Burrell and scientist Greg George resolve some issues, the basic problem remains. You have campagna balm examples, and per the graphs at EAG labs they dont match the white flakes found on the artifact. So the artifact bottom is Not a Campagna bottle.

Despite Greg George saying he feels the skat insect bottle will not match,  due to the primary ingredients, and "long chain carbons", ect., I would test it, At least the bottle is same size and same markings.
The famous Freckle cream jar, I would forget about until you find a clear one from the same decade that does match. That connection is even more tenuous than the Campagna. At least Amelia may have carried a time period lanolin hand cream. (Not Campagna though)

Or just give up on both these bottles completely. That would probably be wise in the big picture. In researching these artifacts, I found a quote in June 2010 from ric, in the forum, and Michael Hall was on a thread called "helping to understand"
Ric said "Any artifact, taken by itself, can be explained away if you postulate an unusual undocumented event (i.e. a compact carried as a memento), but when you find yourself having to do that over and over when there is a single hypothetical event (i.e. an American female castway) into which everything fits, the maintenance of skepticism begins to appear more and more desperate." end quote
 
I think the reverse of Rics quote can also be true.  It can be desperate as well to add a lot of meaningless clutter together and produce a pile and say "here look, can this all be coincidence?"

For the bottles and Jar, yes they are just coincidence.
There are too many hoops to jump through to make them fit. They can be just coincidence and clutter.
I would put a lid on the Jars.



Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 02, 2012, 12:04:57 PM
I think the reverse of Rics quote can also be true.  It can be desperate as well to add a lot of meaningless clutter together and produce a pile and say "here look, can this all be coincidence?"
For the bottles and Jar, yes they are just coincidence.
There are too many hoops to jump through to make them fit. They can be just coincidence and clutter.
I would put a lid on the Jars.

Logically, if my quote is true, the reverse of it cannot be true.
The artifacts exist.  Joe's research has made a case for what they are.  If Joe is wrong, then some other explanation must be right.  If you can come up with a well-researched and documented  alternative explanation that holds up better than Joe's I'm sure Joe (and I) will gladly embrace it, but dismissing artifacts by saying, "They can be just coincidence and clutter." doesn't cut it.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 02, 2012, 12:31:23 PM
I think the reverse of Rics quote can also be true.  It can be desperate as well to add a lot of meaningless clutter together and produce a pile and say "here look, can this all be coincidence?"
For the bottles and Jar, yes they are just coincidence.
There are too many hoops to jump through to make them fit. They can be just coincidence and clutter.
I would put a lid on the Jars.

Logically, if my quote is true, the reverse of it cannot be true.
The artifacts exist.  Joe's research has made a case for what they are.  If Joe is wrong, then some other explanation must be right.  If you can come up with a well-researched and documented  alternative explanation that holds up better than Joe's I'm sure Joe (and I) will gladly embrace it, but dismissing artifacts by saying, "They can be just coincidence and clutter." doesn't cut it.
1920's jar of freckle cream dropped overboard by one of the pleasure cruises around gardner Mark Pearce documented.
1940's skat bottle, refilled by an islander with hand lotion.
Either work just as well as Earhart.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 02, 2012, 01:12:52 PM
1920's jar of freckle cream dropped overboard by one of the pleasure cruises around gardner Mark Pearce documented.

Pleasure cruises around Gardner???  I missed that one.  Must have come been mentioned while I was away. Can you provide a link?

Anyway, I just did a little experiment with a one of the freckle cream jars that has a tight fitting lid.  An empty freckle cream jar sinks like a stone.

1940's skat bottle, refilled by an islander with hand lotion.

Where on earth is an islander going to get hand lotion?

You're going to have to do much better than that.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 02, 2012, 01:45:35 PM
Yes Mark posted 1920 advertisements for cruises around gardner. It is in this thread.
They were not exactly concerned with the ocean then. So some freckle cream is used up and dropped overboard. A few typhoons and decades later Tighar finds it.
That explains the freckle cream jar nicely. How a 1920's jar got on gardner.

Where would an islander get hand lotion? They were not totally primitive, far from it and they did even have a hospital. That could get lotion there in bulk and refill an American skat bottle. They reused american discards as tighar has documented. Or a coast guardsman could have refilled a skat jar with hand lotion and took it hiking during some alone time. There are countless possibilities.I remember when one field search produced 67 pairs of panties. Strange stuff gets out there. These jars are not even strange. Common house items from anyone. During flooding these jars could be pushed anywhere, such as the seven site. Or maybe the coast guardsman applied his last bit of handcream there looking at the ocean. The possibilities are so numerous it is mind boggling.

Being an ex peace officer from the southwest I know you can have a report of a missing girl last seen walking down the road. It is fruitless to search a field with some trash in it and proclaim every pencil is the little girls. Tighar will have to do better than that.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 02, 2012, 02:13:49 PM
Yes Mark posted 1920 advertisements for cruises around gardner. It is in this thread.

Not that I can find, and the idea that there were ever pleasure cruises around Gardner is laughable.

They were not exactly concerned with the ocean then. So some freckle cream is used up and dropped overboard. A few typhoons and decades later Tighar finds it.
That explains the freckle cream jar nicely. How a 1920's jar got on gardner.

As I've already explained, a freckle cream bottle dropped overboard would sink.

Where would an islander get hand lotion? They were not totally primitive, far from it and they did even have a hospital. That could get lotion there in bulk and refill an American skat bottle. They reused american discards as tighar has documented. Or a coast guardsman could have refilled a skat jar with hand lotion and took it hiking during some alone time. There are countless possibilities.I remember when one field search produced 67 pairs of panties. Strange stuff gets out there. These jars are not even strange. Common house items from anyone. During flooding these jars could be pushed anywhere, such as the seven site. Or maybe the coast guardsman applied his last bit of handcream there looking at the ocean. The possibilities are so numerous it is mind boggling.

What is mind boggling is your total misconception of the island and the people who lived there.  We'll waste no more time on this speculation.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on November 02, 2012, 02:47:05 PM
"So ended our wonderful cruise amongst those wondrous reef-bound Pacific coral islands of green woods, cocoanut palms bracken covered stretches, all clothed just as nature made them, and marred only by the grim tragedies of those whose ships strayed shoreward." 

Papers Past, the Phoenix Group (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19241010.2.101&srpos=26&e=--1900---1938--50--1----2gardner+island--)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on November 02, 2012, 03:35:05 PM
"So ended our wonderful cruise amongst those wondrous reef-bound Pacific coral islands of green woods, cocoanut palms bracken covered stretches, all clothed just as nature made them, and marred only by the grim tragedies of those whose ships strayed shoreward." 

Papers Past, the Phoenix Group (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19241010.2.101&srpos=26&e=--1900---1938--50--1----2gardner+island--)

Wow, how did I miss that before?  They had quite a time, including a stop at Gardner for gosh' sake.

Jeff, as much as I would like to take credit for that find, I must admit that it came from our dear friend and member C. W. "Woody" Herndon. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on November 02, 2012, 04:48:53 PM
Off topic, but apparently even British soldiers were issued Insect Repellent in these little 2-ounce oval bottles post-war:

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30025650
http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib/250/media-250559/standard.jpg


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 02, 2012, 08:34:54 PM
In responding to this post, I would like very much to point out again that there is a difference between belief and knowledge.  Belief is not a blind act of faith (although it can be; acts of faith have been known to possess a high intrinsic worth) but is based, rather, on where the evidence appears to point.  Very often I find here a tendency to ascribe to the researcher a knowledge that is actually a belief based on facts.  If some certain knowledge cannot be ascribed to the researcher, the reverse claim is made that the researcher then has "proven" nothing. It may well be that the researcher in question has not in fact sought to prove anything, only to indicate remarkable coincidences that weave themselves into a larger cloth of evidence, but that is often said to be beside the point.  I would submit that the extent of most researchers' knowledge lies somewhere on a spectrum between knowledge and lack of it.  We would do well, I believe, if we would keep these things in mind.

Joe thank you for the database and your articles, and excellent time consuming research.
My own opinion is that neither the "freckle cream" jar or the "campagna bottom" is worthy of an association with Earhart.
Glad we cleared that up. You of course know that I think these things are shouting Earhart almost as loudly as she appears to have done in the post-loss radio signals TIGHAR has deemed "credible."

1. No clear jar of the freckle cream type has been located. We dont have one.
News flash: The jar isn't clear and never was.  I have the lab report showing it and will explain, as I've said, as soon as I can get a chance to say what the lab learned and how we interpreted it.  I cite this not as "evidence" that the jar was freckle cream indeed, but as evidence that there may be additional facts that you might not have observed while otherwise occupied disverifying. 

Alan Harris looks like he and others tried hard to find one.
We live in a very blase' age regarding history and historical inquiry.  We think that the past is transparent to us, that an internet search or a museum inquiry can clear up our questions.  Sometimes it can, but the past, even yesterday, is quite a foreign country.  Prior to the 1930s, especially with regard to bottles, glassware was used to destruction. During the Great Depression, according to Bill Lockhart, "less was made; less was sold; less was used." It should be little wonder that certain items are unobtainable or very difficult to obtain.

The evidence from the manuals he produced saying this jar was only available in Opal is good evidence.
Our bottle expert Bill Lockhart states this is not true.  A manual for any given year saying what style of glass was used was valid for that year, and maybe not even that long.  We can argue this if we wish, but when an expert says something this definitively, it usually means there are other experts who are also willing to take the same position.  It doesn't mean by definition they are right and you are wrong, but you would need first, I think it is only fair, to state how many glass catalogs in cold dim library stacks have you strained your eyes to read?

So even if it was Dr.Berrys it looks like Alan Harris and Dave Burrell posted it was older than the 1930's. So if she was carrying it then it was very old.
The concept, I will grant, sounds strange today, but back then people held on to things for much longer than today.  Again, remember the Lockhart Principle: Used to destruction, or unsold.

I have a hard time picking up items from the pre 1930's and assigning them weight as evidence.
Assigning weight as evidence is an individual endeavor.  Your freedom to think and assign these weights is what makes this discussion interesting and enjoyable.  I would defend your right to do this.

First it has to be the right decade, then proceed from there, the freckle cream for me just is not evidence at this point.
I can see this is a sticking point for you.  Bear in mind we still don't have the decade in hand.  We think it's the 1930s and I will reveal why later, but that's unlikely to settle it.

2.The campana balm at least appears to not have the same dating issues.
You're kind to say so, but you'll see from my paper that we have some ambiguities here, which I freely admit.

I can see from the research that this is "possibly" a womans lotion bottle. Mark Pierce found numerous advertisements in this thread showing Campana was NOT gender specific at all.
Quite possibly, we need a new terminology.  Gender-indicated?  Gender-prevalent?  Something to indicate that at most places and times a bottle with a woman on the label would have been used most often by a woman.  Canada, I know, at times had a different marketing plan.  And maybe the U.S. at odd times did as well.  But I've seen a lot of distortion of the evidence here.  And no one has taken me up on the need to listen to the radio broadcasts of First Nighter, heard by millions.  Radio was the PRIMARY vehicle of advertising for this product.  (I have an attachment from a period radio trade journal to back this claim, but it's too large to post.)

Plus, after looking at 3 different laboratory reports over a five year period, I still see no confirmation it is even campana balm. For years this looks like it was called the "lanolin" bottle. It may have been best to stick with that.
Here is how the scientist from the first lab, which initially did not find a close match to Campana, viewed the report from Dr. Mass and my Lotion bulletin, once he'd seen it:
"I took a more thorough look at your article, and I think in general I like the way you described the match.   You made it clear it was not a perfect match and so in that context, I might have said a “pretty good match”.  You said a “very good match” and that is probably ok though perhaps (from an old nitpicker’s point-of-view) “pretty good match” would have made the point too."
He agreed with me that it was not a perfect match, but I also asked him:
Since the bottles were, as I say in my report, separated by 75 years and thousands of miles, having distinct histories of wear and use, might the expectations for the quality of a spectral match need to be adjusted downward, in light of those circumstances?   

His answer: "Agreed."
 
I also asked him, When I say in my report, "A perfect match would not be expected," am I justified in supposing that?   His answer: "Yes."

One needs to understand that the chances of getting just the right bottle, with contents not perfectly preserved, but worn and degraded in nearly exactly the same way as the Niku bottle, are very small.  It's pretty remarkable that the FTIR graph showing a match to the Tragacanth, a rare but shared ingredient between the artifact and Campana, was obtained.

Starting with the first lab report in 2007 there was lanolin and seed oil identified.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Bottle/NikuVanalysisbottle.html

Then it was sent to another lab, EAG labs, in 2011 for more research based on some smudges that Dr.Mass the first scientist did not deem important the first time around.  Clearly from Dr.Mass' report the first time she found the lanolin and worm residue as being most likely the only residue.
Dr. Mass was making no judgment of the brown remnant's value by not testing it.  The purpose of the original testing was materials characterization, NOT materials identification.  Identification at that point was still a very distant prospect.  TIGHAR wanted a general description of the characteristics of the remnants.  An exhaustive one probably did not seem necessary or financially prudent at the time.

This overall five year process is best summarized in your original Notion of a lotion article.
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm
Picking apart the length of time the process took is like going back to the 1950s and criticizing the cars people drove for not having anti-lock brakes.  It took some time to develop these refinements.  So it is with all scientific research, so far as I am aware.

Lab two, Evans lab, tested actual campagna balm samples against the artifact. On pages 36-39 of the EAG report those graphs of the artifact don't match for Camapana. Despite the pronoucements of a consulting scientist, Greg George, the graphs don't lie.
You put far greater stock in your interpretation than in the scientists'.  The EAG scientists (Lab two) never received the artifact to compare.  They only received Dr. Mass' spectral measurements.  It was only when Dr. Mass had both bottles to compare that the full extent of the similarities revealed themselves.

We can speculate till the cows come home about contamination and degradation to try to make this artifact fit a campagna bottle.
The plain fact is the white residue found on the artifact does not match Campagna balm.
Again, one must understand, this isn't like pouring some hand lotion into a vending machine and 20 graphs come out all perfectly proclaiming the match.  It's taken a large amount of detective work to figure this out. 

However while Campana had Tragacanth gum by 1957 at least, FTIR cannot differentiate between gums. Dr. Mass said that in her third and final round of testing to try to confirm what the second lab produced.

Quote-
"Figure 7, shown below, reveals a favorable comparison between gum Arabic and the
reddish residue in the Kiribati bottle. However, FTIR is insufficient to distinguish
between different types of plant gums, and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry is
necessary to definitively distinguish between gum tragacanth and gum Arabic." end quote
Let's look at the coincidences: 
1.) We have a bottle characterized in 2007 by a trained materials scientist as consistent with hand lotion.
2.) A bottle emerges in 2011, Campana Italian Balm. This was the most popular hand lotion of the 1930s.  Its quite unique base stamping matches the artifact.
3.) Chemical analysis shows three of the known Campana ingredients, Glycerine, Sorbitol and Tragacanth Gum can be detected on a known bottle of Campana Italian Balm.  The other known ingredients, Essential oils, Alcohol, Phenol, and Benzoic Acid were not detected, even though they were known to have once been in the actual bottle of Campana.  This should speak volumes about the likelihood of obtaining "matches" even when we know ahead of time what is going to match.
4.) The Niku bottle, having sat in the Niku sun, wind and rain for 70+ years underwent the same testing. Tragacanth Gum was matched, or perhaps it was Gum Arabic that was matched.   Either way, the ingredients here were matched between the artifact bottle, and the known Campana bottle.  You may argue, then, that the match was on the gum of a label (Gum Arabic), but I find this unlikely as my report of last week explains.  The label would need to have migrated to the inside of both bottles, and adhered to both insides as black and brown spots in exactly the same way.  It's particularly telling that Tragacanth, as the attachment shows, was an ingredient listed on the label of Italian Balm in a bottle stamped Copyright 1939.

Ester, as a by-product of the manufacturing process, was also matched on both bottles, as were other functional groups, such as oxalates, and OH (hydroxyl).

Understand, as well, that in order to obtain any kind of chemical match, visually similar components usually need to be compared.  In many of the comparisons you are seeing in the reports, white remnants were compared to brown, brown to blue, and so on.  These comparisons, again, were an unavoidable result of the fact that the initial lab (EAG) did not have both bottles in hand to test.

Or just give up on both these bottles completely. That would probably be wise in the big picture.
Now I know you must be pulling my leg!  It may not be possible to persuade you of other notions than what you have determined.  Of that, it may be "wise" to agree to disagree, but I at least think the questions implied in your statements are legitimate ones to be asked.  I'm taking a lot of time in answering them, but you also took a lot of time in composing your list of reservations.  Thanks for the opportunity to try to address the concerns.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 03, 2012, 12:56:03 AM
"So ended our wonderful cruise amongst those wondrous reef-bound Pacific coral islands of green woods, cocoanut palms bracken covered stretches, all clothed just as nature made them, and marred only by the grim tragedies of those whose ships strayed shoreward." 

Papers Past, the Phoenix Group (http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19241010.2.101&srpos=26&e=--1900---1938--50--1----2gardner+island--)

Thanks for digging this up Bob/Woody. Cruises,both private and military, to and around Gardner is not laughable. It is a historical fact.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 03, 2012, 03:06:04 AM
Joe thank you again for your time and effort. You do not have to reply to any doubters on the bottle evidence, yet you do.
I do not expect that you will convince everyone but you have certainly went above and beyond making yourself available.

I will not address every point you made, a lot of your last post I agree with, such as nothing matching perfectly, different experts disagreeing, and it was interesting hearing the behind the scenes conversations you had as you asked the scientists if it was a "pretty good match", or a "very good match"
It shows you are trying hard. I have been there, done that.

By now however, you know I feel you are on the wrong track on this particular evidence. I have a little experience deciding what is relevant and what is not in processing crime scenes. I have stated why I think the bottles are irrelevant, not just because Earharts fingerprints are not on them, but that they have other issues as well. Those I have already pointed out and will not completely rehash.

I do await your report on the 'Freckle cream' jar, and why it's not really a clear jar.
On the other issues on the dating of that artifact, I am not sure why you are even arguing it was only available in white during the 1930's if you are going to claim it white anyway. But I will await that report. The artifact sure looks clear to me, and has looked clear since Tighar asked everyone to try to find a clear jar that matched. Now that we cannot find a clear one, the artifact is not really clear? That should be an interesting report.

On the "Campana" artifact, I realize the lenght of time in processing doesn't exclude the item as evidence. I have processed years old crime scene evidence.
I concede it could be evidence as a hand lotion with lanolin. It is interesting that you mention that Dr.Mass was not doing material identification initially, just material characterization. So you just wanted to know sort of what it was, but not definitely what it was?
At what point did you or EPAC decide you needed Material Identification?
I believe you mentioned in one of your reports titled, "why Campana is important", that hand lotion was not gender specific enough. Campana you said was better for quote "visual persuasion" than regular hand lotion. Therefore, Campana took on a new focus after listening to the all nighter programs and the huge advertising. Isn't that picking a product that fits the hypothesis better and then starting material identification to prove it is Campana?

On the remaining laboratory issues, specifically for the "campana" bottom,
there are a couple of items not addressed in your above post, and it's the heart of the issue.
It does not matter if a scientist is testing different colored smudges. It really does not matter if they have both actual Campana and the artifact in the same lab at the same time.
What matters is the results, matching graph to graph. Campana versus Artifact.
Yes, both the real campana samples and the bottle showed some gum.
Yes, both the real campana samples and the bottle showed possible esters.
The problem again is that the graphs do not come close to matching for the esters. I can look at EAG labs spectrum 28-31 trying to match the white flakes graph and the real campana doesn't match.
Degradation and metal cap compounds might make the job of sorting harder, and the values weaker, but it is not going to change Campana to Lanolin unless you do some creative backflips. EAG labs tried, they added in metal cap oxidation, and still came up with a partial match that isn't really that partial. Of course, that is subjective. It was subjective to the scientists as well, or there would be no discussions of "pretty good match" or "very good match". The scientists know a match from a non match. The rest is just close or way off. Unlike Horeshoes and Hand grenades, this close, "pretty good" match doesn't cut it for me.

It is up to individuals following this case to believe or not, as you state.
Anyone can view spectrums 28-31 on the EAG lab report.
The results, for me, show widely diverging values, that has failed to match Campana to the white flakes on the artifact.

It is simply not good enough to match some of the ingredients. If an ingredient is found on the artifact that does not match Campana liquid or bottle, then it excludes Campana.

I hope you keep going with your studies, I do look forward to the clear jar becoming white or whatever the new evidence is, in your quest to clarify these old jars relevance to Earhart.
So, we do agree on some issues, and some concessions can be made. I can concede that the gum identification can be "pretty close", since most gums show the same fingerprint on FTIR. That is being fair. However, for me to believe this is Campana, there also has to be additional Gas Spectrum charts showing the white flakes match the known samples. That is because the FTIR ester match is so off. That is also fair. Also of course it would be great to locate a bottle of Campana balm that actually matches the artifact size. Only then,will you truely know if this is Campana balm.

Then everyone can decide what a bottle of Campana balm is worth as evidence Earhart landed on Gardner Island.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 03, 2012, 12:34:55 PM
Then everyone can decide what a bottle of Campana balm is worth as evidence Earhart landed on Gardner Island.
Tom,
I see from your recounting of past history you are a retired lawman.  Thank you for your service and welcome to the Forum!  Agreeing to disagree on the Forum also means we're not disagreeable here.

We don't have many members of TIGHAR so far as I'm aware, who have dealt with the issue of legal matters and standards of evidence or proof from the perspective of the justice system.  However, these are concepts that have come up often on the Forum and EPAC.  Beyond a reasonable doubt, preponderance of evidence, percent of confidence, and other such terms crop up all the time.

If this is a topic of interest to you, maybe we could start a new topic outside of Campana and Dr. Berry.

One question I might have would be, has this type of FTIR evidence ever come up at trial?  What were the standards of "closeness of match" that were required?  Were there different standards of this type of graphical evidence for civil and criminal or would they be the same?  If so, were you responsible for interpreting this evidence?  Earhart's fate is very different from a criminal trial, of course.   Your experience seems one that might lend itself to some larger philosophical questions of the Project, perhaps from a legal standpoint.  Is this a topic of interest?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on November 03, 2012, 05:35:12 PM
In reference to the past few posts mentioned, I'm not well pleased to know that we as grown men would pausibly fight over matters such as glass jars and bottles. However, I've had the opportunity to sit directly across from a man (Joe) in D.C. and to tell you the truth, I fight him highly credible of his findings and I know he truly has put an effort into this project. As with Tom, I want you to remember that the supposedly white milk-glass jar does not fit into the box as some are led to believe. Thus, with the actual artifact jar does. I know this seems wild...but it is. Alot of us have pulled our hair and teeth out trying to figure out timelines and manufacturers. For me, I've scanned magazines from Womens Cosmopolitan to Saturday Evening Post trying to figure out how "big" this stuff was back in its time. Needless to say, the only thing I have come to the conclusion is that it was sold only in drug stores. I'm also onto a lead that it might have been distributed at the Worlds Fair. As you might have seen in my latest post that Dr. Berry never made the freckle cream to begin with. Anyway, gettin back to what I really want to say...Is this project will move forward. For those of us who have put alot of time and effort into this adventure...will continue to do so. We are up for suggestions and yes criticisms, but we will not throw in the towel that easily. Anyway, wanna tell Ric thanks for all you do, and for taking the brunt of all that you do. Thanks for making Tighar so special!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 03, 2012, 06:18:40 PM
I can't help you there Joe. I have never testified a chemical is of a certain type in a courtroom. You perhaps inferred a lot about my background that is not correct.
I can't run or calibrate a spectrometer or interferometer either. That was handled by the state lab boys. Now, I did learn to read a graph in middle school, and it's just my personal opinion your FTIR results don't come close to meeting any reasonable burden of proof. But that opinion is as a layman. I am no chemist or analyst. Also, most of my cases involving spectroscopic techniques were drug cases, and there was rarely a court challenge on those deals.You got a hard job, and would just keep working on it if you really believe this jar held Campana balm. I do not for reasons stated previously, I'll leave it at that. PM if you want to talk cop to cop or want some advice on which path to follow. I'll try! Haha.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on November 03, 2012, 06:43:19 PM
Cruises,both private and military, to and around Gardner is not laughable. It is a historical fact.

I saw no "advertisements for pleasure cruises" as you alleged. There is one newspaper article describing a cruise (not cruises) around the Phoenix Group in 1924.  There was no mention of what ship it was or why it went to the Phoenix Group. The article says that the islands are "seldom visited." The shack mentioned is almost certainly the abandoned Arundel work shack from 1892 that is known to have been there and visible.  Several visits to the island by naval vessels over the years are well documented. None of the visits, naval or civilian, including this one in 1924, account for what has been found at the Seven Site.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 03, 2012, 07:28:42 PM
I can't help you there Joe. I have never testified a chemical is of a certain type in a courtroom. You perhaps inferred a lot about my background that is not correct.
I can't run or calibrate a spectrometer or interferometer either. That was handled by the state lab boys. Now, I did learn to read a graph in middle school, and it's just my personal opinion your FTIR results don't come close to meeting any reasonable burden of proof. But that opinion is as a layman. I am no chemist or analyst. Also, most of my cases involving spectroscopic techniques were drug cases, and there was rarely a court challenge on those deals.You got a hard job, and would just keep working on it if you really believe this jar held Campana balm. I do not for reasons stated previously, I'll leave it at that. PM if you want to talk cop to cop or want some advice on which path to follow. I'll try! Haha.
This is an honest answer, Tom.  I think we're getting somewhere here.  I can see where you are coming from.  Frankly, if Campana were a person on trial for being a hand lotion, I could not guarantee just how that trial would turn out.  That's the justice system, and it's an honorable system and you should be proud to be a part of it.

In a scientific investigation, the approach may be somewhat different.  In science, an indicative hypothesis can still be a good one, building slowly, if it can, to a definitive one.  I'm sure someone has written a book somewhere on science versus the law and standards of evidence. I'll do some searching tonight.

Nevertheless, we actually do have some common ground here.  We both think the provisional answers to what the glass artifacts represent are consequential answers.  We conclude differently on the content of the answers, but this happens in life, as in law.  One can't always get a unanimous verdict.  We both agree that a sincere effort to seek the answers is underway.

Your experience is with people whose guilt or innocence is a very consequential matter. It pays to be careful and get the evidence right, and I agree.  I can't say I agree with your interpretation of the data, but I can understand the approach that guides your thinking.

"Cop to cop" is, however, a conversation you might find a bit one-sided.  I'm just a civilian, but enormously grateful for the work that officers such as yourself do in keeping the peace every day.


Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 04, 2012, 12:31:12 AM
Cruises,both private and military, to and around Gardner is not laughable. It is a historical fact.

I saw no "advertisements for pleasure cruises" as you alleged. There is one newspaper article describing a cruise (not cruises) around the Phoenix Group in 1924.  There was no mention of what ship it was or why it went to the Phoenix Group. The article says that the islands are "seldom visited." The shack mentioned is almost certainly the abandoned Arundel work shack from 1892 that is known to have been there and visible.  Several visits to the island by naval vessels over the years are well documented. None of the visits, naval or civilian, including this one in 1924, account for what has been found at the Seven Site.

Ric, you are correct, my mistake on advertisements to Gardner. However,my point is still that private and military trips in the 1920's and 1930's were made. The HMS Leith and HMS Wellington made trips there, in addition to the private excursion listed above for pure recreation. Those are the ones we know about. I doubt every visit got a newspaper story. Also documented timber cutting trips as documented in the below thread. You state these parties could not leave empty bottles,fish bones,fires, and I respect that is Tighar's position. You may be right in that some or all belonged to Earhart. I was merely stating the island's traffic as pertains to found jars. People drop things in odd places. Keep the faith.

 http://tighar.org/smf/index.php?topic=900.15
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 04, 2012, 05:30:12 AM
This is a good discussion.  There are some things I think that might add some dimension here.  I will say as a disclaimer my visualization of the island is entirely secondhand and can be enhanced by Ric or those with firsthand experience. However, my understanding is the Seven Site has never been all that easy to reach either by wave action or deliberately walking there.  Ric told us once "It's a viciously hot half-hour hike up the beach" from the Loran Station.  Consequently, artifacts that arrive there would seem to me to have been deliberately brought there.  Dr. King stated yesterday "We have little or nothing to suggest that the features (or the site) were used prior to the 1930s-40s -- no prehistoric artifacts, for example." People DO drop things in odd places, and they did at the Seven Site, including 2 ceramic plates with Coast Guard logo, a wartime Coke bottle, and fragments that seem to match a military salt shaker.  "They" also dropped a number of other things, including a human skull, 12 other human bones, and a number of other artifacts not so easily attributable to the known activity.  (That anyone "could not leave" artifacts as Tom says TIGHAR has posited - is too absolute a position. TIGHAR has never been this dogmatic. She invites people to consider the evidence, rather than a rigidly defined position.)

The point that gets lost along the way seems to be that the site has been identified by people who have rigorously studied it as a probable site of castaway activity.  This means someone who is there not by choice but by accident. It's not someone from a pleasure cruise, unless the pleasure took a decidedly different turn along the way. We can interpret single artifacts differently. This is not a problem. But the possible relationship of things found at the site to one another and to the known or unknown activity needs to be somewhere in the picture when interpreting them.

Every visit may not have received a newspaper story, maybe, but most missing persons then or now, it seems to me, get missed by someone, and someone makes a note of it.  (If I'm mistaken there, Tom, I know you can provide some real life examples.) On the premise that missing people get noticed, Ric decided in October 2010 that any willing EPAC members should mount an "expedition" to the Library of Congress.  I signed up for duty along with Tom King, Lonnie Schorer and Ric.  We combed through the major print media circulated among the islands for signs of someone, anyone who might have gone missing or met with even a bit of trouble in the western Pacific in the 1930s and early 1940s but were unable to come up with even one story of a missing person who could plausibly have gone missing on Gardner at that time.  Such an event is not excluded, but these alternate scenarios have at least been entertained and researched by people who've given good energy to see this happen. I'm on the road today with just my iPad, and mobile devices don't allow upload of attachments to this website. But I have the 12-page research write-up that came out of that visit and if anyone feels the group here might be interested, send me your email through the messaging service here and I'll forward you this document for you to post to the forum here.** Thanks.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR


** Done.  See below for posted document.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 04, 2012, 07:37:13 AM
Joe, things not only get dropped by visitors. Objects MOVE.
Check out the New Jersey storm surge. The ocean tends to move things around a bit.
On one hand you say there are WWII coke bottles found, and Corrugated tin roofing laying around the seven site, yet on the other hand
act like it is amazing some other bottles were washed there as well, by talking about the remoteness of the location. ???

As far as a partial skeleton, it would be unusual if bones were not found!
There was that big ship wrecked up the beach with 11 men drowned and 8 missing. Reports of bodies washing ashore half eaten by sharks. No doubt some bloated and drowned and floating ashore later.
There are many articles on it, this is one. Also check out the "awful ordeal" article on the same site. You don't have to look hard to find out why half skeletons were there.
I don't think everyone got a proper burial that day.

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=AS19291223.2.77&srpos=48&e=01-01-1919-01-01-1937--10--41----2phoenix+group--
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 04, 2012, 08:28:46 AM
Tom,
These are legitimate questions if you haven't researched them. No one ever stated an absolute "my way or the highway" answer here. Important to keep in mind.  By using the search feature of this Forum and utilizing the TIGHAR website you will be rewarded a wealth of material.  They have been asked before.

I would suggest starting with Norwich City Survivors' Shelter (http://tighar.org/wiki/Norwich City Survivors' Shelter)

Then Nutiran (http://tighar.org/wiki/Nutiran)

Then the Seven Site (http://tighar.org/wiki/The_Seven_Site)

Then the Norwich City Board of Trade Inquiry (https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Norwich_City/NorwichCity.html)

Look over the articles, maps, etc., then come back and let me know what you thought. No hurry and at your leisure, of course. Others with island experience may chime in as and if they see fit.   

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 04, 2012, 09:40:41 AM
Yes, it seems like there have been plenty of people asking the same questions.
Which is basically how can one rely on bones as evidence when there were quite a few drowned men nearby, jars that could have come from multiple sources, and campfires. It ain't evidence of a castaway when there were timber cutters nearby and their debris and fires might be a false trail.

In my view the best evidence Tighar has is George Putnam. A close relative is a good source of accurate information. He thought she may have headed to the phoenix group. As far as hard evidence, it seems scant, but the plexiglass is a unique item. That is the best evidence so far to me, and "maybe" the Bevington photo. Until another plane part is found, those two are it for me. Which is not a lot. However Tim Mellon says he sees the whole pile of plane, so perhaps the answer wont rest on bones and jars. I hope there is something really unique found soon.The reality of some missing persons is they never get resolved
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 04, 2012, 02:00:28 PM
Which is basically how can one rely on bones as evidence when there were quite a few drowned men nearby
It depends on what you mean by nearby.  I'd estimate more than 4 miles from the Norwich City to the Seven Site, but that's only a guess and may be corrected later by someone more knowledgeable who has walked it.  The island can typically be more than 100 degrees, so walking can be tiring. I believe survivors stated (in the source I linked for you) that the port of Apia had been reached by radio prior to evacuating the ship. They knew help was steaming toward them. They were not - unlike our putative castaways - marooned.  So why wander over to the Seven Site?  Remember, also, anyone exploring that far has to walk all the way back for a rescue.  The Board of Trade interviewed all survivors, and none reported such an excursion. They were very specific about where their movements placed them, and why. As for the drowned men, one needs to assume at least one who didn't suffer the injuries or exertions that drowned his friends, swam around the entire length of the island to the Seven Site, survived long enough to eat animals from more than 1,400 fish bones, did some odd thing heating 1930s liniment and beer bottles to purify water, then made no attempt, having accomplished this feat, of re-contacting the comrades he knew were on the island who were at the spot 4 miles away, where rescue by the S.S. Trongate was nearly assured. For what it is worth, an eyewitness to the bones, Gerald Gallagher, who was charged with the upkeep and safety of everyone on the island in 1940, stated "There is no local indication that this discovery is related to wreck of the 'Norwich City.'"

, jars that could have come from multiple sources,
If you speak of all the glass artifacts, yes, as a set more than one glass item could and probably did come from a non- castaway source. There is a Coke bottle we are nearly certain came from the Coast Guard.  If we accept however, that the human remains were not likely to be from the Norwich City, it's highly likely the owner of some of the bottles, perhaps the majority of the bottles, is the castaway.  There is very little likelihood you can ascribe a pre World War II beer bottle and liniment bottle both burned in a fire AND a bottle whose remnants are ingredients "consistent with its having been used as a lotion or skin cream bottle" (Mass, Scientific Analysis of Fine Art, 2007) AND a jar strewn with mercury, but only on the interior, which just happens to have the same shape as a freckle cream jar, which also contained 12% mercury (EAG, 2012) AND a Benedictine bottle to anyone else at all times except under any circumstances to the individual whose bones were lying not more than a few feet from that region, along with, yes, the 1,400 fish bones, AND lots of other strange artifacts, including a jackknife smashed apart for the blades, a compact full of rouge, a mirror from a compact, AND an assortment of other strange and twisted objects bespeaking someone with technically advanced materials such as lucite.

Who, by the way, was only a castaway, not proven to be Amelia Earhart, I admit.

and campfires. It ain't evidence of a castaway when there were timber cutters nearby and their debris and fires might be a false trail.
We must remember Niku isn't a forest reserve in the Maine woods or a campground on Martha's Vineyard.  The timber cutters, so far as I can see, we're there briefly for minor ship repairs.  Most ships, so far as I can see, weigh anchor off the stern of the Norwich City so as to provide a stable point from which to launch boats into the current for a landing.  Again, that's a long way from the Seven Site.  These industrious loggers, these rough and ready men, hauling off the entire forest of Kanawa from the island, aren't likely to have had rouge and a compact.

In my view the best evidence Tighar has is George Putnam. A close relative is a good source of accurate information.
I agree.  Search "Earhart's mother kept suitcase" in the Books section of Google and you'll see what one close relative thought her daughter would most want to have nearby if she ever should re-appear.

Until another plane part is found, those two are it for me. Which is not a lot.
I share your hope more will turn up and am glad you haven't given up hope.  I know your standard of proof is high and my ramblings are unlikely to sway you.  We have, as you point out, tried hard to do everything possible to figure out what the artifacts are and who brought them.  You may not give much credence to what you read here, but I know your interest level is high.  Thanks for your scrutiny.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on November 04, 2012, 04:32:46 PM
The timber cutters, so far as I can see, we're there briefly for minor ship repairs.  Most ships, so far as I can see, weigh anchor off the stern of the Norwich City so as to provide a stable point from which to launch boats into the current for a landing.

The logging has been discussed before.  I imagine Tom was relying on items such as the following:

The manager of the company, Captain Allen, "made several visits to Gardner for the purpose of cutting and loading timber for ship repairing but no other use was made of the island."
This sounds not like a quick pit stop to cut a tree and patch a leak, but more like cargo loads of wood being cut and hauled off for use in boatyards.   In those days of "manual labor only", Captain Allen might well have had sizable work crews occupied on Niku for several days per visit.

What kind of timber?

Timber cutting visits!
Kanawa is a good 'hard wood' tree and certainly good for shp repairs.
Buka and Ren are softer wood, less likly candidates?
If Kanawa was the tree of choice puts them in the vacinity of Kanawa Point and The Seven Site unless these areas account for whats left on the islands from those expeditions.
This agrees with my own impressions gleaned from long-term reading of articles and posts that: (a) of the available indigenous wood species, kanawa was the most suitable for ship/boat structure; and (b) kanawa was neither plentiful nor universally distributed over the island.  (My "impressions" are of course not facts.)

Further as to location:
The Seven Site is the narrowest part of the island that was habitable.  Historical photos show that in 1937 it was open kanawa and buka forest.

All the above suggest to me that Tom's speculation is not completely far-fetched or unreasonable.

Finally,

These industrious loggers, these rough and ready men, hauling off the entire forest of Kanawa from the island, aren't likely to have had rouge and a compact.
I don't see that Tom anywhere claims either deforestation or that the loggers would be responsible for all the artifacts including cosmetics . . . c'mon now, let's keep 'em above the belt . . ?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 04, 2012, 06:03:43 PM
The timber cutters, so far as I can see, we're there briefly for minor ship repairs.  Most ships, so far as I can see, weigh anchor off the stern of the Norwich City so as to provide a stable point from which to launch boats into the current for a landing.

The logging has been discussed before.  I imagine Tom was relying on items such as the following:

The manager of the company, Captain Allen, "made several visits to Gardner for the purpose of cutting and loading timber for ship repairing but no other use was made of the island."
This sounds not like a quick pit stop to cut a tree and patch a leak, but more like cargo loads of wood being cut and hauled off for use in boatyards.   In those days of "manual labor only", Captain Allen might well have had sizable work crews occupied on Niku for several days per visit.
I read the passage to mean they were repairing their own vessel.  Perhaps this minimizes it, but if you are going to camp out there, you'd need to make use of a great many things on the island. The article states, "No other use was made of the island." I spent a good hour of my time attempting to locate the source of this article to read in its entirety.  Does anyone have the source link?  When were the loggers there?


What kind of timber?

Timber cutting visits!
Kanawa is a good 'hard wood' tree and certainly good for shp repairs.
Buka and Ren are softer wood, less likly candidates?
If Kanawa was the tree of choice puts them in the vacinity of Kanawa Point and The Seven Site unless these areas account for whats left on the islands from those expeditions.
This agrees with my own impressions gleaned from long-term reading of articles and posts that: (a) of the available indigenous wood species, kanawa was the most suitable for ship/boat structure; and (b) kanawa was neither plentiful nor universally distributed over the island.  (My "impressions" are of course not facts.)

Further as to location:
The Seven Site is the narrowest part of the island that was habitable.  Historical photos show that in 1937 it was open kanawa and buka forest.

All the above suggest to me that Tom's speculation is not completely far-fetched or unreasonable.

Finally,

These industrious loggers, these rough and ready men, hauling off the entire forest of Kanawa from the island, aren't likely to have had rouge and a compact.
I don't see that Tom anywhere claims either deforestation or that the loggers would be responsible for all the artifacts including cosmetics . . . c'mon now, let's keep 'em above the belt . . ?

The deforestation quip and the compact association was a tongue-in-cheek remark.  I thought it would be seen as funny.  If it offended anyone, I apologize.

I was about to write that the archaeological record has very little to say about these loggers, but given the 2 sheets at least of overlapping corrugated material at the Seven Site, sheet metal remnants on the surge ridge, Laxton mentioning a house built for Gallagher in his article for the Journal of the Polynesian Society (but not his memorandum as Lands Commissioner), I suppose it's possible. Invoking Occam may not be sufficient to dismiss the possibility entirely loggers were at the Seven Site.  But one would think, if there, they might have inscribed their presence in that record a bit more vocally than it appears they did.  Where are the logging tools, perhaps?

We certainly have nothing from an archaeological standpoint that would make me immediately think of loggers at the Seven Site.  If the operation was large, what type of equipment would it entail? The items representing technology at the site generally seem rather miniature, not oversized as I would expect logging equipment to be.  And some things are broken apparently to serve other purposes.

By the way, when I mentioned Lucite earlier, I didn't mean the Plexiglass matching in curvature and thickness a window glass from an Electra; I meant 3 little pearlescent tines apparently broken off from a base. The point of one is broken off.  They have been interpreted at various times as having come from a large comb.  Whoever was living at the site seems to have been awfully concerned about appearances.

Joe Cerniglia
#3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Jeff Carter on November 12, 2012, 06:14:16 PM
What sources and quotes support Amelia's concern about her freckles?  I found only the one on Google.

From Amelia: A Life of the Aviation Legend, by Goldstein and Dillon.  This refers to the New York ticker tape parade after the "Friendship" flight:  "As photographers snapped, several spectators, eager for a glimpse of the famous bob, sang out 'Take off you hat, Amelia!' She made a little face, but obligingly removed her modish straw cloche. Tossing it to Muriel, she remarked ruefully, 'Here's where I get sixty more freckles on my poor nose, I guess!'" (page 62)

Are there other quotes I can search for.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 13, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
What sources and quotes support Amelia's concern about her freckles?  I found only the one on Google.

From Amelia: A Life of the Aviation Legend, by Goldstein and Dillon.  This refers to the New York ticker tape parade after the "Friendship" flight:  "As photographers snapped, several spectators, eager for a glimpse of the famous bob, sang out 'Take off you hat, Amelia!' She made a little face, but obligingly removed her modish straw cloche. Tossing it to Muriel, she remarked ruefully, 'Here's where I get sixty more freckles on my poor nose, I guess!'" (page 62)

Are there other quotes I can search for.  Thanks.
The  quotation you cite above is the best of all of them.  It comes from Earhart's only sibling, Muriel Earhart Morrisey.  Morrissey wrote a biography of her sister, "Courage is the Price" in which she (as Dillon's primary source) references the ticker tape parade incident, wherein Earhart complained of the sixty more freckles on her nose she would receive if she removed her cloche.

There are other references where Earhart obliquely refers to various skin problems brought on by sun, by open cockpits, by weather, etc.  Earhart may have been accustomed to using euphemism in the instances when she actually complained about her skin and appearance.

Here is a list of mostly primary historical references to Earhart's concern with her skin I have found:
1) Page 94 of Amelia Earhart's 2nd book "The Fun Of It" has Earhart saying that the goggles she wore would cause her to look like a "horned toad" after the sun exposure she was receiving.

2) October 11, 1928 Omaha Morning World-Herald article, wherein Earhart asked for advice from actress Eve Casanova on her "weather-beaten appearance" from sun exposure, of which she was "ashamed."

"How do you prevent sunburn and keep that lovely complexion?" Miss Earhart wanted to know. "I get so burned and tanned that I'm sometimes ashamed of my weather-beaten appearance."

3) A blog article (http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/archive/index.php/t-391344.html), wherein a distant relative recalled a family lore that Earhart was not only concerned with her freckles, she could be irascible about them if the discussion turned in that direction:

"We get updates because Amelia is a relative on my paternal grandfather's side. Not a super close relative...only a second cousin or second once removed or something...I can't rememember exactly. But, after my grandmother died, my dad became the contact for this side.

My grandmother never knew her personally, but my grandfather and his brother met her a couple of times during her childhood...I really wish I could remember exactly how that shirt-tail relation works in the geneology..."

"Oh, Amelia really did HATE her freckles. It's something my grandfather remembered about her because he mentioned them to her (thought she was quite adorable) when she was little and she became irate!"

4) Earhart's mother kept a bag of sun creams on hand should Earhart ever return.  Google "Earhart's mother kept suitcase" in Google Books for the citations.

5) Earhart's description of preparations for the 1928 flight (http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=1133&REC=1), wherein she said she typically packed a tube of cold cream for "cracked lips" as part of her "irreducible minimum" of cometics. 

The Earhart biographer who appeared to devote the most attention to Earhart's self-consciousness about her appearance was Doris Rich. Her book is titled Amelia Earhart: A Biography, and is available from booksellers and Amazon.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 13, 2012, 10:08:39 PM
Joe you know as well as anyone how a word or two changed from a quote makes a big difference in meaning in the whole.
You state that in preparation for her 1928 flight, Amelia Said she typically packed a tube of cold cream for cracked lips as part of her "irreducible minimum" of cosmetics." You, quoting Earharts letter.
That is not what the letter states. In fact she never mentioned the word COSMETICS at all. She said she was carrying an irreducible minimum of TOILETRIES"

Big difference.

Webster defines Cosmetics as " changing or beautifying the appearance of skin"
Toiletries can be for either beautification or personal hygiene.

Earhart makes it clear she was only carrying for hygiene, as she stated the cold cream was  "NOT FOR PULCHRITUDE" (beauty), but chapped lips. She wanted that clear.

So despite efforts to link Earhart to Rouge, cosmetics, makeup mirrors, the  letter you linked to states she was carring none on that flight, nor fretting about it.
In fact the letter states she did not worry about appearance on the flight, "the men do not", she said. Nothing was ever mentioned about one single cosmetic. Cracked lips can cause infections and discomfort, a toothbrush is to avoid tooth and gum infections and decay, and a comb is necessary to keep hair out of her eyes. Tissue to wipe away fluids no doubt. That was her "irreducible minimum of Toiletries"

So while it may seem picky to point out a word, since Tighar's theory states they found cosmetics, I am sure that was just a slip for you to put the word cosmetic in summarizing Earhart's statement letter.

For the rest of her relatives recollections of Amelia being concerned with her sunburns and freckles and skin, I have never seen a woman yet that was not concerned with their skin.
Yet, Amelia made it a point in the letter you linked, to say that she was bringing NOTHING to do
with beauty, vanity, or the appearance of her skin.

So yes, she was a woman. She cared about her skin. She also inferred she wasn't worried about it during the fllight record you referenced. Maybe she did an about face, and brought a full makeup kit on her last flight. On her 1928 trip, she was clear there was no cosmetics. 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 14, 2012, 05:33:15 AM
Tom,
I'm a TIGHAR researcher, not an attorney.  There seems to be a popular misconception that TIGHAR researchers' every post is a Q.E.D, in other words, something that sets out to prove, as in a mathematical theorem, that which was proposed to be demonstrated.  I make no such claim.  For myself, I don't find it particularly rewarding to chase down items such as those relating to Earhart's preoccupation with her skin as a means to establishing a smoking gun. If I expected at every turn such a thing to materialize I would be endlessly disappointed.  I do find it rewarding, rather, to try to build a preponderance of evidence.  Tom King wrote recently that "often it is a preponderance of evidence - no single piece of it determinative - that causes historians and archaeologists (among others in the humanities, sciences, and social sciences) to conclude that a hypothesis is correct." 

You draw a sharp wide gulf between cosmetics and toiletries. The toiletries and cosmetics industry (http://www.valueline.com/Stocks/Industries/Industry_Analysis__Toiletries_and_Cosmetics.aspx) is often linked as a combined set, so no, I don't think it amiss to have used the example of Earhart's personal log of the 1928 flight.  This is a primary source.  In emphasizing the words "not for pulchritude," you did not also state that the cold cream was part of an "irreducible minimum," which I translate to mean she would not consider some personal care item for dry skin to be an item that could be reduced or eliminated from consideration on a long flight. It also seems to me that a product fitting that description was found at the Seven Site.

To my understanding, the items I listed above referencing Earhart's concern with her appearance, complexion, and skin have never before been collected in one place.  They are not - I say again - a Q.E.D., but they are supportive of the notion that Earhart, in the words of one Earhart biogrpaher "did think her skin was unattractive...flying left her no escape from exposure to sun and wind. Her face was frequently sunburned, freckled, and sometimes peeling."

I would add that I don't think we're going to be able to tie particular brands of cosmetic items to Earhart. The document could emerge to do this, but probability doesn't tip that way.  This should be well understood so that any impression that we labor under false hopes is dispelled.

Jeff Carter asked a simple question, and I provided the best answer based on years of research, that I had. The answer may not be sufficient to a standard you set, it may not be conclusive, but it might be indicative to some of a curious set of coincidences, or in the words of one of our esteemed contributors, a "marker of some kind," no more and no less.  It is the accumulation of these markers that makes the case one of preponderance of evidence, not one of beyond all reasonable doubt.  I must add in talking about this preponderance, I'm not referring to cosmetic items such as the evidence in favor of a compact at the Seven Site (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2012-09-30T14:51:00-07:00&max-results=7).  I'm referring to the entire Nikumaroro hypothesis, and the evidence there is a good deal more intricate and involved than a few bottles of putative cosmetics.  While I labor to dispel the notion that I work under false illusions of success, I would also like, as I hope I just did, to dispel any notion that, while I do specialize in bottles, that I emphasize a few pieces of evidence at the expense of all others.  And there are many others than just the ones mentioned here.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on November 14, 2012, 10:24:51 PM
Nicely said Joe! In reference to what was mentioned, I would like to add my two cents to this matter. Several months back, I recall a forum member making the account that everytime they saw a picture of Amelia, there were no imperfections. If I remember right, the member and I looked back into old photographs and found only one. Even going clear back into her childhood Amelia was very very adament about her complexion and very very serious about everything she did. If you look into old documents and whatnots of what she has done in history, you will truly find that this is a woman of caliber. Yeah, she may have not been the best pilot to land a plane..but the woman did have guts and we admire her for that. She has set a precupus for all women, young and old. Anyway, the comment was made that Amelia supposedly never carried cosmetics with her on the plane. I truly disagree with that. Simply, because she had her so-called fan base and those of high dignitaries all over the world. Heck...even to this day...you can walk in the Smithsonian Institution (Air and Science building) and find a squadron of young ladies desperately fighting for the chance to learn about her. So I truly believe the woman carried some form of cosmetics with her. Yeah, she may have not used these all the time...but in public she was an admiration to many women. Especially the young ladies of our future. As for the flying laboratory...I believe that Putnam had a line of potential companies lined out to compensate the trip. I just don't believe it was one particular item such as freckle cream. There were many others. Anyway, I also found out as of last evening...that Amelia and Fred had just more than items of cosmetics. But, something that fans would enjoy! Looking back at the pictures of her stops...I don't see large quantities of these floating around or in big bags. So this so-called 'flying laboratory" was more than just a flying pharmacy, but may have served as our first air mail service. You be the judge!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on November 14, 2012, 10:52:10 PM

Heck...even to this day...you can walk in the Smithsonian Institution (Air and Science building) and find a squadron of young ladies desperately fighting for the chance to learn about her. So I truly believe the woman carried some form of cosmetics with her. Yeah, she may have not used these all the time...but in public she was an admiration to many women. Especially the young ladies of our future.

It is amazing isn't it that after all these years she still is an inspiration, and not only as a pilot it seems.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on November 16, 2012, 02:21:27 PM
Joe you know as well as anyone how a word or two changed from a quote makes a big difference in meaning in the whole.You state that in preparation for her 1928 flight, Amelia Said she typically packed a tube of cold cream for cracked lips as part of her "irreducible minimum" of cosmetics." You, quoting Earharts letter.
That is not what the letter states. In fact she never mentioned the word COSMETICS at all. She said she was carrying an irreducible minimum of TOILETRIES.

In fact the letter states she did not worry about appearance on the flight, "the men do not", she said. Nothing was ever mentioned about one single cosmetic. Cracked lips can cause infections and discomfort, a toothbrush is to avoid tooth and gum infections and decay, and a comb is necessary to keep hair out of her eyes. Tissue to wipe away fluids no doubt. That was her "irreducible minimum of Toiletries"

So yes, she was a woman. She cared about her skin. She also inferred she wasn't worried about it during the fllight record you referenced. Maybe she did an about face, and brought a full makeup kit on her last flight. On her 1928 trip, she was clear there was no cosmetics.

Tom, you have a habit, at least lately here on the Forum, of making a big deal out of how a word or two change in a quote can make a big difference in the meaning of a statement, and then you do the same thing yourself. I have high-lighted portions of your statements above to show you this. Here is a link to the portion of the Earhart Letter, personal preparations for the 1928 Flight, (http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/earhart&CISOPTR=1133&REC=1) that you say you are quoting. Twice you use the quotation "irreducible minimum of toiletries". Nowhere does she say that. What she says is "Toilet articles boiled down to a pretty irreducible minimum", not exactly the same but rather your interptation of what she said. She also said nothing about any"tissue" but rather said "The only 'extras' were some fresh handerchiefs (sic)...." not the same at all. Nowhere do I see where she says that the toothpaste and comb were the only items that she took. She said that they were there and IMHO anything more or less than that is someone else's opinion.

She also said "My 'vanity case' was a very small army knapsack.". Here is a link to photos of Army knapsacks (http://www.google.com/search?q=army+knapsack&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=L5CmUPbgBYSc8gShnoH4BA&sqi=2&ved=0CFEQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=596). Which one do you think might be representative of the "small" one she said she carried?

Also please note that the 1928 flight was accross the Atlantic and only measured in hours, whereas the 1937 around the world flight was measured in weeks and with stops in many places where AE could not be assured of being able to obtain articles she might require. This IMHO, might mean that she carried a larger supply of both toilet articles and cosmetics on this longer flight.

If you are going to be critical of what others say, at least please try to have your own information correct.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: tom howard on November 16, 2012, 10:19:26 PM
Joe you know as well as anyone how a word or two changed from a quote makes a big difference in meaning in the whole.You state that in preparation for her 1928 flight, Amelia Said she typically packed a tube of cold cream for cracked lips as part of her "irreducible minimum" of cosmetics." You, quoting Earharts letter.
That is not what the letter states. In fact she never mentioned the word COSMETICS at all. She said she was carrying an irreducible minimum of TOILETRIES.

In fact the letter states she did not worry about appearance on the flight, "the men do not", she said. Nothing was ever mentioned about one single cosmetic. Cracked lips can cause infections and discomfort, a toothbrush is to avoid tooth and gum infections and decay, and a comb is necessary to keep hair out of her eyes. Tissue to wipe away fluids no doubt. That was her "irreducible minimum of Toiletries"

So yes, she was a woman. She cared about her skin. She also inferred she wasn't worried about it during the fllight record you referenced. Maybe she did an about face, and brought a full makeup kit on her last flight. On her 1928 trip, she was clear there was no cosmetics.

If you are going to be critical of what others say, at least please try to have your own information correct.
Yes, you're right and I expect the same applies to all posters, including those that reply to me.

The main point of my post, and one easily understood, was simply that Joe had changed an important word in a quotation, one that IMO does not carry the same meaning, toiletries vs. cosmetics.  Joe has explained for himself that he disagrees about the importance of changing the quotation, so it is up to the forum to decide for themselves.

.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: JNev on November 17, 2012, 04:27:55 AM
Jeff N wrote
Quote
I have to confess that I really respect Dr. Tom King's summary view of what was found there regarding context, etc. and the possibilities (in his publications - wisely not posted in this forum by his august hand - which I well understand now)

Jeff is these on his blog or other places? Links please :)

Of course, Chris - I'm sorry, I should have done that -

Please have a look at Dr. King's "Amelia Earhart Archeology", and an installment on "Why I Don’t Think We’ll Find the Airplane – And Why I Don’t Think It Matters" (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.de/2010/12/why-i-dont-think-well-find-airplane-and.html) by Tom King.  This example is from back on December 8, 2010 and he has other work that you can find through this source, some later no doubt.

I've also read some of his books and find his work very interesting and well worthwhile.

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 17, 2012, 05:23:46 AM
Here is the quotation I am alleged to have altered for purposes of deception:

"Earhart's description of preparations for the 1928 flight, wherein she said she typically packed a tube of cold cream for 'cracked lips' as part of her 'irreducible minimum' of cosmetics."

Notice the double quotes.  Those represent my words.  Notice the single quotes. Those are Earhart's words.  Because I used the word cosmetics, and Earhart used the word toiletries, I am said to have twisted Earhart's words.  I cited evidence for you that cosmetics and toiletries are often said to be synonymous.  In either case, I had no intention of misleading or deceiving anyone. 

Altering or fabricating quotations is a serious charge in academic disciplines.  They are serious charges even in an informal forum such as this one.  Many an author's career has been left in ruins over such charges when they are part of a pervasive and true pattern.  Jonah Lehrer of the New Yorker is only one example.

I will always be civil here, but I will defend myself from scurrilous and baseless charges.

The main point of the quotation above, lost in the debate over integrity, is that Earhart claimed to have cold cream as part of an "irreducible minimum" for flight preparation.  An artifact, maybe two, was recovered at the Seven Site that could well fit that description.  This is not proof of any such thing, but my purpose in answering Jeff Carter's question was to bring to light incidents in which Earhart was known to have been conscious about her skin and/or appearance.  I have been researching and collecting these over a two-year period in which I have scoured libraries and other sources. The other examples I supplied in support of this were largely ignored, distorting my point entirely.

You will never find me knowingly distorting evidence.  Whenever evidence has been proven to controvert that which I earlier believed to be true, I embraced it.

My defense is not incivility. It is the reasonable effort that all reasonable people make to defend their own work.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 17, 2012, 08:41:50 AM
Point taken, Jeff, and very good advice you give.  I've taken no lasting offense, and will not try to return any.  I hold to the opinions I expressed.  My guiding principle is to speak when I have something to say but also let the discussion continue.  Differences can usually be resolved when people keep talking, are firm when needed, but mostly flexible. That is the advice I will offer myself today.

Regarding the cosmetics, I would say we're observing a bit of a paradox.  Earhart was uncomfortable with her appearance, as documented in 2 accounts.  One might assume she didn't want to talk about it all that often.  The few times she did talk about it were noticed by those around her and documented.  We will probably never find Earhart saying with exact specificity what, if anything, she packed in the way of cosmetics, but it may be reasonable to assume, and others before me have assumed, she did pack them.  The best evidence we have obtained I can see that she brought cosmetics on the world flight was contained in Dr. King's article on the compact I cited earlier in the thread, wherein it is described Rick Jones unearthed a photo of Earhart with what looks to be a box-like compact in her hand as she deplaned from the Electra in Australia. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on November 18, 2012, 07:56:56 PM
Joe...Several days ago you and I talked for several minutes in regard to the document that I found in the pharmecutical journal that indicated that W.B. Forsyth created Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment! At that time, I thought that Forsyth just used Dr. Berry name for a label. Anyway, last night I went further back into the Chicago Tribune from 1906, and found out that indeed there was a Dr. Berry. According to this newspaper clip, it indicates that Dr. Berry was a renowned skin doctor in his time, and that he must had alot of notoriety by the large bold letters of his name in the paper. What caught my eye was freckle ointment for sale below the article. This tells me now that there were two different types of freckle ointment made. One by Berry and the other by Forsyth. So, if this is the case, then the jar found on the island must have been made by Dr. Berry and Hazel Atlas. Enjoy the article!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on November 20, 2012, 05:32:22 AM
Superb work, Randy!  We had much research on the president of Berry Chemical, William Bond Forsyth(e), researched and described by Greg George as "a charlatan and quack-medicine purveyor involved in numerous schemes."  But we had never had reason to believe Dr. C.H. Berry was a real individual involved (at least originally) in selling his own branded freckle ointment.

Incidentally, just by coincidence, AE graduated from Hyde Park High School in 1916 while living in Chicago. Hyde Park is 7.3 miles (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&q=104+state+streets+chicago+to+hyde+park+chicago&ie=UTF-8&ei=r3OrUIODIuyu0AGC_IGoBQ&ved=0CAUQ_AUoAA) from Dr. Berry's offices as listed in 1893.  The C.H. Berry Co. headquarters was later opened at 2975 Michigan Avenue, only a 4.6-mile walk (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&q=104+state+streets+chicago+to+hyde+park+chicago&ie=UTF-8&ei=r3OrUIODIuyu0AGC_IGoBQ&ved=0CAUQ_AUoAA) from Hyde Park.

I do not take any of this to be more than a coincidence.  It wouldn't establish anything of substance; it's just curious.

Anyway, terrific work!  The forum is turning out to be a great source of research both to verify and to disverify, and I consider both to be extremely important activities!

Incidentally, I have decided to test the bottle of Skat for comparison to the existing spectra of artifact 2-8-s-2a.  I've already set that process in motion by reaching out to obtain the spectral files from earlier this year. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Gary LaPook on November 20, 2012, 07:21:34 PM

Incidentally, just by coincidence, AE graduated from Hyde Park High School in 1916 while living in Chicago. Hyde Park is 7.3 miles (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&q=104+state+streets+chicago+to+hyde+park+chicago&ie=UTF-8&ei=r3OrUIODIuyu0AGC_IGoBQ&ved=0CAUQ_AUoAA) from Dr. Berry's offices as listed in 1893.  The C.H. Berry Co. headquarters was later opened at 2975 Michigan Avenue, only a 4.6-mile walk (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&q=104+state+streets+chicago+to+hyde+park+chicago&ie=UTF-8&ei=r3OrUIODIuyu0AGC_IGoBQ&ved=0CAUQ_AUoAA) from Hyde Park.

I do not take any of this to be more than a coincidence.  It wouldn't establish anything of substance; it's just curious.


Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

And another coincidence, MY father also graduated from Hyde Park High School, in 1918, and I grew up just 1.2 miles from there! What should we make of that?

gl
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Chris Austin on November 21, 2012, 04:56:40 AM


 What should we make of that?

gl

Do you have freckles? ;)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on December 12, 2012, 09:11:05 PM
However, Given that a 2 ounce skat bottle does match in size and markings and was produced in the millions in ww2 jungle kits, perhaps testing the chemicals of the artifact and skat would be smart.

The lab test results comparing Skat to the residual remnants found on artifact 2-8-s-2a (the Campana Italian Balm bottle fragment) and to Skat's ingredient list is attached. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on December 13, 2012, 04:17:11 AM
Not wanting to re read the 34 pages, can someone (Joe?) please summerise why this analysis was carried out and to what purpose.

Thanks :)

Those who stated the Skat should be tested were correct.  I did not want to accept that at first because I believed myself to have been correct about my hypothesis and lab tests cost money.  Whether or not I was correct in the end made no difference.  The Skat is thus far, based on its likeness of base stamp to the artifact, the most reasonable alternative to Campana Italian Balm that has been proposed.  The research that proposed it was done in good faith and is a credit to this forum that produced it.  Because it is reasonable and done in good faith, until tested it would always be a spear to hurl into the heart of the hypothesis the bottle fragment was Campana Italian Balm, whether or not the artifact actually was, or was Skat, and whether or not my scientific rationales for dismissing Skat as skat were true.  In short, in the end the only justification I had for not testing it was my own fear - small but real - that those proposing it might be correct.  I owed it to this forum to own up to this and do the experiment that it urgently requested.  And so I have. 

Those who doubt a hypothesis or challenge an idea are many things.  They may be obnoxious at times in the methods that they choose to employ in argument.  This might mean they are boorish, but it doesn't make them necessarily bad scientists. 

Richard Feynman does a better job of summarizing:

"It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition."

The entire speech is here. (http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html) I apologize if I've used too many words for what is really a very simple idea.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR






Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on December 13, 2012, 10:27:43 PM
Jeff, thank you for the kind words. I would agree that Skat Insect Repellent, based on the report, can effectively be ruled out as the identity of 2-8-s-2a. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Another DES PAT 85925 bottle on ebay
Post by: Jeff Carter on January 22, 2013, 11:35:51 AM
http://www.ebay.com/itm/WW-II-Vintage-Bottle-of-Insect-Repellent-DES-PAT-85925-MINT-/321056894780
Either no dot, or dot by the number 21 - hard to tell.

Also, saw a familiar shape in a Ronsonol bottle advert on a vintage history website.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/bb01fb6f58df6a57ec0c4b9868cb4cac/tumblr_mh0em7G8f21qdmciqo1_1280.png

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 23, 2013, 10:38:15 PM
Nice job, Jeff, and I know these bottles aren't all that easy to locate. 

Still, the repellent bottle you've linked, so designated by the eBay seller, has no label, so we can only take his word for it. If tested, how would you know what you were trying to match?  Find a bottle with a label and we can continue that discussion.

The data thus far supports the notion that nearly all World War II insect repellents were made with dimethyl phthalate, either mixed or straight.  It's a durable substance and does show up with spectroscopy.  No dimethyl phthalate was found on 2-8-s-2a.  It doesn't add up to insect repellent, as the report from the lab shows.

The Ronsonol product looks from the ad to have been packaged in the right kind of bottle, but I see no surviving examples.  Lighter fluids are made of combustible fluid and do not correspond with Dr. Mass' finding of lanolin, linseed or rapeseed oil, and gum tragacanth.

The counter-argument that the Coast Guardsmen brought hand lotion is more probable than the one stating the artifact was lighter fluid or insect repellent, but I consider both arguments to have low probability in fact, and not well supported by Occam.

(By the way, for those who might just be tuning in, these latest posts refer to the lotion bottle (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm), not Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment.)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR


Title: Campana Vanity Size
Post by: Jeff Carter on January 24, 2013, 12:41:57 PM
This seems to be an example of the vanity size bottle that Campana advertised starting in the mid 1930s.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1932-CAMPANAS-ITALIAN-LIP-BALM-/310572927303





Title: Campana Dreskin
Post by: Jeff Carter on January 24, 2013, 12:59:35 PM
A bottle of Campana Dreskin - The Original Skin Invigorator:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1934-CAMPANAS-DRESKIN-SKIN-INVIGORATOR-GOOD-H-KEEPING-/310572927304
with advertising materials showing how marketed.





Title: Re: Campana Dreskin
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 24, 2013, 01:32:40 PM
A bottle of Campana Dreskin - The Original Skin Invigorator:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1934-CAMPANAS-DRESKIN-SKIN-INVIGORATOR-GOOD-H-KEEPING-/310572927304
with advertising materials showing how marketed.

Campana Dreskin (http://www.trademarkia.com/dreskin-71506918.html) was one of my first guesses for the identity of the lotion bottle in late 2010.  The product does not seem to me to have sold in as much quantity as Campana Italian Balm, which is often billed as the company's number one selling item. Dreskin seems to have been an astringent (http://www.cosmeticsandskin.com/bcb/skin-tonics.php), similar to witch hazel, which dries the skin.  You'll notice the label on the bottle in the eBay listing says it is 50% alcohol.  I don't think the artifact bottle is Campana Dreskin because lanolin, a skin moisturizer and not an astringent, was found on the artifact bottle.   Gum tragacanth, which was also found on the artifact bottle (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm), also seems an unlikely ingredient for a "skin refreshant," which is not meant to adhere to skin, as gum tragacanth does (http://books.google.com/books?id=rgAD20GGDtoC&pg=PA93&lpg=PA93&dq=gum+tragacanth+adhesive+properties&source=bl&ots=K6rrZ8foKp&sig=j2TxGUpbaTma815ksILB6XsBCcM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=MqUCUb7-OIy20QHR94HoBw&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBQ), but rather to evaporate quickly. Even if the bottle was Dreskin, this was a product aimed primarily at women, as the stylized nude silhouette in the background of the ad on page 125 of the illustrated history of Batavia  (http://books.google.com/books?id=8erEtRI5JZgC&pg=PA116&dq=batavia+history+campana&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FZUBUbOKF-iL0QGXkoHgBA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=batavia%20history%20campana&f=false) would suggest.  It's an unlikely selection for Coast Guardsmen, British overseers, Tuvaluan and i-Kiribati colonists.

The Campana Dreskin bottle does seem about the right size, though.  Thanks for the balanced view.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on January 24, 2013, 05:19:35 PM
While were on the subject of bottles, I thought I'd bring up the freckle cream artifact jar with a possible find. Depending upon how you look at it compared to how I looked at it. Anyway, several nites ago I was messing around with this new software Fast Capture and having alot of fun. I wanted to see actually what the newer freckle cream jar looked like under negative color. As it turns out I saw more than I thought I would. As I went further, I placed it then into grayscale color and it enhanced it a bit more. In the pictures below, hopefully most of you will see what I am seeing. As I've looked at this numerous times, I've somewhat drawn my own conclusion that this indeed is a unique jar, and yes according to studies done there was traces of mercury inside the jar. This jar has markings on the front and inside the jar. Some of those markings may indicate the symbol RX Mug (which you will see on the front of the jar). This jar was found at a campsite, which may have belonged to a castaway and possibly Earhart herself. This jar may be that of a RX Mug used by a doctor or pharmacist in the early 1900's to mix freckle cream ointment (possibly by Dr. Berry himself). Which later was used by Hazel Atlas for future milkglass jar sales of its kind. Anyway, most of you will agree that this is a unique find and is not a final conclusion that this is a jar used by Earhart. But, does make you take notice that its kinda of odd that a jar of its caliber would end up on an island so many thousand miles from the U.S. on a tiny remote atoll of Niku. Anyway, would love to hear your feedback on these pictures...thanks@
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on January 24, 2013, 05:35:17 PM
In the freckle2.jpg you will see what appears as follows:

(1). Shield or possible Rx Mug
(2). Face of a character
(3). The number 5.
(4). Heading or title of the product
(5). Possible compund instrument or microscope

In the freckle3.jpg you will see what appears as follows

Note: This appears on the inside of the jar from a top view of the jar.

(1). Lettering (A E N)
(2). Other letters or words above.


In speaking with my girlfriend (who is an lpn nurse), she told me that its a possibility that Amelia may have made her own freckle cream ointment or drugs in this "flying laboratory". She told me that the compound instrument is what they use to ground up the drugs or whatever. Remember, Amelia at one time earlier in her teens did work for a pharmacist.
Title: Lotion poll
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 25, 2013, 12:19:51 PM
I have a question.  I'm curious to know whether male forum members own a personal bottle of hand lotion.  You may have used such a product at some point in the past but be hesitant to admit it.  Personally, my moisturizing products start and end with a little Chapstik and I do not use aftershave. If I did use aftershave, a product billed as a hand lotion wouldn't be my first choice.  There is a bottle of hand lotion on the locker room sink at the gym where I work out, but I've never seen any men using it.  Just curious.  If there are no replies to this post, that might also be a data point in itself.  I know there are still honest doubts among some that 2-8-s-2a was hand lotion, but putting that aside, the question is valid for exploration. Do you own hand lotion?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Swift on January 25, 2013, 12:55:44 PM
I have been known to use a little hand lotion after working with water or having to do a serious washing of my hands with gas or something, but I use the one my wife keeps by the sink.  But I do a little bottle I threw in my glove box from a hotel room (free), but I can't remember the last time I used it.   And that probably doesn't count as a purchase.....does it?   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John B. Shattuck on January 25, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
Don't own one and can't remember last time I used any...

Just call me "rough hands" I guess.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on January 25, 2013, 02:48:46 PM
My gosh, what is the problem admitting men using hand lotion.  I have used it for most of my life especially after working it the shop with solvents etc drying out my hands and cracking the tips of my fingers.  Many products for men are on the internet. 

http://tinyurl.com/b77kz93

A lot of men use Bag Balm for dry and cracked hands.  I know many loggers and mechanics who swear by it.

http://www.bagbalm.com/uses.htm

And by the way, real men do eat Quiche, though they don't admit that either.  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on January 25, 2013, 03:52:35 PM
I use Udder Balm all the time.  My wife buys the stuff now, but I did when I was single.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on January 25, 2013, 05:32:20 PM
Absolutely!  I think it was originally designed to be used on dairy cow's udders.  They tend to get fairly sore when milking machines are used, especially in the winter.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on January 25, 2013, 05:35:34 PM
I just googled it myself, and noticed the original formula for Bag Balm contained mercury and lanolin.  That sounds sort of familiar.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on January 26, 2013, 12:22:27 PM
That sounds sort of familiar.

How could we have missed Niku's thriving dairy industry as the source of the Seven Site bottles?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on January 26, 2013, 12:48:28 PM
That sounds sort of familiar.

How could we have missed Niku's thriving dairy industry as the source of the Seven Site bottles?

Yes Ric and the tittilating yummies for the coconut crabs.  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on January 26, 2013, 01:15:50 PM
That sounds sort of familiar.

How could we have missed Niku's thriving dairy industry as the source of the Seven Site bottles?
Ric, you mean to tell me there aren't ANY dairy cattle on a small desert island in the middle of the Pacific?!  What are the odds?! I suppose next you'll tell me it's difficult to find a good, steady source of fresh water or that there are probably fifty different easy ways to die there!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Bob Lanz on January 26, 2013, 02:14:15 PM
Absolutely!  I think it was originally designed to be used on dairy cow's udders.  They tend to get fairly sore when milking machines are used, especially in the winter.

It all started in 1899.

"John L. Norris bought the formula for Bag Balm®—a salve created to soften cow udders—that worked extremely well."

Admiral Byrd takes Bag Balm® to the North Pole.

"In 1937, Admiral Byrd’s provisions for the trip to the North Pole included Bag Balm®, which helped to protect against the harsh climate. It would be the first of many instances where Bag Balm® played a role in comforting those on a very long journey."

Ya think Dale?  If it's good enough for Admiral Byrd's chapped hands and face, it's good enough for mine.  Oh and cow's udders too.  :D

Never leave home without it.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dale O. Beethe on January 26, 2013, 02:53:01 PM
Went with Admiral Byrd in 1937, huh?  Anything else interesting happen in 1937?  Seems as if people in 1937 liked to have something like Bag Balm, or perhaps Campana Balm, along on long trips to the middle of nowhere!  Certainly not proof of anything on Niku (by itself, at least), but perhaps a small indicator that fits with a lot of other small and not-so-small indicators.  Just as Mr. Gillespie has "indicated" all along.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 26, 2013, 06:55:49 PM
"John L. Norris bought the formula for Bag Balm®—a salve created to soften cow udders—that worked extremely well."

I first read about this in a cycling magazine early in the 1990s.

The farmers found that their own hands felt better after applying Bag Balm to the cows' udders, so it became a home remedy.

I'm a happy and satisfied customer.

[None of which has anything to do with Niku, of course.  ::) ]
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 30, 2013, 06:17:51 AM
I entered the eBay auction, first spotted by eagle-eyed Jeff Carter, for the Campana Dreskin (complete with liner notes on the product) and won the auction.  I can see from the marketing in the liner notes, which I will scan and post when it arrives, that Campana's hope was that some men would buy this product.  I think my reasons for having rejected Dreskin in 2010 as an inferior match to Campana's Italian Balm are valid.  Nevertheless, I can see this product will need to be tested by FTIR for any possible match.  Living up to Feynman's call for unremitting integrity would require nothing less.  I can virtually write the critics' response if we do not:
"...And this Italian Balm that TIGHAR's pr and glass guy, Joe, has foisted upon us, do you know what that has turned out to be?  A product marketed to both men and women!  The Coast Guard could easily have brought it.  It's all there on the eBay auction.  You can go there right now and read it..."

I will test the Dreskin.  And if I'm wrong about Dreskin as the wrong match for 2-8-S-2a, I will publicly state this (along with a picture of myself wearing a tin-foil hat!)   8)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on January 30, 2013, 07:49:56 AM
Congratulations on your purchase. Keep us up to date on your findings and I hope you don't have to wear that tin-foil hat. :D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 30, 2013, 09:47:44 AM
Thanks.  One point to keep in mind is we've never had an Italian Balm bottle with intact product inside to test.  All we have had to work with are faint remnants the lab can scrape off the sides of the interior of one of the bottles.  Most sellers wash them thoroughly before offering them for sale.  If a bottle of Italian Balm ever appeared with ample contents inside, I think we'd have more than just the close match we obtained.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Lauren Palmer on January 30, 2013, 10:11:21 AM
WARNING:  I stopped buying things over ebay after the second rip-off:  I received products not even close to what they were touted as being, and no remedy from ebay.  Basically ebay told me to go to its conversation subsite, and replies to my situation(s) were that I was ripped off - I knew that!
Buyer Beware!  ;D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on January 30, 2013, 11:10:46 AM
Thanks.  One point to keep in mind is we've never had an Italian Balm bottle with intact product inside to test.  All we have had to work with are faint remnants the lab can scrape off the sides of the interior of one of the bottles.  Most sellers wash them thoroughly before offering them for sale.  If a bottle of Italian Balm ever appeared with ample contents inside, I think we'd have more than just the close match we obtained.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Well please explain report #1180 which states Dr.Mass has a "partially filled bottle of Campana", for comparison to the artifact.  see description below.

"The fragment contains two dark brown residues and one white residue in its base, as well
as a reddish-brown residue near the top. The FTIR spectra from these residues were
compared to those from a non-archaeological and partially filled bottle of Campana
Italian Balm conducted by the Evans Analytical Group
(David Saperstein, PhD
Scientist, FTIR, GCMS and Raman Services)"

Clearly a partially filled known bottle of Campana Balm is a lot different that the one you just described with faint crusty scrapings inside.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 30, 2013, 11:54:41 AM
Thanks.  One point to keep in mind is we've never had an Italian Balm bottle with intact product inside to test.  All we have had to work with are faint remnants the lab can scrape off the sides of the interior of one of the bottles.  Most sellers wash them thoroughly before offering them for sale.  If a bottle of Italian Balm ever appeared with ample contents inside, I think we'd have more than just the close match we obtained.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Well please explain report #1180 which states Dr.Mass has a "partially filled bottle of Campana", for comparison to the artifact.  see description below.

"The fragment contains two dark brown residues and one white residue in its base, as well
as a reddish-brown residue near the top. The FTIR spectra from these residues were
compared to those from a non-archaeological and partially filled bottle of Campana
Italian Balm conducted by the Evans Analytical Group
(David Saperstein, PhD
Scientist, FTIR, GCMS and Raman Services)"

Clearly a partially filled known bottle of Campana Balm is a lot different that the one you just described with faint crusty scrapings inside.
Scientists speak in very literal, as opposed to colloquial, terms and it's important to interpret them as such. Her description of "partially filled" is accurate in the literal sense, since any amount of material partially fills it.  My statement is also accurate.  The material inside the authentic bottle was scant, but enough to provide a picture of what had been inside it. My point is I would prefer to have a more fully intact product inside because I believe this would have yielded an even better match than the close match obtained.  I spotted such a bottle on a website, contacted the owner, but he did not wish to part with the bottle or a sample of its contents.  Should such a bottle ever appear for sale, I would purchase and test it as well.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on January 30, 2013, 01:22:25 PM
Joe, that seems to be a problem in communicated details to the reader. In one of your reports it does indeed show a picture of a partially filled campana bottle, with label. While you never state that particular bottle was the "known bottle tested", it gave the impression to me and probably others.

If I understand you correctly today, you are stating the empty(with traces), non labeled bottle was sent to the lab to be tested against the broken artifact found. Correct?
That empty, non labeled bottle does not have the same curves of an orginal campana bottle, nor can it be said positively 100%  is a known campana bottle. That is a very important point, and is alarming in that there is no known base sample being tested.
Therefore you have been arguing and testing an unknown bottle sample against an unknown artifact sample?
 
Until you have a known campana sample to test, I really do not see the point in trying to prove the artifact is campana balm.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 30, 2013, 02:27:17 PM
I understand what you are saying, but could you let me know why you say that the non-artifact bottle was unlabeled?  Did I say it was unlabeled?  The Campana Italian Balm bottle that was tested was labeled Campana Italian Balm.

The non-artifact bottle that was partially filled is of a larger size than the artifact, as has been stated many times. We know there were several sizes but have only been able to locate 2 of these known sizes, one of which was empty, the other of which was partially filled.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on January 30, 2013, 04:11:40 PM
At this point you are confusing me with the number of bottles. I am sure I am not alone.
If trying to prove the found artifact is campana balm it must be tested against a known sample of campana balm.
In any size.

In your research we have a picture of a near full bottle labeled campana balm with crust near the top.
You have now stated that bottle was not used. That you could not obtain it.
In your research we also see a basically empty bottle(with residue) that resembles a campana bottle. A Tighar member provided it, and that bottle is unlabeled.

So where is the picture of the empty Campana bottle with label that was tested against the artifact?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on January 30, 2013, 06:33:05 PM
I am sure I am not alone.

Not quite alone, at least; this current dialogue has now gotten me confused as well.  I admit that is not a rare event or a feat very difficult to accomplish.   :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 30, 2013, 07:39:03 PM
So where is the picture of the empty Campana bottle with label that was tested against the artifact?
I'm having difficulty posting photos in response to the above question.  Is the server having issues?  I notice mobile internet is very spotty as well.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on January 30, 2013, 08:05:48 PM
Yes, I found it in your original Notion paper, 3rd bottle, looks like label upside down.
It doesn't look like anything is in, and does look washed, I am surprised anything was found.
I had always thought the 95% full one was the one tested since it actually has fluid in it.

http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/62_LotionBottle/62_LotionBottle.htm
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Martin X. Moleski, SJ on January 30, 2013, 10:50:28 PM
I'm having difficulty posting photos in response to the above question.  Is the server having issues?  I notice mobile internet is very spotty as well.

Four images were posted today.

1. What size image are you trying to post?

2. What resolution?

3. What is the error message you receive, if any?

If we don't pick up a clue there, then we will move on to other standard questions:

1. What browser?  Version?

2. Operating system?

3. Kind of connection--wireless or wired?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on January 31, 2013, 04:48:37 AM
I was trying to post some new images for the Dreskin, which arrived yesterday, Marty.  They were small, < 200 kb.  I'll try again later.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:30:49 PM
Mark Pearce asked that I post scanned images of the little flyer that shipped with the box of Campana Dreskin in 1934.  The flyer shows that Dreskin in certain instances was marketed as a product for both genders in 1934.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:34:23 PM
Even Italian Balm had a few men's uses listed on the flip side of the Dreskin flyer from 1934.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:36:00 PM
Mark also came across this 1945 newspaper ad, listing Dreskin under "Men's Needs"

http://www.torranceca.gov/archivednewspapers/Herald/1944%20Sept%2014%20-%201946%20Jan%203/PDF/00000494.pdf

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:45:00 PM
But Billboard Magazine from Nov. 27, 1943 (http://books.google.com/books?id=4h8EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PT9&dq=campana+dreskin+1943&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9qUOUbSOMcHw0gH7kYDYBA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA) says, "Campana Serenade, with Dick Powell, sells not only the balm that started the Campana fortune, but Dreskin, Coolies, DDD, and Solitaire make-up, all in the femme beauty line."  The marketing was obviously not always consistent and could be changed to suit the opportunity or however the marketers thought Dreskin might be used. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:49:24 PM
The Dreskin 1934 flyer may have noted some men's uses for their flagship Italian Balm, but this advertisement from the Woman's Home Companion of Jan. 1935 is obviously targeting women primarily.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 07:50:51 PM
Same image from Woman's Home Companion, showing the "punch line" at the top.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 09, 2013, 08:09:50 PM
Common ingredients may be noted between the 2 products Dreskin and Italian Balm

Dreskin ingredients :
F. D. & C. Color
Essential Oils
Glycerine
Boric acid
Methyl parasept
Alcohol

from Marion Gleason, Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, 1957


Ingredients list for Campana’s Italian Balm :
Essential oils
Alcohol
Phenol
Benzoic Acid
Gum Tragacanth
Glycerin
Sorbitol

from Marion Gleason, Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, 1957

I suspect that when the test results from Dreskin are in, they may show a match for lanolin (oil of lanolin could be an "essential oil") and maybe some others.  However, Gum Tragacanth is a tie-breaker.  It was not listed for Dreskin.  It was found in Italian Balm, and it was found on the artifact.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 10, 2013, 07:30:14 AM
Here are some images of the 1934 bottle of Campana Dreskin.  In the first image, Dreskin front.jpg, note the white blob floating at the top.  I have never seen the "flakey white residue/accretion from the bottom of the bottle" described by Dr. Jennifer Mass in her initial 2007 report on artifact 2-8-s-2a (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Expeditions/NikuV/Analysis_and_Reports/Bottle/bottle.pdf), but the blob does appear flakey, and it's certainly white.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 10, 2013, 07:35:18 AM
Here are a few more images from the Campana Dreskin 1934 bottle.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 10, 2013, 07:42:49 AM
Here is the last set of images I have from the 1934 bottle of Campana Dreskin.  The base dimensions are a good 1/4 inch smaller than the artifact's base dimensions.  I don't have the exact dimensions handy, but it's obviously smaller. Perhaps this bottle was for a trial size.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 10, 2013, 03:16:29 PM
I was browsing YouTube the other day and noticed the Oklahoma Historical Society had posted a new Earhart video, apparently not before widely available.  Moving image archivist Corey Ayers, while in the process of converting OHS film stock to high-definition, relates the story (http://newsok.com/film-archives-help-keep-oklahomas-history-alive/article/3747875) of coming across the film, which can be viewed here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAcQcWilVVA&feature=youtube_gdata_player). It had been privately owned by an Oklahoma family named Colcord.  The film shows AE after landing her Pitcairn PCA-2 autogiro  (http://www.aviation-history.com/airmen/earhart-Autogiro.htm) in an Oklahoma prairie in 1931.  She heads into what appears to be a tin shack and is then seen chatting with men in straw boater hats while preparing to take off again.  Could be just me, but I think 1:13 to 1:16 is interesting.  Maybe you can take a look and see.  Mirror, drink of water, jar perhaps?  The link above relates pilots of these contraptions had notorious sunburn problems, so a skin cream seems contextually "proper" at least.  The object seems a reflective thing with some depth to it.  Tantalizing, but probably beyond the reach of our speculation or skills.  I've ordered the hi-res version for a closer look. Regardless, the film is an interesting aviation history find about a less well-known part of Earhart's history, her short-lived flying career with the Pitcairn PCA-2 autogiro, a forerunner of the modern helicopter.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 11, 2013, 05:10:37 AM
Here's an interesting historical curiosity, a newspaper article out of Texas on July 11, 1937 claims Amelia Earhart used a "tallow preparation" to relieve sunburn.  It was given to AE as a gift from a host during her autogiro cross-country trip in 1931.  Also of interest are the contemporaneous post-loss comments about her fate.  One person states, "I don't know how many coral islands there are in the Pacific Ocean, but I'll betcha that if there's one, Amelia found it."

The small band of researchers who are following up on the cosmetics angle will find it interesting. Those in between who have followed the hyped news accounts may be surprised to learn that this is the first secondhand account I've found stating Earhart used any kind of preparation for her skin. We know of her freckles, her concern with sunburn and with her overall appearance. The biographers agree these are not in doubt. We're pretty sure from photographic evidence and news accounts she brought a compact (http://ameliaearhartarchaeology.blogspot.com/2012/09/artifacts-of-seven-site-compact.html) on the world flight. What we lack is something a little more substantial in the way of showing what else she was doing with her skin.

Newspaper accounts seem to me the hidden trove in this research.  No one has read them all, much less connected all the dots.  If there's a photo or a stray quotation that reveals more along this line of research, the newspaper accounts are where that find is most likely to turn up, in my opinion.

Due to apparent size limitations of the website, I will attach the article in 4 posts. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 11, 2013, 05:11:45 AM
part 2 of Abilene Texas news article

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 11, 2013, 05:12:46 AM
part 3 of Abilene Texas news article

The first attachment of this post is where the tallow preparation is mentioned.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 11, 2013, 05:13:48 AM
part 4 of Abilene Texas news article

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on February 11, 2013, 07:17:45 AM
Good work Joe. I didn't read the part of a "sunburn Tallow", so maybe that wasnt scanned?
It wouldn't surprise me in the least if she was worried about sunburn, as anyone staring at the sun for
hours might get burned. A pilot or fisherman would fit as potential users of a sun screen product.
With that said, of course it is a leap to assume some of Earhart's sunburn cream(or freckle cream) is the jar(s) found.
Anyone on a south pacific island of European origin might rightly be concerned of sunburn, the same as today if visiting the
beach and everyone is lathering on sun screen.
It's all interesting, and a part of the puzzle, but still a long way from putting it in Earharts plane as you know.
Until a plane part is on deck, it's all going to be puzzle parts no doubt.

It seems apparent that there is still indecision and uncertainty if dresden or campana balm was found as the bottles don't fit the known artifact, or that the so called freckle cream jar was even freckle cream let again a particular brand.
This is still a work in progress as you are providing now.

What does concern me is articles like this one at History.com
http://www.history.com/news/what-happened-to-amelia-9-tantalizing-theories-about-the-earhart-disappearance?cmpid=INT_Outbrain_HITH_HIS&obref=obnetwork

The reporter states that not only was freckle cream found, but a freckle cream product was found that
was quote "preferred" by Earhart.
Clearly this is a gross misrepresentation of the known facts.
1.We don't know Tighar found a freckle cream jar(or for that matter Campana balm or Dresden)
2.We certainly do not know if any particular product was preferred by Earhart. Though it does make for a more juicy story.

Perhaps these over aggressive writers are how stories take on a life of their own and your own work and Tighar's becomes expanded into historical realms not supported by Evidence.
While you can in no way write the articles, perhaps you can submit corrections to History.com as they are found in error?
They do ask for corrections from readers if fact checking is found in error.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 11, 2013, 08:58:49 AM
Yes. I agree with your sentiments on the over-hyping reporters.  Since first these sort of exaggerated accounts made their appearance, I have come to appreciate that those who too much play up a story are as detrimental to its reasoned consideration and analysis as those who seek by any means to shoot it down.  Both are distortions, and a disservice to TIGHAR's researchers, who require years in some cases to ferret out the information they painstakingly collect.  While I think it impractical to address every media distortion back to its authors, the case of the History Channel you've provided is particularly notable. They presumably should have had the means at their disposal to have done better research.  I will write to them in the next few days.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 11, 2013, 09:38:00 AM
I have come to appreciate that those who too much play up a story are as detrimental to its reasoned consideration and analysis as those who seek by any means to shoot it down.

Very true.  Media over-enthusiasm is a problem but misstatements and distortions are just as common in articles that are critical of TIGHAR.  (Of course, the naysayers are less eager to have those corrected.) With print and broadcast media you can gripe after the fact, but you can't un-ring a bell.  Television documentaries seldom re-edit and magazines almost never print corrections - and if they do, few people pay any attention to them. On-line news can be more easily corrected but there no way to send an "oops" message to all the people who read the faulty version.

In the end, it's best to heed the old saying, "Don't believe everything you read in the newspaper."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 16, 2013, 10:32:08 AM
Anyone on a south pacific island of European origin might rightly be concerned of sunburn, the same as today if visiting the
beach and everyone is lathering on sun screen.

Maybe. The island has harsh sunlight as anyone there could attest. We now know UV light from sun exposure is harmful to the skin.  Did they know it then?  If so, did they care and could they do anything about it?  William H. and Nancy K. Young in their book "World War II and the Postwar Years in America" (p. 687) say:
"In the 1940s, a good visible tan, the darker the better, represented robust health. (Emphasis is in the original text.) The notion of staying out of the sun because of its long-term injurious effects remained for future generations to discover.  In light of the positive attitudes tanning elicited, Miami-based pharmacist Benjamin Green in 1944 introduced a lotion designed to enhance (i.e., darken) one's tan.  He called his product Coppertone, and he placed the image of an Indian chief on the label with the slogan, 'Don't be a Paleface.'

"Not until 1953 did Green's company create the iconic Coppertone Girl for its advertising....

"In addition, Green reputedly concocted a primitive sunscreen lotion around this time. U.S. troops stationed in the South Pacific suffered from excessive exposure to the tropical sun, and welcomed Red Vet Pet (for Red Veterinary Petroleum), a red, greasy salve that probably blocked some rays if applied heavily enough. But the day for true sunscreens still lay in the years ahead." (Red Vet Pet was, so far as I can tell, sold in tubes, not glass bottles.)

When set against the context of contemporaneous attitudes to sun exposure, Amelia Earhart's off-the-cuff remarks in the Omaha World-Herald for Oct. 11, 1928 are surprising, and seem ahead of their time: "How do you prevent sunburn and keep that lovely complexion?" Miss Earhart wanted to know. "I get so burned and tanned that I'm sometimes ashamed of my weather-beaten appearance."

The 1937 Abilene Reporter News article cited earlier, wherein AE is said to have accepted a skin preparation from strangers for sunburn, repeats this theme.

What sort of product would an American in 1937 be using if that American thought the sun was, rather than a means to good health, a means to a "weather-beaten" complexion.  If it's a sunscreen you need, you're out of luck.  The best one could do would be to buy products that relieved the symptoms after the fact.  By coincidence, both Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment and Campana Italian Balm claimed exactly that relief, as can be ascertained by reading the labels on the products from the attached photo.

Tuvaluans and i-Kiribati colonists, British overseers and Coast Guardsmen would seem unlikely candidates for these types of sensitivities, and even if they were, if Berry and Campana are the products they used to address them, we're stuck with the fact that both products have American women pictured prominently on their labels.

I would grant that we probably can't know what the artifact bottles contained, in the sense we can know Nikumaroro had Tuvaluans, and one can always imagine undocumented products as well as undocumented events that could bring them to that place and time.  It's simply part of a circumstantial case that I happen to find compelling enough to research.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: C.W. Herndon on February 16, 2013, 10:57:45 AM
Joe, here is a picture of at least some of the Coast Guard men stationed on Niku in 1944. While a few of the men have apparently worn some type of clothing to protect themselves from the sun it appears that most of them have gone for that dark, sun tanned look.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 16, 2013, 11:14:57 AM
The suggestion that a Pacific Islander on Nikumaroro in the 1930s or '40s would use any kind of skin care product is ludicrous. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on February 16, 2013, 02:45:42 PM
I believe the idea is that European men or fair colored men such as Coast Guardsman or fishermen might use nose balm for protective creams as well as after sunburn conditions. People that are already burned or suffer burns easily tend to protect damaged skin from burning further. Even at the turn of the century this was not unheard of, there was not mass ignorance of the sun's burning effect until  the 1970's. The idea of skin protection was known even 100 years ago. Sunburn relief has been known about probably as long as people have been sunburnt.
Which is an entirely different scenario than Polynesians applying Bullfrog sun block.

Ladies, and men, wore hats for this exact purpose for centuries around the world in every community known and do to this day.
So on an island which was lived on by European men, used by European men,(such as the now known timber cutters), lived on by a coast guard station,  the idea an empty jar of skin protectant, or skin healer, used by a man is not a far fetched hypothesis.
Emelia Earhart did not invent sun protection, or invent sunburn creams, nor was she the sole buyer of such products even in the 1930's.
So was this jar hers? Who the heck knows. The point is that sunburn cream(as Dr.Berrys was advertised to alleviate in numerous advertising examples) doesn't seem out of place on a tropical island considering the amount of fair skin people on the island in the decade before and after her disappearance.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 16, 2013, 04:56:52 PM
So on an island which was lived on by European men, used by European men,(such as the now known timber cutters), lived on by a coast guard station,  the idea an empty jar of skin protectant, or skin healer, used by a man is not a far fetched hypothesis.

Your desperate defense doesn't hold up. The only European men who lived on the island, as far as I know, were Gallagher, the Coasties, and for a a couple months, Laxton.  We have an inventory of Gallagher's personal effects.  No skin protectorates there.  We have numerous photos of bare-chested Coasties.  No concern about sunburn there. That leaves Laxton who is known to have visited the site once.   What's this about about European timber cutters?  I must have missed that.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on February 16, 2013, 06:57:44 PM
So on an island which was lived on by European men, used by European men,(such as the now known timber cutters), lived on by a coast guard station,  the idea an empty jar of skin protectant, or skin healer, used by a man is not a far fetched hypothesis.

Your desperate defense doesn't hold p. The only European men who lived on the island, as far as I know, were Gallagher, the Coasties, and for a a couple months, Laxton.  We have an inventory of Gallagher's personal effects.  No skin protectorates there.  We have numerous photos of bare-chested Coasties.  No concern about sunburn there. That leaves Laxton who is known to have visited the site once.   What's this about about European timber cutters?  I must have missed that.

There is not an ounce of desperation in pointing out sunburn relief cream on a tropical island is far from extraordinary.
 Especially one with a coast guard station on it.  A Coast guard station equals a LOT OF PEOPLE WITH SUNBURN POTENTIAL.
I find it amusing for the head of Tighar to quickly skim the US military living there as "the coasties" and give it some short Shrift almost like that is an irrelevant time and matter. Yet I have desperation?
For you as well as I know Ric, this jar could have rode in aboard a US transport as well as the Electra. It also has several other
potential sources which are in this thread and I will not rehash.

As far as Timber cutters, well you must have amnesia or are a bit tired,  because you have talked at length in multiple threads on this forum about Timber cutters being on the island before Earhart, when discussing a potential source for the found sextant box, shoes.
They could have also dropped an empty sunburn jar obviously. As could any other visitor, whether Brits raising markers of possession, nailing notices on the trees, or fisherman out for an adventure(both also documented on these pages in the past).
The island has been used,and during the 1920-40's offers numerous possibilities for the simple loss of a sunburn jar.

That it "may" be part of the puzzle I concede. I also am rational enough to weigh the evidence and concede these jars perhaps have no connection to Earhart at all, and that is as plain as the sun which caused the infliction to begin with.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Tim Mellon on February 16, 2013, 07:28:27 PM
So on an island which was lived on by European men, used by European men,(such as the now known timber cutters), lived on by a coast guard station,  the idea an empty jar of skin protectant, or skin healer, used by a man is not a far fetched hypothesis.

Your desperate defense doesn't hold p. The only European men who lived on the island, as far as I know, were Gallagher, the Coasties, and for a a couple months, Laxton.  We have an inventory of Gallagher's personal effects.  No skin protectorates there.  We have numerous photos of bare-chested Coasties.  No concern about sunburn there. That leaves Laxton who is known to have visited the site once.   What's this about about European timber cutters?  I must have missed that.

There is not an ounce of desperation in pointing out sunburn relief cream on a tropical island is far from extraordinary.
 Especially one with a coast guard station on it.  A Coast guard station equals a LOT OF PEOPLE WITH SUNBURN POTENTIAL.
I find it amusing for the head of Tighar to quickly skim the US military living there as "the coasties" and give it some short Shrift almost like that is an irrelevant time and matter. Yet I have desperation?
For you as well as I know Ric, this jar could have rode in aboard a US transport as well as the Electra. It also has several other
potential sources which are in this thread and I will not rehash.

As far as Timber cutters, well you must have amnesia or are a bit tired,  because you have talked at length in multiple threads on this forum about Timber cutters being on the island before Earhart, when discussing a potential source for the found sextant box, shoes.
They could have also dropped an empty sunburn jar obviously. As could any other visitor, whether Brits raising markers of possession, nailing notices on the trees, or fisherman out for an adventure(both also documented on these pages in the past).
The island has been used,and during the 1920-40's offers numerous possibilities for the simple loss of a sunburn jar.

That it "may" be part of the puzzle I concede. I also am rational enough to weigh the evidence and concede these jars perhaps have no connection to Earhart at all, and that is as plain as the sun which caused the infliction to begin with.

I agree with you, william patterson, and what a distraction! Aren't we here to determine whether or not the aircraft made its last landing on the Nikumaroro  reef? Archeologists may revel in zippers and shoes and jars, but in the end, these are all tangential, and essentially irrelevant. I recognize that you are no fan of asserted aircraft parts discovered, but in the end, that is where the proof will be found in the pudding, or not.


 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on February 16, 2013, 09:34:52 PM
I do agree with you Mr.Mellon on this point. The recovered Jars and bottles prove little one way or the other in my opinion.
I do not consider them carrying much weight for evidence of Earhart.
Rather I prefer testimony from a doctor of a wheel in the lagoon passage, or plexiglass from an airplane.
In my opinion those items and testimony are 1000 times better evidence of Earhart stranded than empty bottles and jars
that we have no record of Earhart ever owning, using, or carrying on her plane.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 17, 2013, 05:33:42 AM
So on an island which was lived on by European men, used by European men,(such as the now known timber cutters), lived on by a coast guard station,  the idea an empty jar of skin protectant, or skin healer, used by a man is not a far fetched hypothesis.

Your desperate defense doesn't hold p. The only European men who lived on the island, as far as I know, were Gallagher, the Coasties, and for a a couple months, Laxton.  We have an inventory of Gallagher's personal effects.  No skin protectorates there.  We have numerous photos of bare-chested Coasties.  No concern about sunburn there. That leaves Laxton who is known to have visited the site once.   What's this about about European timber cutters?  I must have missed that.

Yes Mr Gillespie there are pictures of bare-chested coasties however all that indicates is that there are photos of bare-chested coasties, not that all of them had no concerns about sunburn so Mr Patterson's argument is neither desperate nor ill-founded. Perhaps some did, especially fair skinned ones who from past experience had been badly sunburned. I note in many photos taken during the war on Pacific islands that quite often while there are many servicemen with no shirts or hats, there are others wearing shirts and hats. So that doesn't rule out the introduction of the Dr Berry product by a coastguard. Sunburn is a painful thing for those who burn easily - I do and if I had been stationed on that island during WW2 I most certainly would have avoided getting burnt. Also I would suggest that the unit medical officer and its commander would try to avoid having some of their men incapacitated with what was essentially an easily avoidable injury. Many years ago I was quite literally laid up in bed for a few days because of very bad sunburn on my legs - couldn't stand and could barely walk, since that experience I have avoided it by being careful. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 17, 2013, 08:22:22 AM
The straw man has made an appearance in the argument.  No one has said that Coast Guardsmen couldn't have brought the jar or the bottle fragment to the Seven Site. No one has stated it was physically impossible.  What we are considering here is the probable.  Let's forget for a moment the arguments in favor of these glass fragments as indicative of a Euro-American female at the Seven Site.  They've been stated and re-stated.  How might we strengthen the argument in favor of these artifacts as indicative of ownership by male Coast Guardsmen, or i-Kiribati, or Tuvaluan colonist, or British overseer?  We could use a photo of Red Vet Pet, the only commercial sunscreen available during World War II.  Did it sell in the containers such as the jar or bottle?  Are there products other than women's cosmetics in which the jar was sold?  What are these products?  All possibilities must be admitted, but do they all carry equal weight?  We can say the Coast Guardsmen desperately needed and craved sunscreen, that their every waking moment on the island was devoted to a hunt for these items, but where in the context of the 1940s or 1930s are these products to be found?  I like the Socratic dialogue, but it needs to rise above vague generalizations.  The arguments "pro" the Nikumaroro hypothesis are growing out of specific research.  They do not prove but rather, indicate.  Show the evidence in which alternate hypotheses are indicated.  Proof is not requested, but generalization will not do.  Build a train of thought and defend it and the argument will be entertained, and I dare say, welcomed.

Second, the argument that the artifacts are a distraction from the airplane is a total non-sequitur.  There were PEOPLE and THINGS in the airplane.  It's very fallacious to suggest that we're being misled by stupid science types who want to consider other lines of evidence, evidence which, by the way, we now have in hand to analyze and debate.  I see nothing exclusionary to the aircraft about having such a debate.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 11:02:59 AM
The straw man has made an appearance in the argument.

The forum does seem to have a Scarecrow Brigade who are more interested in naysaying than in doing any genuine research to support their imaginings about what someone might have done.  What was it the Scarecrow wished he had?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 11:17:40 AM
As far as Timber cutters, well you must have amnesia or are a bit tired,  because you have talked at length in multiple threads on this forum about Timber cutters being on the island before Earhart, when discussing a potential source for the found sextant box, shoes.

If you'll review those threads I think you'll find you are mistaken. In 1939 and '40 the first settlers on Nikumaroro did a lot of timber cutting for the construction of the Government Station.  We suspect that it was one of these timber cutting parties that discovered the skull of the castaway.  The work parties were Gilbertese laborers.  There were no Europeans on the island at that time.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Tim Mellon on February 17, 2013, 12:07:41 PM
There were PEOPLE and THINGS in the airplane.

Mr. Cerniglia, there are PEOPLE and THINGS in the airplane 985 feet below sea level that are more certainly related to the event in question, in my opinion. I think no-one is questioning whether the land-based evidence may be real, only the ability to prove it so, due to other complicating actors potentially involved.

You might be able to assist in reaching the practical determination of whether the Earhart aircraft landed at Nikumaroro if you were to spend some of your time examining what has already been found, and searching yourself for additional evidence. If you choose not to get "wet" in this matter, that is OK too.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 12:35:18 PM
You might be able to assist in reaching the practical determination of whether the Earhart aircraft landed at Nikumaroro if you were to spend some of your time examining what has already been found,

That is exactly what Joe is doing and I would urge him to continue to do so.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 17, 2013, 02:36:17 PM
As far as Timber cutters, well you must have amnesia or are a bit tired,  because you have talked at length in multiple threads on this forum about Timber cutters being on the island before Earhart, when discussing a potential source for the found sextant box, shoes.

If you'll review those threads I think you'll find you are mistaken. In 1939 and '40 the first settlers on Nikumaroro did a lot of timber cutting for the construction of the Government Station.  We suspect that it was one of these timber cutting parties that discovered the skull of the castaway.  The work parties were Gilbertese laborers.  There were no Europeans on the island at that time.

Mr. Patterson may also be thinking of the earlier timber cutting mentioned here (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg18663.html#msg18663) and quoted below:
Quote
According to Harry Maude's history of Gardner Island prepared as part of his proposal for the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme, the "well-known island identity" was the Samoa Shipping and Trading Company, Ltd. who were issued an Occupation License for a term of 87 years on January 1st, 1914.  The manager of the company, Captain Allen, "made several visits to Gardner for the purpose of cutting and loading timber for ship repairing but no other use was made of the island."

But as discussed back then, very little is known about those visits, e.g. whether work crews would have been Europeans or otherwise.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 17, 2013, 05:04:46 PM
Hi All

Has the area directly in front of the arrow shaped anomoloy been searched and dug over, Could be a marker of some sorts

Thanks Richie
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 17, 2013, 05:09:38 PM
The straw man has made an appearance in the argument.

The forum does seem to have a Scarecrow Brigade who are more interested in naysaying than in doing any genuine research to support their imaginings about what someone might have done.  What was it the Scarecrow wished he had?

Thank you for your reply Mr Gillespie, and I thank Mr Cerniglia also. There was no introduction of a straw man in my reply as you are well aware. Your assertion that there was is because I simply pointed out that photos of bare-chested Coast Guard personnel is not evidence that all Coast Guard personnel were unconcerned about sunburn only that some were. It is a small point but one that should be noted as this freckle cream jar has a great deal of TIGHAR's argument that Earhart landed on Nikumaroro riding on its tiny and shattered shoulders.

It is only right therefore, in the strict interests of science, that its limitations as evidence should be cited so that that evidentiary value can be assessed properly. If you dismiss that as nay-saying it shows that you are allowing your biases towards the Nikumaroro theory to outweigh proper caution. In following the freckle cream argument and the comments as they have progressed over time I respectfully point out that so far this particular jar and its assumed contents have only been linked to Earhart in the most general sense using the evidence that at one point well before her disappearance she alluded to her problem with freckles. That is the evidence used to link the Nikumaroro jar to her and to claiming it is evidence that she landed on the island - even I as a relatively ordinary guy can see that it isn't much.

I wish you well in your endeavour but these few glass fragments do not by themselves offer the link to Earhart except through the most tenuous of arguments. Especially as to do so both yourself and Mr Cerniglia must assertively rule out other possible sources for the jar without any evidence to back those exclusions other than painting pictures of a sun tan happy population of European naturists. That is the danger with proposing theories - sometimes the theorist begins to believe the theory rather than maintaining a professional and sceptical distance. In any exercise such as this it is the proposer of the theory who must be the most sceptical of all because failure to do so allows the chance that too much weight is placed upon things that do not have the strength of certainty to support it thus, ironically, nay-saying is the theorist's best tool in the chest.   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 05:14:35 PM
Has the area directly in front of the arrow shaped anomoloy been searched and dug over, Could be a marker of some sorts

We went to great lengths to check that out during the 2007 trip.  It's just a patch of sand.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 06:08:00 PM
There was no introduction of a straw man in my reply as you are well aware. Your assertion that there was is because I simply pointed out that photos of bare-chested Coast Guard personnel is not evidence that all Coast Guard personnel were unconcerned about sunburn only that some were.

As Joe pointed out, we have never claimed that it is impossible that the jar is attributable to a Coastie.  How could we?  All we have said is that there is no evidence that any of the Coast Guard personnel used a product that came in such a jar.  Pointing out that there could have been sun-sensitive Coast Guardsman who didn't get his picture taken argues against a position we haven't taken. That's a straw man.

It is a small point but one that should be noted as this freckle cream jar has a great deal of TIGHAR's argument that Earhart landed on Nikumaroro riding on its tiny and shattered shoulders.

Oh please.  The jar gets a lot of attention because it's fascinating, but if a Coast Guard veteran came forward tomorrow with a photo of himself dobbing himself with Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream as a sunburn preventative the Niku Hypothesis wouldn't miss a beat. Conversely, if we found a picture of AE holding a jar of  Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream it still wouldn't prove that the jar on the island was hers. It's an object that seems to fit nicely into a jigsaw puzzle that has dozens of other pieces that fit together and appear to show a coherent and sensible picture.  Joe has busted his butt trying to pin this artifact down but he's gone as far as he has with it out of his own curiosity, not because of any urging from me.  Our senior archaeologist Tom King has supported his investigations with both professional and financial encouragement because archaeologists just love chasing minutia.  TIGHAR is blessed to have bulldogs like Joe who latch on to an artifact and don't let go until they've wrung every possible bit of information from it, but the jar is only important as an element in the larger picture of the Seven Site.  If we "lose" it, like we've lost so many other artifacts that we once thought might be attributable to Earhart, it would be disappointing but it would be no big deal. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 17, 2013, 06:31:49 PM

Pointing out that there could have been sun-sensitive Coast Guardsman who didn't get his picture taken argues against a position we haven't taken. That's a straw man.


Thank you for your prompt reply Mr Gillespie - with respect I would suggest that you saying something is a straw man is simply no more than your opinion. However I think you will concede that so far in the long and detailed discussion of Dr Berry's Freckle Cream all that has been produced is a comprehensive knowledge of early to mid-20th century patent ointments rather than anything but the most tenuous link between Ms Earhart and those fragments of glass found on the island. As for the effects of its "loss" that is for TIGHAR, its supporters and the public to decide. As a member of the latter who has read the discussion I'm afraid that I find it quite unconvincing.

But credit where credit is due, Mr Cerniglia has done sterling work in his study of all things freckle cream - perhaps he should publish these in an appropriate publication.  I for one now know more about this product than I ever thought possible or necessary. :)

You will excuse the placing of this question here but I have quite forgotten where I asked it. I recall that in answer to some discussion of the tide data and water levels on the reef you said that Mr Brandenberg was preparing a new paper which answered the questions raised, I was wondering how that was progressing. As I understand it that these levels are vital to transmission times etc. of the post-loss radio messages. Thank you.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 17, 2013, 08:56:18 PM
You will excuse the placing of this question here but I have quite forgotten where I asked it. I recall that in answer to some discussion of the tide data and water levels on the reef you said that Mr Brandenberg was preparing a new paper which answered the questions raised, I was wondering how that was progressing.

Thanks.  I've been meaning to answer that question but I too lost track of it.  The new issue of TIGHAR Tracks will include Bob Brandenburg's paper "Time and Tide."  It's a 12-page paper in 64-page journal. We're hoping it can go to the printer the end of this week.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 18, 2013, 06:07:04 AM
Quote from: Dan Kelly link=topic=261.msg23759#msg23759

But credit where credit is due, Mr Cerniglia has done sterling work in his study of all things freckle cream - perhaps he should publish these in an appropriate publication.  I for one now know more about this product than I ever thought possible or necessary. :)


Credit is premature since the lab is still working on all the tests we want to run. Nevertheless, in addition to Dr. Tom King, I want to point out that TIGHAR chemist Greg George is serving as an invaluable advisor in both setting up the experiments and interpreting the results.  TIGHAR bottle expert Bill Lockhart is providing his expertise in all things glass, and other TIGHAR members such as Bill Lockhart, Jeff Glickman and Rick Jones are providing donations for the work.  Ric and Pat Thrasher have been supportive every step of the way. If there is anyone else I left out, please let me know.

I'd also like to give credit to TIGHAR member and Niku expeditionary Walt Holm, who was skeptical of the jar research, not because he felt it lacked intrinsic worth but because he felt adequate controls had not been effected to help validate it.  These control experiments have been the backbone of our current efforts.  You've seen a little of Walt's influence in the FTIR report on Skat insect repellent earlier on this thread.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 19, 2013, 04:04:28 PM
Hi All

Just come across this on ebay so thought i would post as the small jar is similar to Dr Berry's 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-OMAHA-NEBRASKA-antique-MILK-GLASS-Perfume-Cosmetic-bottles-VELVETINA-/370650306774?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item564c7ad8d6

(http://abcbottles.com/0-3708t/mvc-660h.jpg)

Thanks Richie
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 19, 2013, 04:15:29 PM
here is another link to a coupon with same type jar

http://forgottenoldphotos.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/photo-number-456.html

(http://lh3.ggpht.com/_6JcCpEVFAGQ/TWC0eJGWEwI/AAAAAAAAJjQ/0mIti-cwG_M/extra%20old%20ad%20from%20nebraska_thumb%5B7%5D.jpg?imgmax=800)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 19, 2013, 04:25:49 PM
here is one on worthpoint however it's been sold

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/velvetina-vanishing-cream-jar-box-169948371

(http://images.cloud.worthpoint.com/wpimages/images/images1/1/0611/21/1_11baad190a5c6fb4c02fb704ae11f2ca.jpg)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: James G. Stoveken on February 20, 2013, 10:43:16 AM
VELVETINA VANISHING CREAM!!??  That explains everything!  OK, next project...      :D
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 20, 2013, 07:19:32 PM
VELVETINA VANISHING CREAM!!??  That explains everything!  OK, next project...      :D

Yup That vanishing cream has allot to answer for haha, However it's the first jar i have found that is similar to dr berrys jar out of the well over 100.000 odd i have looked at in last 12 month's  ::)   It is mentioned page 4 i think on this topic but no picture was attached  :)

Thanks Richie
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on February 20, 2013, 10:01:05 PM
Here is another one for sale, with some good photos

http://www.etsy.com/listing/78301947/antique-velvetina-vanishing-cream-milk

amck
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 21, 2013, 02:17:52 PM
I think vanishing creams did contain mercury, which is interesting; but both the Velvetinas, the older posting mentioned by Richie and the one found by Andrew, are in opaque (milk) glass and do not have the "HA" Hazel-Atlas trademark on the bottom.  I suppose HA might still have made them, as a custom order in customer-specified color and with the product name on the bottom.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on February 21, 2013, 09:36:16 PM
Agreed, and the bottom of one of them actually says Velvetina, which the Niku artifact does not have.

But I'm curious about the brown jar on eBay and how it might be different that the typical milk glass.

amck
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 22, 2013, 06:19:08 AM
I think vanishing creams did contain mercury, which is interesting; but both the Velvetinas, the older posting mentioned by Richie and the one found by Andrew, are in opaque (milk) glass and do not have the "HA" Hazel-Atlas trademark on the bottom.  I suppose HA might still have made them, as a custom order in customer-specified color and with the product name on the bottom.

Greg George sent me this link to a USDA fine imposed in 1937 against a maker of pills for misrepresenting the level of mercury contained in their product.  The USDA found the maker guilty of not using enough mercury as stipulated by the official "standard of strength" in the United States Pharmacopoeia. 

http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/fdanj/bitstream/123456789/62925/2/321001540.txt

Clearly, the agreement on known health hazards was different from that of our own era.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 22, 2013, 06:25:29 AM
I think vanishing creams did contain mercury, which is interesting; but both the Velvetinas, the older posting mentioned by Richie and the one found by Andrew, are in opaque (milk) glass and do not have the "HA" Hazel-Atlas trademark on the bottom.  I suppose HA might still have made them, as a custom order in customer-specified color and with the product name on the bottom.

I would not think it impossible for vanishing cream to contain ammoniated mercury. General chemistry guides, however, appear to draw a distinction between the ingredients in vanishing creams and those in bleaching creams, and the former are not said to contain mercury.

p. 1.221:

http://books.google.com/books?id=oAo1X2eagywC&pg=RA4-PR10&dq=vanishing+cream+contains+mercury&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yY8mUfeeJ6Tb0wGSvIGQCg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=vanishing%20cream%20contains%20mercury&f=false

p. 71:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Rro0lH0Lzm8C&pg=PA71&dq=vanishing+cream+contains+mercury&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aZEmUZv3EK2J0QHTxYDYBQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=vanishing%20cream%20contains%20mercury&f=false

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 22, 2013, 06:38:11 AM
VELVETINA VANISHING CREAM!!??  That explains everything!  OK, next project...      :D

Yup That vanishing cream has allot to answer for haha, However it's the first jar i have found that is similar to dr berrys jar out of the well over 100.000 odd i have looked at in last 12 month's  ::)   It is mentioned page 4 i think on this topic but no picture was attached  :)

Thanks Richie

Good find, Richie!  I'll add this to the list.  My Sears Catalogs didn't offer this one.  I can't seem to find it offered beyond 1917.  I'd welcome more information on this product.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 22, 2013, 08:06:25 AM
Here's one from 1920:

http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85042345/1920-04-11/ed-1/seq-32/print/image_681x773_from_0%2C0_to_5456%2C6200/

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 22, 2013, 08:10:24 AM
1924:

http://fultonhistory.com/newspaper%209/Penn%20Yan%20NY%20Democrat/Penn%20Yan%20NY%20Democrat%201923-1925%20Grayscale/Penn%20Yan%20NY%20Democrat%201923-1925%20Grayscale%20-%200370.pdf

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 22, 2013, 11:05:12 PM
A few months back there was a post on this thread  (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg17755.html#msg17755)briefly reporting mercury analysis results obtained for Hazel Atlas jar. I haven’t seen a more detailed discussion of this analysis since then—how exactly the analyses were done, what the analysis results were, what sort of quality measures were taken to assess the quality of the analysis work done by lab, whether there is any data on mercury in similar jars that did not contain a mercury-laden product, whether possibility of contamination of the jar after collection was considered, etc.  If this has all been discussed somewhere and I’ve missed it, I’d appreciate it greatly if someone could kindly point me toward this information. Perhaps this will be covered in the upcoming issue of Tighar Tracks?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 23, 2013, 07:53:26 AM
The lab tests and our analysis of them are still in process.  We are about halfway through the tests we want to run and then there will be the process of interpreting what it all means.  It's a little bit like writing a graduate level thesis.  I have chosen not to report the results in installments to the forum (and thus to the general public as well) for several reasons:

1) The experiments are a conjoined set and results from ones in the future may inform, amplify, or even overturn what we already have learned.
2) Each experiment can take 3-4 weeks just to see results come back.
3) The forum can be a bit acrimonious at times, and I'd rather hold off on sounding certain in my arguments until I am more certain in my arguments.
4) There is a team of people who are working with me, and their thoughts need to have ample time to crystallize and be heard.

We're not exactly sure in what format we will present the results when they are ready, but we know we will be doing something with them.  I am keeping the EPAC informed of our efforts in monthly reports.  They provide not only intellectual guidance but the financial support that is the lifeblood of any such research.  I am in contact almost daily with the immediate team who are designing the experiments and helping to interpret the results. 

In the meantime, I am listening attentively to the comments and suggestions that are written here and providing answers where I can and also joining in on the jar discussion.  There have been occasions, in the case of the experiments with Skat insect repellent, for example, when experiments have been prompted by this forum.  In this and any other such cases, I have posted the lab results here directly for all to see, and I will continue to do this.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 23, 2013, 08:52:13 AM
The lab tests and our analysis of them are still in process.  We are about halfway through the tests we want to run and then there will be the process of interpreting what it all means.  It's a little bit like writing a graduate level thesis.

Then isn't a bit premature to conclude that the jar held a mercury-rich substance?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on February 23, 2013, 09:37:14 AM
I was sitting in the living room the other day and my girlfriend had all her cosmetics and dippy-do effects laying around. She has these in one location for when she goes to work in the morning. I made the comment that it looked like a campsite!!! As I thought bout this...it made me think bout Amelia and the effects she might have had on her if she indeed landed on Niku. First of all, I believe Joe that we are looking at an ointment jar and not so much a cream jar. The reason I say this is because if you were going on a trip for just a few days...would you take a big jar or a travel jar with you. Most women might agree with me, that a small jar like the jar found on the island is not even close enough to supplement the needs for facial cream. Now, I would agree however, that if someone carried with them an ointment...a substance like that of hydrocortizone...then that is feasible and possible. However, like so many I am baffled with the reality that this artifact jar is clear and not that of milk glass. Like you, I have been searching for weeks on end, and have come up with nothing!!! I am curious to see why Dr. Berry had two different sets of freckle cream in his ad. The one you posted several weeks ago. Its too bad they never had things done with KODAK back then. Anyway, I truly believe that we are looking at a substance that is made up of a component that you just can't dip your fingers into...but you run your finger across just to get a small amount that will last for awhile. Kinda of like dr. bakers salve. Whatever this jar is...its of great importance...because from all the ads people have posted...wouldn't you all agree that if Amelia did carry a jar of Freckle cream...then a milk glass jar should be there. But, that doesn't wipe out the possiblity that this is a unique jar of ointment. Anyway, would love to hear your insights into this! Thanks!!!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 23, 2013, 10:03:05 AM
The lab tests and our analysis of them are still in process.  We are about halfway through the tests we want to run and then there will be the process of interpreting what it all means.  It's a little bit like writing a graduate level thesis.

Then isn't a bit premature to conclude that the jar held a mercury-rich substance?

Yes.  If I said something that led you to think I had "concluded" that, I apologize.  In most if not all of the remarks I've made I have been extremely careful to say more work remained and that nothing has been concluded.   We think the jar contained a mercury-bearing substance but until we've run every control we can think of, it would be mistaken to say we have concluded that.

On one occasion, however, in the heat of battle, my enthusiasm did cause me to say more than I knew, before all possible tests had been run.  Here is that remark:

"We have found mercury in quantity sufficient to have been considered part of the original contents on the inside of the jar."

A remark such as that one might better have been reserved until all the work was completed, and even then it would need to be qualified against other tests.  The quantity found, after all, is only one variable from only one experiment.  The fault for that remark is mine, not TIGHAR's.  I'm not perfect and I make mistakes, but when I do, I admit them and move on.  Is this sufficient expiation, Mr. Kada?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on February 23, 2013, 12:17:22 PM
I ran across this ad this afternoon from The Evening Herald of Klamath Falls, Oregon on March 24, 1921. Found it very interesting as it gave a list of other manufacturer's of freckle cream and vanishing cream during this time frame. Curious, to know why Dr. Berry's freckle ointment is the only one listed as ointment and not freckle cream.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: richie conroy on February 23, 2013, 12:23:21 PM
Hi All

Here is another product using similar jar

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-MARINELLO-Cosmetic-Milk-Glass-Face-Cream-Jar-Cosmetic-Vanity-/330876513905?_trksid=p2045573.m2042&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D27%26meid%3D5802545352964045001%26pid%3D100033%26prg%3D1011%26rk%3D3%26sd%3D190679115485%26

(http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/0/5/6/7/6/2/webimg/648488628_tp.jpg)

Also i have just been reading on this site http://www.glassbottlemarks.com/hazel-atlas-glass-company/ paragraph 6 caught my attention Platonite has this area been researched

my apologies if this has been talked about before

Thanks Richie
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 23, 2013, 02:16:11 PM
However, like so many I am baffled with the reality that this artifact jar is clear and not that of milk glass. Like you, I have been searching for weeks on end, and have come up with nothing!!!

...wouldn't you all agree that if Amelia did carry a jar of Freckle cream...then a milk glass jar should be there.

I think Randy is making a point worth remembering here.  We've been seeing some opaque white and other colors posted lately (Velvetina is light brown, I think) and I'm not sure what the relevance is.

Re Platonite, I'm no expert but what I've seen on the web indicates that it too was always opaque and usually in bright colors, and was used in dinnerware/tableware and not the utility products like cosmetic jars.  Also it seems not to have been produced in large quantity until the '40's.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 23, 2013, 03:20:48 PM

On one occasion, however, in the heat of battle, my enthusiasm did cause me to say more than I knew, before all possible tests had been run.  Here is that remark:

"We have found mercury in quantity sufficient to have been considered part of the original contents on the inside of the jar."

A remark such as that one might better have been reserved until all the work was completed, and even then it would need to be qualified against other tests.  The quantity found, after all, is only one variable from only one experiment.  The fault for that remark is mine, not TIGHAR's.  I'm not perfect and I make mistakes, but when I do, I admit them and move on.  Is this sufficient expiation, Mr. Kada?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

I was idling wondering Mr Cerniglia if basics exclusion tests have been done to establish if there is a natural contamination of mercuric compounds in the soil and other naturally occurring items near where the jar fragments were found (including avian faunal remains).   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 23, 2013, 04:46:45 PM
I was idling wondering Mr Cerniglia if basics exclusion tests have been done to establish if there is a natural contamination of mercuric compounds in the soil and other naturally occurring items near where the jar fragments were found.   

You are in good company in your suggestion. The lead scientist at the lab has also suggested this as a possible experiment. The problem is that there isn't much of what one would typically call "soil" at the Seven Site (http://tighar.org/wiki/The_Seven_Site).  If you read the link in that last sentence, it says under "Site Structure," that "The ridge on which the Seven Site lies is composed of coral rubble thrown up by wave action and stabilized by vegetation. There is little soil accumulation, though screening does produce a small amount of humic material."

Here's  what it looks like (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9BQ6S67GRTY/SqRhAAohHPI/AAAAAAAAADU/FVfX1SSrgeY/s1600-h/ExStratMkdup.jpg).

It's not exactly the type of material in which one would imagine deposits of mercury from wind or rain adhering.  The samples Dr. King has told me about are of three types: "a) coral rubble and b) some fine-grained material, probably largely ash, from the SL (slope) feature, and (c) a 'soil' area near the SE corner of the 'site' -- that is, of the area we've investigated."

We may want to test the coral for mercury eventually, but I decided if we do it, it should be in a later round of testing.  One important control we want to do in this first round is to test another glass shard that is not from that jar to see what types of mercury readings we obtain.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 23, 2013, 05:33:22 PM
I was idling wondering Mr Cerniglia if basics exclusion tests have been done to establish if there is a natural contamination of mercuric compounds in the soil and other naturally occurring items near where the jar fragments were found.   

You are in good company in your suggestion. The lead scientist at the lab has also suggested this as a possible experiment. The problem is that there isn't much of what one would typically call "soil" at the Seven Site (http://tighar.org/wiki/The_Seven_Site).  If you read the link in that last sentence, it says under "Site Structure," that "The ridge on which the Seven Site lies is composed of coral rubble thrown up by wave action and stabilized by vegetation. There is little soil accumulation, though screening does produce a small amount of humic material."

Here's  what it looks like (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9BQ6S67GRTY/SqRhAAohHPI/AAAAAAAAADU/FVfX1SSrgeY/s1600-h/ExStratMkdup.jpg).

It's not exactly the type of material in which one would imagine deposits of mercury from wind or rain adhering.  The samples Dr. King has told me about are of three types: "a) coral rubble and b) some fine-grained material, probably largely ash, from the SL (slope) feature, and (c) a 'soil' area near the SE corner of the 'site' -- that is, of the area we've investigated."

We may want to test the coral for mercury eventually, but I decided if we do it, it should be in a later round of testing.  One important control we want to do in this first round is to test another glass shard that is not from that jar to see what types of mercury readings we obtain.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Thank you Mr Cerniglia for your reply. No doubt you have considered that soil as we have referred to it covers a multitude of things. Fine grained coral mixed with the decayed remnants of bird, fish bones and shells etc. is the soil of the island and that which encourages the growth of the flora of the island. Compounds such as mercuric ones etc. are known to become concentrated in animals at the upper levels of the food chain due to their natural selection of prey that provides the best dietary intake against the effort to harvest these. So if there is naturally occurring mercuric content in the various animals that form the links in that food chain then the higher species in the chain will be ingesting greater concentrations of a compound like a mercuric one. It follows therefore that as these species suffer mortality in some form either as prey or simply dying then when their bones and flesh break down the trace elements and molecular compounds will be deposited in areas around where the decay occurs. Over times there will be a gradual increase in any molecular compounds like mercury compounds in what we call the soil of the island. Mercuric compounds are reasonably stable and could probably associated with minor flooding events or rainfall be transported to and deposited on otherwise mercuric free objects such as glass etc. So while I think that your work on the classification and study of the availability of the various unguent containers that might fit the profile of the glass fragments is first class, I still wonder about the aforementioned natural contamination of these fragments in the environment of Nikumaroro especially as the species on land would appear to represent the top predators in the food chain that leads from the sea to the land. Therefore I would suggest that soil sampling from various localities needs to be addressed - unless it has been done and this form of contamination has been previously ruled out.             
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 23, 2013, 06:14:24 PM
Hi All

Here is another product using similar jar

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-MARINELLO-Cosmetic-Milk-Glass-Face-Cream-Jar-Cosmetic-Vanity-/330876513905?_trksid=p2045573.m2042&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D27%26meid%3D5802545352964045001%26pid%3D100033%26prg%3D1011%26rk%3D3%26sd%3D190679115485%26

(http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/0/5/6/7/6/2/webimg/648488628_tp.jpg)

Also i have just been reading on this site http://www.glassbottlemarks.com/hazel-atlas-glass-company/ paragraph 6 caught my attention Platonite has this area been researched

my apologies if this has been talked about before

Thanks Richie


More information on Marinello products here (http://www.marinello.com/history.aspx).

Of particular note is the part that says:

"Soon her products were distributed in every state of the Union, in Canada, Mexico, South America, England, throughout continental Europe, in Russia, South Africa, Australia, China and Japan and on islands in both oceans."

Interesting!


Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on February 23, 2013, 07:02:23 PM
With the latest post in regards to Hazel Atlas company...I'm really curious as to how the "fired-on" process is done in conjunction with Plutonite? I've seen over the years how glassblowers make glass bowls and stuff...but how do you fire-on a certain color? Educate me on this guys???
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 23, 2013, 09:42:07 PM
Thank you Mr Cerniglia for your reply. No doubt you have considered that soil as we have referred to it covers a multitude of things. Fine grained coral mixed with the decayed remnants of bird, fish bones and shells etc. is the soil of the island and that which encourages the growth of the flora of the island. Compounds such as mercuric ones etc. are known to become concentrated in animals at the upper levels of the food chain due to their natural selection of prey that provides the best dietary intake against the effort to harvest these. So if there is naturally occurring mercuric content in the various animals that form the links in that food chain then the higher species in the chain will be ingesting greater concentrations of a compound like a mercuric one. It follows therefore that as these species suffer mortality in some form either as prey or simply dying then when their bones and flesh break down the trace elements and molecular compounds will be deposited in areas around where the decay occurs. Over times there will be a gradual increase in any molecular compounds like mercury compounds in what we call the soil of the island. Mercuric compounds are reasonably stable and could probably associated with minor flooding events or rainfall be transported to and deposited on otherwise mercuric free objects such as glass etc. So while I think that your work on the classification and study of the availability of the various unguent containers that might fit the profile of the glass fragments is first class, I still wonder about the aforementioned natural contamination of these fragments in the environment of Nikumaroro especially as the species on land would appear to represent the top predators in the food chain that leads from the sea to the land. Therefore I would suggest that soil sampling from various localities needs to be addressed - unless it has been done and this form of contamination has been previously ruled out.           
The 2 main arguments that came up, as I recall, were that 1) the level of mercury on such a small surface area of glass would indicate a proportionally large soil contamination, if soil contamination were the culprit. The amount was simply too large to be accounted for by environmental background levels, even had it been found in an urban area.  The amount wasn't extremely high in terms of sheer volume, but it was high when compared to the small surface area tested, only a few square cm.  Had these levels been detected on, say, an equivalent area of a laboratory countertop, Greg has demonstrated it is just large enough that a hazmat team would need to be called in for cleanup.  2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.

Now, these are good arguments, and yours are too, Dan.  They account for all the situations I can envision.  But they can't account for situations I may not have envisioned.  Feynman would probably have been in favor of a soil test.  I'm not against it.  It's just that we can more quickly disverify our hypothesis of a mercury-bearing cream having been in the jar if we can find evidence other glass on the site is similarly contaminated.  It's just a matter of taking one step at a time.  Sound reasonable?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 23, 2013, 11:43:44 PM

The 2 main arguments that came up, as I recall, were that 1) the level of mercury on such a small surface area of glass would indicate a proportionally large soil contamination, if soil contamination were the culprit. The amount was simply too large to be accounted for by environmental background levels, even had it been found in an urban area.  The amount wasn't extremely high in terms of sheer volume, but it was high when compared to the small surface area tested, only a few square cm.  Had these levels been detected on, say, an equivalent area of a laboratory countertop, Greg has demonstrated it is just large enough that a hazmat team would need to be called in for cleanup.  2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.


Joe, if you don't mind me asking, how much mercury was found by the lab, and how big an area of the jar was tested? The only information I have seen in this post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg17755.html#msg17755) in which you are quoted by Randy Conrad as saying in an email that "Evans Analytical Group in Syracuse, New York has reported today that 3.4 micrograms per liter of mercury was detected from the ointment pot".

Perhaps this is not actually what you said, or what you meant? It's hard for me to understand from the quote, as written, how the measurement was performed or what the measurement results were, so it is hard to see how it was concluded that the amount of mercury present in the jar was unusually high. Can you state the lab results in units of mass per unit area (e.g., micrograms per square cm) ? That might help clear things up, at least for me.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 24, 2013, 01:02:31 AM
The amount wasn't extremely high in terms of sheer volume, but it was high when compared to the small surface area tested, only a few square cm.  Had these levels been detected on, say, an equivalent area of a laboratory countertop, Greg has demonstrated it is just large enough that a hazmat team would need to be called in for cleanup.  2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.

Now, these are good arguments, and yours are too, Dan.  They account for all the situations I can envision.  But they can't account for situations I may not have envisioned.  Feynman would probably have been in favor of a soil test.  I'm not against it.  It's just that we can more quickly disverify our hypothesis of a mercury-bearing cream having been in the jar if we can find evidence other glass on the site is similarly contaminated.  It's just a matter of taking one step at a time.  Sound reasonable?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Thank you Mr Cerniglia for your reply, but that isn't the question. My question was were soil samples taken from the area of the fragment finds and also from scientifically defined random sites on the island to determine exactly what is the average background mercury compound contamination, and for that matter other naturally occurring metallic contaminants, so that the amount found on the glass fragment can be placed within its probability range in the island environment. Only then, I suggest, can TIGHAR begin to define if the glass fragments are those of a vessel which at some time held a skin lotion of some mercury containing kind or contrarily held some other non-mercury based unguent. Please accept that I am not criticising your thorough work on establishing a comparative morphological and historical typology of unguent jars of this kind.   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 24, 2013, 02:08:46 PM

The 2 main arguments that came up, as I recall, were that 1) the level of mercury on such a small surface area of glass would indicate a proportionally large soil contamination, if soil contamination were the culprit. The amount was simply too large to be accounted for by environmental background levels, even had it been found in an urban area.  The amount wasn't extremely high in terms of sheer volume, but it was high when compared to the small surface area tested, only a few square cm.  Had these levels been detected on, say, an equivalent area of a laboratory countertop, Greg has demonstrated it is just large enough that a hazmat team would need to be called in for cleanup.  2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.


Joe, if you don't mind me asking, how much mercury was found by the lab, and how big an area of the jar was tested? The only information I have seen in this post (http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg17755.html#msg17755) in which you are quoted by Randy Conrad as saying in an email that "Evans Analytical Group in Syracuse, New York has reported today that 3.4 micrograms per liter of mercury was detected from the ointment pot".

Perhaps this is not actually what you said, or what you meant? It's hard for me to understand from the quote, as written, how the measurement was performed or what the measurement results were, so it is hard to see how it was concluded that the amount of mercury present in the jar was unusually high. Can you state the lab results in units of mass per unit area (e.g., micrograms per square cm) ? That might help clear things up, at least for me.

Thanks!

John, the answers to these questions would take a lot of time to produce and comprise at least several pages that I want to write when I present the final findings.  In fact, they would probably be the main idea of the presentation. A high Hg reading is purely based on context.  We haven't yet gathered all the contextual information, in the form of lab controls.  We could decide in the end it wasn't high, but we still think it was.

In the meantime, you've prompted me to review my notes with Greg to double-check things.  Thank you for your patience.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 24, 2013, 02:18:42 PM
The amount wasn't extremely high in terms of sheer volume, but it was high when compared to the small surface area tested, only a few square cm.  Had these levels been detected on, say, an equivalent area of a laboratory countertop, Greg has demonstrated it is just large enough that a hazmat team would need to be called in for cleanup.  2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.

Now, these are good arguments, and yours are too, Dan.  They account for all the situations I can envision.  But they can't account for situations I may not have envisioned.  Feynman would probably have been in favor of a soil test.  I'm not against it.  It's just that we can more quickly disverify our hypothesis of a mercury-bearing cream having been in the jar if we can find evidence other glass on the site is similarly contaminated.  It's just a matter of taking one step at a time.  Sound reasonable?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Thank you Mr Cerniglia for your reply, but that isn't the question. My question was were soil samples taken from the area of the fragment finds and also from scientifically defined random sites on the island to determine exactly what is the average background mercury compound contamination, and for that matter other naturally occurring metallic contaminants, so that the amount found on the glass fragment can be placed within its probability range in the island environment. Only then, I suggest, can TIGHAR begin to define if the glass fragments are those of a vessel which at some time held a skin lotion of some mercury containing kind or contrarily held some other non-mercury based unguent. Please accept that I am not criticising your thorough work on establishing a comparative morphological and historical typology of unguent jars of this kind.   

Dan, yes, soil samples were taken from the area of the fragment finds, according to Dr. King.  You'd have to ask Mr. Gillespie what other island samples are in TIGHAR's possession.  They wouldn't have been collected with a scientific process in mind because we didn't know we might want to test samples for the purpose of looking at Hg at the time they were collected.  Maybe this is work for a future expedition.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Andrew M McKenna on February 24, 2013, 04:55:53 PM
Dan

I think your suggestion that ONLY after eliminating all variables regarding the ambient level of mercury contamination, can TIGHAR claim that the jar glass has an elevated level of mercury due to it's former contents to be somewhat unreasonable.
 
Yes it is true that, in theory, the 7 site might in fact be a toxic waste site contaminated by hazmat team levels of mercury sufficient to infuse the glass of the jar with a similar level of toxicity, but I think the odds are pretty small given what we know about coral atolls, the history of Nikumaroro, and what we know about the products sold in that particular jar.  Coral atolls are not generally known for being repositories of heavy metals without significant external contamination, and the Phoenix islands are about as far away from sources of contamination as one can get.

You cite the concentration of mercury in the food chain as a possible source of contamination.  What exact species of "top predators in the food chain that leads from the sea to the land" are you suggesting contributed to such potential contamination?  Are we talking frigate birds, hermit crabs, coco crabs, tuna, dolphins, sharks, humans?  The top predators in that gang generally don't consistently land themselves at the 7 site in sufficient quantity to provide hazmat team level of contamination.  Keep in mind that we've only found evidence of a countable number of individuals of all species, so it isn't like the place is completely overrun with the remains of mercury laden top predators, there simply isn't that much remaining of any species.

Doing a bit web searching, I do find a study of seabirds with mercury concentration at Midway Island

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969700004964 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969700004964)

That indicates contamination levels in the range of 2,000 PPB for frigate birds, and up to 7,000 PPB for red-tailed tropic birds, and near 20,000 PPB for black footed albatross and tops out at 31,900 PPB for the bonin petrel.  I don't think we have either the albatross or the petrel at Nikumaroro, so we can cross those two off the list.  There are studies showing humans who eat dolphin on a regular basis testing out as high as 19 PPM, but I don't think that these levels are high enough to infuse the jar glass with the level of mercury that was found in the lab. 

Can you cite any reference for the concentration of mercury by top predators on uninhabited coral atolls that would result in contamination high enough to infuse glass with 3.4 micrograms of mercury per liter?  Outside of a toxic waste dump, I doubt that the food chain mechanism could achieve such levels.

Joe, can you translate the lab findings of 3.4 micrograms per liter into PPM?  I'm a bit hazy on how to relate the two.

We do have the wings - bones and feathers - from several frigate birds that were found at the 7 site.  Since these are available (I think), it might be worth testing them to determine what the actual level of mercury in them as a substitute for testing of soil samples, but only if the cost is reasonable.

As far as I know, we did not take soil samples with the intent of testing them for mercury.  We didn't know the issue existed at the time we were there, and it only exists because the type of jar we found is known to have been used for a product that contained significant levels of mercury.  Seems to me that the simplest solution is to connect the known jar with the known mercury laden product, but yes that does still have some level of uncertainty.  Completely eliminating all uncertainty is a difficult and expensive proposition, so we have to pursue what we believe is the most effective and reasonable lines of research.  I personally don't think testing the soil samples at the 7 site, and randomly around the island would be a productive line of research given the resources required and the limited ability to pursue this project on site.  You are of course welcome to help fund a trip out there to collect soil samples and test them.   :)

So, while I can certainly be wrong, it is possible that the ambient level of mercury at the 7 site is extraordinarily high, enough so to infuse a piece of glass with hazmat team levels of mercury, I think the odds are incredibly small.

Andrew
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 24, 2013, 05:29:38 PM

Doing a bit web searching, I do find a study of seabirds with mercury concentration at Midway Island

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969700004964 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969700004964)

That indicates contamination levels in the range of 2,000 PPB for frigate birds, and up to 7,000 PPB for red-tailed tropic birds, and near 20,000 PPB for black footed albatross and tops out at 31,900 PPB for the bonin petrel.  I don't think we have either the albatross or the petrel at Nikumaroro, so we can cross those two off the list.  There are studies showing humans who eat dolphin on a regular basis testing out as high as 19 PPM, but I don't think that these levels are high enough to infuse the jar glass with the level of mercury that was found in the lab. 

Can you cite any reference for the concentration of mercury by top predators on uninhabited coral atolls that would result in contamination high enough to infuse glass with 3.4 micrograms of mercury per liter?  Outside of a toxic waste dump, I doubt that the food chain mechanism could achieve such levels.

Joe, can you translate the lab findings of 3.4 micrograms per liter into PPM?  I'm a bit hazy on how to relate the two
.


Andrew, I think 3.4 micrograms per liter works out to 3.4 parts per billion (ppb).
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 24, 2013, 06:43:42 PM
Dan

I think your suggestion that ONLY after eliminating all variables regarding the ambient level of mercury contamination, can TIGHAR claim that the jar glass has an elevated level of mercury due to it's former contents to be somewhat unreasonable.
 
Yes it is true that, in theory, the 7 site might in fact be a toxic waste site contaminated by hazmat team levels of mercury sufficient to infuse the glass of the jar with a similar level of toxicity, but I think the odds are pretty small given what we know about coral atolls, the history of Nikumaroro, and what we know about the products sold in that particular jar.  Coral atolls are not generally known for being repositories of heavy metals without significant external contamination, and the Phoenix islands are about as far away from sources of contamination as one can get.

You cite the concentration of mercury in the food chain as a possible source of contamination.  What exact species of "top predators in the food chain that leads from the sea to the land" are you suggesting contributed to such potential contamination?  Are we talking frigate birds, hermit crabs, coco crabs, tuna, dolphins, sharks, humans?  The top predators in that gang generally don't consistently land themselves at the 7 site in sufficient quantity to provide hazmat team level of contamination.  Keep in mind that we've only found evidence of a countable number of individuals of all species, so it isn't like the place is completely overrun with the remains of mercury laden top predators, there simply isn't that much remaining of any species. ...
Andrew

Thank you Mr McKenna for your reply. You are probably aware the concept of top predator in the food chain is a relative value given the environment in which the definition is being applied. A goldfish bowl with one goldfish has by its nature a top predator which is the goldfish.  :)  Nikumaroro is basically a bird sanctuary which provides a nesting place for birds whose primary diet is sea food. In the marine environment the food chain, as you also no doubt aware, has many links in its species predation. The marine environment is also such that from the smallest creature consumed through each step there is a steady concentration of heavy metal contaminants until fish are consumed by sea birds which come back to islands like Nikumaroro and feed their young, defecate, die in all manner of ways etc.. Those processes then release some of the contaminants like mercury compounds back into the soil. Mr Kada has asked about the exact levels of this mercury, as I am I Vis-à-vis naturally occurring levels of these substances - the claim about about hazmat levels while sounding suitably dramatic is of little value as we have not defined exactly what is the level of mercury. I am not suggesting that the environment is hazardous at all, I am only suggesting that it is possible that there may be naturally occurring levels of heavy metal contamination.

Most soils have background noise traces of all sorts of elements, and given the sea bird faeces rich environment of Nikumaroro, and the natural concentration of heavy metal contamination characteristic of marine food chains, then I suggest that it is unwise to discount contamination from that source because the hypothetical Earhart/freckle cream/jar link is so enticing. Now Mr Cerniglia has said that samples were taken we would expect that these should have been retained and stored in a pristine way which would allow testing - there is no point in taking them if testing is not in the research program. Then, as I have suggested, this would either confirm or put to rest the idea that the mercury found in the jar fragment residue is of a level that exceeds the background contamination, if any, or is of a level compatible with simple contamination from the environment.

It is quite simple really and creates another means of assessing the freckle cream jar idea. It doesn't confirm, as you and all of us are aware, that the jar was bought to the island by Earhart but it does at the very least confirm the jar's purpose.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 24, 2013, 07:15:57 PM
. . . the type of jar we found is known to have been used for a product that contained significant levels of mercury. 

This is my personal opinion only (and I will be hooted down for sure):

As Randy Conrad has recently pointed out, and as far as I am aware, there has been no evidence found anywhere that Dr. Berry's Freckle Product was ever sold in clear-glass Hazel-Atlas No. 1995 jars, which is what was found on the island.  Joe Cerniglia should, please, correct me if this is not true.  I of course understand that if the word "type" is taken generally enough to mean "similar size and shape" only, the statement is not untrue; but it still sounds a bit of a stretch to me.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 24, 2013, 08:14:29 PM
Nikumaroro is basically a bird sanctuary which provides a nesting place for birds whose primary diet is sea food. In the marine environment the food chain, as you also no doubt aware, has many links in its species predation. The marine environment is also such that from the smallest creature consumed through each step there is a steady concentration of heavy metal contaminants until fish are consumed by sea birds which come back to islands like Nikumaroro and feed their young, defecate, die in all manner of ways etc.. Those processes then release some of the contaminants like mercury compounds back into the soil.

Let me get this straight.  You're suggesting that the mercury found on the jar is from bird dung????  We're talking about the broken jar whose pieces were found buried in coral rubble (not guano)???  What gave you the idea that Nikumaroro is basically a bird sanctuary?  Yes, there are plenty of birds there but it's no more a bird sanctuary than it is a crab or shark sanctuary.  There isn't now and there apparently never was a significant guano deposit anywhere on the island - unlike, for example, McKean Island (now THERE'S a bird sanctuary).  I'd wager that the Seven Site has no more bird droppings per square meter than your back yard.

It is, of course, possible that on some day long ago when the jar was sitting on the ground, upright, undamaged, with the lid off, some bird with mercury saturated poop and a Norden bombsight managed to score a direct hit. If that's your hypothesis we could probably help you devise an experiment to test it.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 24, 2013, 09:00:57 PM

Let me get this straight.  You're suggesting that the mercury found on the jar is from bird dung????  We're talking about the broken jar whose pieces were found buried in coral rubble (not guano)???  What gave you the idea that Nikumaroro is basically a bird sanctuary?  Yes, there are plenty of birds there but it's no more a bird sanctuary than it is a crab or shark sanctuary.  There isn't now and there apparently never was a significant guano deposit anywhere on the island - unlike, for example, McKean Island (now THERE'S a bird sanctuary).  I'd wager that the Seven Site has no more bird droppings per square meter than your back yard.

It is, of course, possible that on some day long ago when the jar was sitting on the ground, upright, undamaged, with the lid off, some bird with mercury saturated poop and a Norden bombsight managed to score a direct hit. If that's your hypothesis we could probably help you devise an experiment to test it.

Thank you for your prompt reply Mr Gillespie. Well you might care to correct the Wikipedia entry regarding the bird sanctuary. Apparently that says that ...

 "The island is part of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, and as such, has been named an Important Bird Area.".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikumaroro

However that aside. It seems to me that getting a straight answer about the background levels of heavy metal contamination in what passes for soil on the island is an impossibly difficult question for people to answer. Mr Cerniglia tells us that soil samples were taken, now I can think of no reason other than analysis why samples would be taken, unless TIGHAR was considering selling them in little bottles as a fund raiser, so were tests done on the soil and what was the result. I can't find any references to tests in your excellent Ameliapedia but perhaps I have missed them. And if I have have then that's me with egg on my face.  :)

Now I do respectfully submit that Dr Berry's freckle cream relied on mercury to do its advertised job so I would think that finding a mercuric compound on the glass residue of a jar that is suggested by TIGHAR to have arrived with Earhart on the island (bearing in mind her apparent problem with freckles) was a big boost to TIGHAR's quest. And if I am not mistaken from the accounts I have read it still is, but just as one swallow a spring does not make, so too a trace of a mercuric compound does not a freckle cream make unless that trace can be ruled out as coming from heavy metal compounds arriving on the island through the digestive processes of sea birds. And the latter I respectfully suggest can only be ascertained if appropriate random sampling is done. In a reply to my earlier question about this matter Mr Cerniglia mentioned the question asked by an analyst he approached ...  "You are in good company in your suggestion. The lead scientist at the lab has also suggested this as a possible experiment." http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg23841.html#msg23841

Therefore the question seems to be a fairly common sense one asked by people who are thinking about the mercury traces on the glass fragment. Personally I see no problem with analysing soil samples to ascertain this data if those samples still exist other than the cost. If they don't then whenever TIGHAR revisits the island perhaps the sampling could be done. It is a sort of belt and braces approach to shore up TIGHAR's argument.         
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 25, 2013, 06:49:17 AM
Well you might care to correct the Wikipedia entry regarding the bird sanctuary. Apparently that says that ...

 "The island is part of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, and as such, has been named an Important Bird Area.".

To continue in the quibbling spirit of this thread - "an Important Bird Area" is not the same thing as "basically a bird sanctuary."  The Wikipedia entry is a general statement.  Niku is an Important Bird Area because it's part of the PIPA.  My comment is a specific statement - based upon direct observation over periods of several weeks in 1996, 2001, 2007, and 2010 - about bird activity at the site where the buried jar fragments were found.  In my opinion, the notion that the mercury detected on the jar might be attributable to a general saturation of the site with bird droppings is on a par with speculation about a transvestite Coastie being responsible for compact mirror and make-up.  We welcome serious suggestions of alternative hypotheses but this is just harassment.

However that aside. It seems to me that getting a straight answer about the background levels of heavy metal contamination in what passes for soil on the island is an impossibly difficult question for people to answer.

Let me help you with that.  Straight answers are my specialty.
In the process of collecting and bagging artifacts we inevitably end up with detritus in the bottom of the bag. Some of the artifacts collected during Niku VI (2010) - such as the jar - were collected using sterile protocols because we hoped to get "contact DNA."  "Dirt" from the bottom of such bags is the closest thing we have to scientifically collected soil samples.


Now I do respectfully submit that Dr Berry's freckle cream relied on mercury to do its advertised job so I would think that finding a mercuric compound on the glass residue of a jar that is suggested by TIGHAR to have arrived with Earhart on the island (bearing in mind her apparent problem with freckles) was a big boost to TIGHAR's quest.

Another quibble.  TIGHAR has not suggested that the jar arrived with Earhart.  It would be accurate to say, "TIGHAR has suggested that the jar MAY HAVE arrived with Earhart."  That possibility is intriguing to the public and media and that has been a big boost to TIGHAR's quest - as well it should be.  It's not the jar, it's the boost that you seem to have a problem with.

And if I am not mistaken from the accounts I have read it still is, but just as one swallow a spring does not make, so too a trace of a mercuric compound does not a freckle cream make unless that trace can be ruled out as coming from heavy metal compounds arriving on the island through the digestive processes of sea birds. And the latter I respectfully suggest can only be ascertained if appropriate random sampling is done. In a reply to my earlier question about this matter Mr Cerniglia mentioned the question asked by an analyst he approached ...  "You are in good company in your suggestion. The lead scientist at the lab has also suggested this as a possible experiment." http://tighar.org/smf/index.php/topic,261.msg23841.html#msg23841

Labs are always in favor of doing more tests.  No matter how many tests we do, it will never be more than a possibility that the jar contained freckle cream.  We already have enough information to say that freckle cream is a reasonable possibility. We don't know that Earhart used freckle cream and, unless we find some primary source reference that has not turned up yet, we'll never know.


Therefore the question seems to be a fairly common sense one asked by people who are thinking about the mercury traces on the glass fragment. Personally I see no problem with analysing soil samples to ascertain this data if those samples still exist other than the cost. If they don't then whenever TIGHAR revisits the island perhaps the sampling could be done. It is a sort of belt and braces approach to shore up TIGHAR's argument.         

The investigation of other material recovered from the Seven Site has pointed up a need for soil samples, so that will be one of the tasks for Niku VIII anyway.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 25, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Thank you Mr Gillespie for your reply. I am happy to see that soil samples are a recognised objective for later visits. The general tenor of your post is to downplay the importance of the freckle cream jar (if that is what it is) and its relationship with Earhart claiming, if I read the meaning of your statement correctly, that it is the media that has placed the emphasis on it rather than TIGHAR and it was just a happy chance that this resulted in good publicity for TIGHAR. May I say that is fortuitous indeed.

However as birds are resident on the island and your comments re deposition of any mercuric compounds in their droppings are, as you say "In my opinion, the notion that the mercury detected on the jar might be attributable to a general saturation of the site with bird droppings is on a par with speculation about a transvestite Coastie being responsible for compact mirror and make-up.", simply your own speculations we can agree to differ simply because as it appears no soil analysis has been performed to either confirm or reject natural background mercuric contamination then at the moment there is no firm answer regarding the mercury source.

I apologise if you see harassment in this line of questioning, I simply see it as expanding the data analysis to wring as much from it as possible thus ascertaining if it provides a complete picture or is in need of further expansion. Something you have conceded in stating that "The investigation of other material recovered from the Seven Site has pointed up a need for soil samples, ...". I would hope that these samples would comprise a set taken from locations elsewhere on the island for comparative purposes to properly discern if there are unique features at the Seven Site that may have a bearing on the search or if they are simply part of the normal composition of the island's soil.       
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Daniel Paul Cotts on February 25, 2013, 10:15:19 PM
I thought reply #609 in this thread put to bed the idea that environmental contamination was an explanation for the mercury on the jar.
Quote
2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 25, 2013, 11:33:39 PM

To continue in the quibbling spirit of this thread - "an Important Bird Area" is not the same thing as "basically a bird sanctuary."  The Wikipedia entry is a general statement.  Niku is an Important Bird Area because it's part of the PIPA.  My comment is a specific statement - based upon direct observation over periods of several weeks in 1996, 2001, 2007, and 2010 - about bird activity at the site where the buried jar fragments were found.  In my opinion, the notion that the mercury detected on the jar might be attributable to a general saturation of the site with bird droppings is on a par with speculation about a transvestite Coastie being responsible for compact mirror and make-up.  We welcome serious suggestions of alternative hypotheses but this is just harassment.


In my opinion, Dan has an interesting idea. As I read it, he is not saying the Hazel-Atlas jar was directly contaminated by guano, but rather he is wondering whether Niku’s ‘soil’ (let’s call it that) may be sufficiently high in mercury content that soil contamination might explain the mercury measurement reported by Joe (via Randy).  Andrew McKenna has pointed out that seabirds can have high levels of mercury in their tissues, and so it seems plausible to me that, as Dan suggests, seabirds have deposited enough mercury on Niku over the centuries to significantly raise Niku’s soil mercury concentrations; this would parallel the environmental cycling of phosphorous, where there have been studies showing that seabirds are major contributors of phosphorous to the soils of some islands and coastal areas. Obviously, the higher the mercury contamination level of the Hazel-Atlas jar, the less likely the possibility that Niku soil plays a role in the mercury measurement results obtained on the Hazel-Atlas jar.

Another thing to consider in interpreting the mercury results of the Niku Hazel-Atlas jar is how it was handled and stored. If people who handled the Niku Hazel-Atlas jar also handled Dr. Berry’s Ointment jars obtained from ebay or from other sources without taking precautions, cross contamination of the Niku jar with mercury from these other jars is a possibility.  By the way, given what we know about the composition of Dr. Berry’s ointment (12% mercury) I would hope all those who handle these freckle cream jars are being careful.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: John Kada on February 25, 2013, 11:40:57 PM
I thought reply #609 in this thread put to bed the idea that environmental contamination was an explanation for the mercury on the jar.
Quote
2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.

Is the type of mercury on the jar known or is it just suspected?  We'll learn the details of the analysis of the Hazel-Atlas Jar from Joe, but at the moment we out here in Forum-Land don't know.

Mercury exists in the environment in several chemical forms. I suspect the mercury in Niku's soil would not be in elemental form, and it think it is very unlikely that it would be in elemental form in in bird tissue.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on February 26, 2013, 12:25:50 AM
In reference to Mr. Kada's question...here is something to ponder on regarding the make up and analysis of mercury found in the artifact jar. Let's just imagine for a moment that we have two Dr. Berry jars. One is a fairly large sized cream jar...one that most women would keep on their bedroom dresser or on their bathroom sink. The other one...is the size that was found on the island. This particular jar is fairly small, and something that a woman would take with her in her purse or handbag or cosmetic bag. Mainly, this jar is a traveling jar. Now, going back to the first jar...it has a white cream substance in it...Most likely a vanishing or freckle cream material (we don't know for sure). But, it has a fairly large amount of substance in volume. The little jar however, has a component in it that is not of a creamy substance but that in particular of an ointment. Something that is very greasy (oil based) and very concentrated. This particular jar is mainly used for short term purposes and has a smaller amount of substance in volume.
  If we took both jars and opened up their lids and turned them on their sides...Which jar would most likely be emptied first? I would assume the cream jar. Mainly because the cream is very acceptable to moisture. It's like what happens to cold cream after its being applied to the face and later washed off? It doesn't take long for the material to dissolve! In the case of the smaller jar...and let's just say for a moment that it indeed is ointment...how long would it take for the substance to run out of the jar. Remember now...its of an oil based because of its ointment consistency. Now remember...."Oil and Water" don't mix. So you have a substance that lingers on the jar for days, months, and years to come!!!
  Now in reference to the make up part...I believe that mercury would be found more in the smaller jar that that of the bigger jar. If indeed the smaller jar had a cream substance in it...then the mercury makeup would be smaller...because it dissolved faster in water and rain and whatnot! If the jar had an ointment in it then it stands a greater chance of holding on to that makeup consistency. Whereas, in the case of the bigger jar (which by right would have the larger consistency of mercury in it) won't stand the chance of survival with its cream consistency and its intolerance to water and rain. Anyway, I hope you all understand where I'm coming from???
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 26, 2013, 01:53:15 AM
I thought reply #609 in this thread put to bed the idea that environmental contamination was an explanation for the mercury on the jar.
Quote
2) the type of mercury suspected, ammoniated mercury, will adhere to glass, whereas elemental mercury, the type found environmentally, will not.

Is the type of mercury on the jar known or is it just suspected?  We'll learn the details of the analysis of the Hazel-Atlas Jar from Joe, but at the moment we out here in Forum-Land don't know.

Mercury exists in the environment in several chemical forms. I suspect the mercury in Niku's soil would not be in elemental form, and it think it is very unlikely that it would be in elemental form in in bird tissue.

Mr Kada has made interesting points in both his posts. Certainly when we talk of mercury we are not talking of the shiny fluid metal but a compound which contains mercury. It is a mercury compound that is contained in Dr Berry's freckle unguent. What I was referring to was the contamination of the soil by mercuric compounds that would naturally be found in the excrement, and as I am informed, in the decayed feathers of moulting birds. The fact that mercury is is concentrated in the food chain in direct and increasing proportion to the position of an animal in the ascending food chain is well known. Excess toxic heavy metal intake is also excreted by an organism in hair or feathers - a process long recognised in biology.

Shell fish are known to be quite effective depositories of mercury and other heavy metals given their feeding process as water filterers taking the primary food sources like plankton and other microscopic marine organisms. Likewise coral polyps also are filter feeders so higher concentrations of mercury might be expected in coral gravel and coral based soils.

Add to that the sea bird contribution through faeces and moulting feathers so I would politely suggest that before too much is made of the purported mercury rich jar residue then proper analysis of trace element concentrations in what constitutes the island's soil is a priority. Any reoccurring deposition and evaporation of water in an impervious environment, like glass, would tend to concentrate any water borne trace elements common to the environment in which the process is taking place. It is simple common sense, I respectfully suggest, if one is relying upon the presence of an element to establish the identity of something that the container once contained, to first rule out what the environment in which it is found also contains.

I might add that with respect Mr Cotts' comment that adherence would depend upon what position the fragment lay in in. If it was on its side then perhaps the residue would be washed off but if it had some form of concave surface relative to to the natural level then it would form a crude but effective Petri dish concentrating the deposition from evaporation. Do photos exist of how the fragments were found before they were lifted?   
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 26, 2013, 08:45:23 AM
A question for Messrs. Kada, Kelly and Harris:
What would it take to convince you that the jar contained Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream?
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 26, 2013, 09:23:08 AM
Not to interrupt, but just to say I am gathering data behind the scenes from Greg George that I would like to introduce at a later time.  I like the discussion and think it is coming mostly from a genuine wish to participate and help inform our experimental design and I appreciate the contributions.  I haven't exited the discussion. I just need more time to marshal some facts that I think will prove helpful.

Regarding standards of proof, I would only add that we are well advised by Dr. King not to place too much importance on any single artifact.  But there's a corollary to that principle, in my view, and that is that one must build the bridges one can.  Call it the "half a loaf" doctrine. If it is possible to move closer to demonstrating probability for the jar having contained a mercuric substance, that bridge surely ought to be built.  Linking mercuric ointments to AE is much more problematic, but IF that kind of photographic or documentary evidence were to show up (and it could - that video I brought out a few pages ago could have, under different circumstances -- better lighting, focus -- have been it) we need to have these bridges functioning, in place, and as strong as possible. 

That's why I think the experiments and this discussion worthwhile, even without immediate hope that we can satisfy all the linkages we would wish, and no hope that this activity would ever meet the standards of proof to satisfy everyone.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 26, 2013, 04:28:12 PM
A question for Messrs. Kada, Kelly and Harris:
What would it take to convince you that the jar contained Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream?

Thank you for question Mr Gillespie. I can only speak for myself as I am unacquainted with Mr Kada and Mr Harris so I can't presume to speak for them. I see the freckle cream jar issue as having several important components. These are in no particular order of priority.

First are the fragments that of a freckle cream container, or of a container of some other cream or lotion? From reading this thread I see that the answer remains unknown. The identification of its contents as a proprietary freckle cream depends upon the presence of mercuric compounds in residue found on it - the freckle creams of the period being laced with mercury which was their active ingredient. Yet whether this residue is from the container's original content or is a result of concentrations of naturally occurring contaminations from the mercuric content in bird faeces or decayed moulted feathers deposited in the island's soil remains a puzzle because whereas TIGHAR has the glass fragment it has not produced any comparative soil samples that would confirm or eliminate contamination from the environment.

Secondly while the shape of the container has been deduced it is pertinent to ask if containers of that sort only held mercury rich unguents. Much research on the subject has been presented but it seems to me that it appears to start from the question "is this a freckle cream jar?" then with respect I think the answers become biased. The initial questions should be "what did jars of this shape contain" which broadens the research undertaken and might have allowed any possible contamination from the natural environment to be recognised.

Thirdly there has been much discussion of when exactly the jar of this was produced and when production ceased and that seems to suggest that the jar may be too old for what is claimed of it. I won't repeat all the arguments as they are well presented in the threads.

Fourthly and probably least important in real terms is the Earhart connection. From what I have read in the discussions and claims the connection to Earhart hinges upon her comment that she didn't like her freckles. So that has been taken to argue not only did she use an anti-freckle cream, which she probably did, but more notably that this jar was bought by her to the island. However I might say that as per my first three points there is no confirmation that this is a freckle cream jar and that to assume that it is leads to a shaky argument which is - Amelia Earhart had freckles, she used a freckle cream, TIGHAR have found a jar which might have contained freckle cream, therefore this is Earhart's freckle cream jar and therefore it is part of the evidence that shows that she landed on Nikumaroro. I would not be alone in suggesting that this is really just a string of assumptions based on one known piece of data which is Earhart didn't like her freckles.

Fifthly, besides the shaky connection to Earhart there really is quite some doubt about how the jar got to the island. Well reasoned arguments have been presented for several ways this could have happened of which coming with Earhart is only one. There is no evidence to rule out its arrival in stores from the wrecked Norwich City, supply through the normal supply lines to the PISS colony, arrival with the Coast Guard or even with one of the various survey parties that visited the island prior to the PISS colonization. If we combine those honestly expressed doubts with the problem that TIGHAR at present has no evidence to exclude post-deposition contamination then even assuming that it arrived by another source as a freckle cream is a big unsupported step.

It would be wise to face the fact that not only are its original contents unproven but also that the way it reached the island is far from certain. Perhaps I have gone beyond the scope of the original question but personally I can see no firm evidence to safely assume anything about the jar or its relations with Earhart or anyone else. It is an artefact but what the presence of that artefact demonstrates is far from being determined. Your question tends to raise all sorts of issues so I respectfully ask you to  excuse the length of the reply.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Mark Appel on February 26, 2013, 04:59:58 PM
Mr. Kelly. You state it would be inappropriate for anyone to assume a relationship between the alleged freckle cream container and Amelia Earhart. I don't believe anyone on this forum, least of all Mr. Gillespie would disagree with that admonition. The perils of making such an assumption notwithstanding, Mr. Gillespie asked you directly what it would take to convince you of such an association. I too would like to know...
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 26, 2013, 08:07:17 PM
Mr. Kelly. You state it would be inappropriate for anyone to assume a relationship between the alleged freckle cream container and Amelia Earhart. I don't believe anyone on this forum, least of all Mr. Gillespie would disagree with that admonition. The perils of making such an assumption notwithstanding, Mr. Gillespie asked you directly what it would take to convince you of such an association. I too would like to know...

Thank you Mr Appel for your question - I think I explained in my post that the question asked by Mr Gillespie is not answerable with a simple yes/no reply given the questions that surround the jar, its contents and the manner of its arrival on the island - if you missed that cautionary admonition then I am sorry.

Bear in mind that what I am saying is purely what I personally would expect. First and most importantly, as I posted earlier, I would like to see soil analysis data showing what the background contamination is given the manner in which Hg becomes concentrated in the bodies of creatures living on a marine diet. This being excreted in faeces and through deposition in feathers. Both of which are probably not in short supply on Nikumaroro and would have been building up ever since the island was above sea level, and this also includes marine filter feeders like the polyps which form the coral. Show me data which effectively rules out water borne contamination and concentration of this through the deposition and evaporation cycle on the glass fragments and that will be a good start.

But even then if the jar is shown absolutely to have contained freckle cream this leads us no closer because then TIGHAR is drawn back into the circular argument I outlined above - "Amelia Earhart had freckles, she used a freckle cream, TIGHAR have found a jar which might have contained freckle cream, therefore this is Earhart's freckle cream jar and therefore it is part of the evidence that shows that she landed on Nikumaroro". As you say this is an unsafe assumption. Therefore once the existence of freckle cream is accepted without doubt you then need something to tie it to Earhart, other than she had freckles because that doesn't tie it to her, all it suggests is another possibility that must be examined. Therefore TIGHAR needs a clear connecting link between that particular jar and Earhart and I am pretty sure they have looked for that quite thoroughly and haven't found anything - if they had then we wouldn't be having this interesting discussion. So as I see it I am not being a naysayer - I am just saying honestly that I have yet to see TIGHAR or anyone else for that matter tie that particular jar to the freckle cream and from there take the most important step which is to tie that particular jar of freckle cream to Earhart and not to any other visitor to the island. Proving through evidence that Earhart landed on the island is the task and that evidence has to be pretty damned conclusive to past muster if it is to solve the mystery.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on February 26, 2013, 08:40:37 PM
This has been a fascinating thread (more than 600 posts) on this forum which has attracted many people who seem to think that the identification of this artifact as a freckle cream jar is somehow critical to the Earhart  on Niku hypothesis and therefore worthy of the expenditure of a large amount of time and money by TIGHAR to verify.  This is I believe due to the somewhat undue emphasis given to this jar in news reports at the time of the news conference with the secretary of state last year, it made a nice story AE had freckles ( and a quote existed that indicated she wasn't especially fond of them).  The jar was consistent as far as anyone at that point in time with a freckle cream sold at the time.  Subsequent work has shown that connection to be a bit tenuous, as far as I can tell only milk glass examples of Dr Berry's have been found and there is legitimate doubt as to whether that form of jar was used by Dr Berry after mid 1920s. 
However what is missing here is context, Ric Gillespie was not vacationing on Niku one day when he stumbled on a freckle cream jar and declared this is the proof of AE's presence there.   My back of the envelope chronology would be that TIGHAR came to Niku based on the contents of her last confirmed radio message that some people familiar with aircraft navigation think could have led her to Niku.  On arriving at Niku and not finding remains of the electra hiding behind a shrubbery they looked at the history of the island and found it had housed both a colony and a loran station after AE's time.  The most interesting tidbit that emerged from that history was that in 1940 bones of a cast away had been found on the island, modern re-analysis of the forensic data on those bones suggest they belonged to a woman matching AE's  ethnic background and physical dimensions.  When TIGHAR excavated the 7 site, where they believe the bones were found,  they found among other things cosmetic jars consistent with those used by a 1930s north american woman.  The jar under discussion in this thread is clearly an ointment/cosmetic style jar from from hazel-atlas company produced in america in the period 1905-1935.  There are very few missing pre-war missing north american women in the south pacific, certainly AE is strong candidate but there is nothing conclusive.  The value of the jar is in its context as a part of set of fragments found at this site that together make it likely that a north american woman who could have been AE spent time ( likely between 1933 and 1940 based on the more definite dating of the campana balm bottle) and may have died there.  Whether or not it is a freckle cream is a very minor point, as Joe said it would be half a bridge and convince no one would did not want to be convinced unless a photo of AE holding a Dr Berry's Jar turns up.  None of the artifacts from the 7 site are "smoking guns" but taken together with the overall context are somewhat  convincing. They await the finding of a piece of the plane ( or similarly convincing evidence) at which point the 7 site items would be used to create a likely scenario for the last days of AE. 

Dan Kelly, you initially raised a valid point in that levels of mercury detected in the glass of the jar could reflect environmental effects and were given a solid answer by Joe and Ric that other items recovered from the site would be tested (a pretty good control) and that future expeditions would take proper soil samples.  This did not seem to satisfy you. In fact an almost infinite number of quibbles could be raised with any artifact many of them seemingly plausible and some kind of criteria has to be used to decide what is worth pursuing or not. 
When these forums work well they remind me of the many research lab group meetings that I have participated in, people are allowed to question anything, throw out ideas etc and this serves to stimulate the research process but when someone demands or declares that time and money be spent on an issue it is incumbent on them to produce some kind of prior examples from the literature or other evidence that the work is needed, simply being plausible is not usually enough.  I have a background in chemistry and biology  and have done a literature search for mercury contamination from decaying biological organisms to glass and ceramics and not surprisingly found nothing, there is huge amount of the data about how various organism's absorb mercury from the environment however the analyses cannot be simply reversed.  Outside of the chemistry field perhaps Mr Kelly or someone with a background in archeology can searchfor relevant evidence of heavy metal uptake from animal remains at other sites.  While  most of us expect TIGHAR to follow a high level in their archaelogical work it is not reasonable to expect them to spend their limited resources on an area that at best will give ambiguous results that will not convince anyone and which ultimately is largely peripheral to the investigation.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 26, 2013, 09:58:10 PM

... Dan Kelly, you initially raised a valid point in that levels of mercury detected in the glass of the jar could reflect environmental effects and were given a solid answer by Joe and Ric that other items recovered from the site would be tested (a pretty good control) and that future expeditions would take proper soil samples.  This did not seem to satisfy you. ....

Thank you Mr Revington for your comments - actually the confirmation of future testing did satisfy me as I could see that without that there were a number of quite obvious questions that awaited answers. As for my comments and cautions I was asked a direct question by Mr Gillespie which involved a somewhat complex answer, which I then was asked again by Mr Appel and which I answered. But if this jar is of so little importance in the scheme of things regarding Earhart's presence or not on Nikumaroro I think you will see from its history that it is not I who have thrust it into the limelight. In fact I would respectfully suggest that I am one of the people who are for downplaying it entirely unless some more direct linkage with Earhart can be discerned given the ambiguities associated with it and its suggested contents. To be blunt I think it is a distraction at present because it raises more questions than answers. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Randy Conrad on February 26, 2013, 11:20:16 PM
In recent days I have been following along with many of your comments in relation to the artifact jar. Over the past several weeks, I'm led to believe that there are many out there that may be confused as to its makeup. Is it a cream or is it an ointment? Good question? Anyway, I ran across these videos last night on youtube. It sheds alot of information and the shelf life of such a product. You be the judge!!!!



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2gkDoMNz8RQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>





<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YPsJctUFfUo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 26, 2013, 11:35:17 PM
To be blunt I think it is a distraction at present because it raises more questions than answers.
Then you have paid this work the highest compliment, and I thank you, for, to quote a favorite textbook of mine, "diligent scientific inquiry always raises more questions than it answers." That is a quotation worth re-reading.  But surely you can't be serious about the distraction part. How can you dismiss the work on the jar as a distraction at the same time that you urge costly lab work to answer, and perhaps pose, additional questions regarding its provenance?  It's an absolute conundrum, a state of favoring the research and opposing it at one and the same moment. And if it be a distraction, unworthy of further comment, why then do you, and I and others seem to continue to want to talk about it? ;)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 27, 2013, 02:11:47 AM
To be blunt I think it is a distraction at present because it raises more questions than answers.
Then you have paid this work the highest compliment, and I thank you, for, to quote a favorite textbook of mine, "diligent scientific inquiry always raises more questions than it answers." That is a quotation worth re-reading.  But surely you can't be serious about the distraction part. How can you dismiss the work on the jar as a distraction at the same time that you urge costly lab work to answer, and perhaps pose, additional questions regarding its provenance?  It's an absolute conundrum, a state of favoring the research and opposing it at one and the same moment. And if it be a distraction, unworthy of further comment, why then do you, and I and others seem to continue to want to talk about it? ;)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

In my opinion we tend to use "science" as a rather fuzzy and elastic concept on these pages.  I suspect that your textbook was referring more to basic scientific research or inquiry, as in:  "What the heck is gravity?" or "Is 'string theory' valid or a bunch of nonsense?".  I don't really think a lot of that is going on here, or should be.  Einstein would likely not have had much helpful insight about a pre-1918 glass jar.  The order of the day is applied science: investigation into concrete things according to scientific principles, aka forensic investigation.

Imagine the chief of an FBI laboratory coming in and asking, "OK, guys, what can you tell me about the origin of the murder bullet and the gun that fired it?  It's our most critical evidence"  And the reply coming back, "Chief, our inquiry has been very diligent and we're proud to say that we've managed to come up with 22 new questions to ask you about it."  I don't think so.  Even civil servants would get fired for that.

If I understand Dan Kelly, it is not hard to believe him serious.  As long as even a (hypothetical) fully-verified Berry's Freckle Jar still would have no verifiable connection to Amelia Earhart on her journey, and therefore would not be evidence of either her presence or absence on Niku, research into its identity can certainly be a distraction from other possible activities, if any are available, that would have a more direct bearing on the central question.

As to the posed "conundrum", I can't speak for Mr. Kelly, but I can understand it not as a conflict, but rather as opinions on two different levels.  At the top level, the preference might be to look elsewhere altogether, because the jar research's marginal value is essentially nil.  On a lower level, if others present jar findings or preliminary research or conclusions, it is still valid to have opinions on how those findings were reached and on the methodology of the research performed.  In short: "maybe don't do it at all, but if you're going to do it, here's a suggestion as to how to do it properly."  I would not agree that if he considers the jar a "distraction", then he is instantly disqualified from any commentary on the work and opinions of others.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 27, 2013, 02:28:04 AM
To be blunt I think it is a distraction at present because it raises more questions than answers.
Then you have paid this work the highest compliment, and I thank you, for, to quote a favorite textbook of mine, "diligent scientific inquiry always raises more questions than it answers." That is a quotation worth re-reading.  But surely you can't be serious about the distraction part. How can you dismiss the work on the jar as a distraction at the same time that you urge costly lab work to answer, and perhaps pose, additional questions regarding its provenance?  It's an absolute conundrum, a state of favoring the research and opposing it at one and the same moment. And if it be a distraction, unworthy of further comment, why then do you, and I and others seem to continue to want to talk about it? ;)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

Perhaps I should have used the term red herring Mr Cerniglia. I feel that the discussion and research has drawn resources from what is the central question which is, did Amelia Earhart land on Nikumaroro? To say that I am "urg(ing) costly lab work to answer, and perhaps pose, additional questions regarding its provenance?" is somehow adding to the distraction is, with respect wrong. I asked a simple question which, to my mind, should have been part of the ensuing research once the fragments were found and that was that soil samples should be taken and tested to verify if the Hg content was a unique feature of the residue on the jar fragment or fell within the natural average levels in the environment it was found. I didn't ask that question just to throw caltrops in your path but because through my reading I was aware of the natural concentration of Hg in fauna relative to their position in the environmental food chain of their habitat. In this case you have not only sea birds which are at the top of the chain and which rely on fish for their diet; fish which themselves are eating other fish and marine creatures etc., all of which are ingesting Hg compounds as part of their diets. Those birds are in turn excreting Hg in their faeces on land and also moulting feathers which are a repository of Hg, and which decay over time thus releasing the Hg contained into the soil of the island. Add to which that soil is primarily decayed coral and coral is made by a polyp which is a filter feeder which will ingest traces of Hg and other heavy metals in the water. A simple series of soil analyses can rule it in or rule it out. 

I do not see the freckle cream jar as a diagnostic artefact because it comes from a locale which, if I understand the various archaeological assessments provided by TIGHAR and some interesting commentary from another archaeologist who posted here some time back correctly, is seriously corrupted in terms of the overlapping and intertwined activity at the site. Given that TIGHAR's own consultant archaeologist has misgivings who am I, a simple interested bystander, to argue with that. So Mr Cerniglia to explain it we are invariably drawn back to the Earhart freckle scenario and as I have said several times recently this leads us nowhere because no one has provided a single jot of evidence that she had Dr Berry's Freckle Cream with her on the fatal flight. Mr Gillespie has said that the freckle cream argument is not central to his theory and as far as I can see he has said that with very good reason, so if I might add who am I to disagree with the person running the show.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Tim Mellon on February 27, 2013, 02:42:13 AM
Yet another dead horse, IMHO.

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 27, 2013, 07:03:57 AM
I do not see the freckle cream jar as a diagnostic artefact because it comes from a locale which, if I understand the various archaeological assessments provided by TIGHAR and some interesting commentary from another archaeologist who posted here some time back correctly, is seriously corrupted in terms of the overlapping and intertwined activity at the site. Given that TIGHAR's own consultant archaeologist has misgivings who am I, a simple interested bystander, to argue with that.

You and some others obviously ascribe different gradations of value to various lines of evidence.  I accept that and quite frankly I really don't see why it poses some identity crisis for TIGHAR, as you imagine.  What's wrong with pursuing multiple lines of evidence?

In the next few days, I'd like to get past the epistemological questions and talk about what Greg George told me regarding the idea for soil sample analysis.  If this is no longer a subject of interest, I'll reserve it for our later presentation, in which I trust some members of the public not here represented might be mildly interested.

I see a lot of straw men assigned here, to Ric, to Tom, to one and all.  Because sentence by sentence, I really don't disagree with anything said in the last couple of posts in terms of what we have or have not proven.  Yet you say I do disagree.  I don't get it.

But I think there is a larger point on which I and, yes, the "archaeological consultant" do disagree, and that is on the value of archaeological field research.  It would be helpful if those who have criticized would list those most promising avenues for research they are personally pursuing and the steps they are taking to contribute to that effort. (Tim Mellon, your generosity and heart is legendary, and appreciated.  I hugely respect it, so please do not consider yourself included in this comment.) I and the team working with me are in fact doing our very best, both in terms of our time and our limited resources. We think it worthwhile.  We do not think we are solving the Earhart mystery but merely helping to build a circumstantial case.  We are not about to be dissuaded by the criticisms.

Here's what Dr. King, the consultant archaeologist had to say about the straw man advanced in his name this morning:

"I think it's a silly argument, and I wouldn't pay much attention to it.  If my quick read of the posts is accurate, the critics are basically saying "It's not a smoking gun, so ignore it."  That's a juvenile way to conceptualize research, and not worth attending to."

Maybe I should have taken his advice.  But I must add that one thing that you are doing, which is quite valuable, is to cause me to take a very critical look at my field notes and to question things I've been told.  Is my case on this or that point - the hazmat argument I made earlier is an example - as good as I believe it to be?  What are its strengths?  What are its weaknesses?  For that part of the discussion, you do have my gratitude.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
 

Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: william patterson on February 27, 2013, 07:43:01 AM
1. We don't know what mixture this jar held.
2. We dont know what year the glass was produced.
3. We don't know if Amelia ever used whatever this glass held.
4. We dont know if Amelia carried the unknown substance, from the unknown dated jar when flying on her last trip.
5. We dont know if this jar was marketed to women.

 It is getting tiresome hearing that "no other European woman was lost in the Phoenix chain 1902-1940. Well, first of all we don't know if that is a true statement or not, and secondly we don't know this jar was used by a European or American woman! With statements like that, is it any wonder why Reuters or Discovery picked up and ran with this "freckle Cream" hypothesis?

There are just too many "we don't knows" for this jar to be considered even the most tenuous of evidence for Earhart being on Niku.
An analogy would be finding a partial label of a cigarette pack next to a 1980 murder victim in a field. Then saying this is somehow evidence that a certain suspect committed the crime. Well we would have to know the following-
1. Did the suspect even smoke? We cant say for sure.
2. Did the paper pack arrive there the same time as the victim or was it deposited another time? Another Unknown
3. Did the suspect smoke that brand, and has he ever been seen with that brand of smokes? Another Unknown.

But we do know the paper pack was made from 1960 to 1975 and that is close to 1980, and the suspect might have smoked, so the suspect might have been near the victim.

Given those facts,I doubt anyone would seriously believe the cigarette pack had any connection to the suspect at all.
This Cream jar is exactly the same as the cigarette pack, so many unknowns, so little relevance, yet it was reported as possibly
exciting new evidence.
Now some would say that is a  bad analogy because this isn't a criminal case, or some might say we have to look at the "context of the jar and how it along with other artifacts and known history" make this jar important.
I say nuts to that idea.
Like somehow lots of non relevant artifacts strenghten each other in evidence weight. Does 1 plus 1 equal 3? Is this a new math?
That "half a loaf", or "half a bridge" theory is new math to me and is reaching beyond the scope of real evidence into the world of making an exciting journalistic story.

If one piece of evidence has zero connection to Earhart, then 5 other equally non relevant artifacts do not combine and somehow become relevant and assume a greater weight. Each piece and artifact has to stand on it's own merits. The Jar has to have a proven connection to Earhart to be taken seriously. So to each his own standard, but for me, this doesn't meet the minimum of any relevance at all.  All we have is a possible skin care product in a jar which was most likely made between 1900-1930 and Earhart was also flying over the pacific in 1937. That's it. Nothing more.
That is weaker than iced tea.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Matt Revington on February 27, 2013, 08:09:18 AM

If one piece of evidence has zero connection to Earhart, then 5 other equally non relevant artifacts do not combine and somehow become relevant and assume a greater weight. Each piece and artifact has to stand on it's own merits. The Jar has to have a proven connection to Earhart to be taken seriously. So to each his own standard, but for me, this doesn't meet the minimum of any relevance at all.  All we have is a possible skin care product in a jar which was most likely made between 1900-1930 and Earhart was also flying over the pacific in 1937. That's it. Nothing more.
That is weaker than iced tea.

I disagree with your analysis William, while no single piece of circumstantial evidence from the 7 site is in itself convincing the body does carry more weight, every piece does not have to conclusive. 

A quote from the wiki site on circumstantial evidence ( of course wiki must be taken with a grain of salt)

"Circumstantial evidence is evidence in which an inference is required to connect it to a conclusion of fact, like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or the intervening inference.
On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out."
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Joe Cerniglia on February 27, 2013, 09:54:51 AM
Quote from: Alan Harris link=topic=261.msg23884#msg23884 date
In my opinion we tend to use "science" as a rather fuzzy and elastic concept on these pages.  I suspect that your textbook was referring more to basic scientific research or inquiry, as in:  "What the heck is gravity?" or "Is 'string theory' valid or a bunch of nonsense?". 
Not at all. The book  (http://books.google.com/books?id=CBx9KDH1qaYC&pg=PA6&dq=science+always+raises+more+questions+than+answers&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7ZwtUeS6Joy40gG4w4CAAQ&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=science%20always%20raises%20more%20questions%20than%20answers&f=false)in question was discussing, in context of the quotation, why it was that atmospheric constituents of Titan, one of Saturn's moons, appear to be escaping into space when measured conditions seemed to argue against that occurrence.  This is not epistemology or abstract questioning; it's scientific inquiry aimed at a very specific problem.

Quote from: Alan Harris link=topic=261.msg23884#msg23884 date
The order of the day is applied science: investigation into concrete things according to scientific principles, aka forensic investigation.
Couldn't agree more.

Quote from: Alan Harris link=topic=261.msg23884#msg23884 date
Imagine the chief of an FBI laboratory coming in and asking, "OK, guys, what can you tell me about the origin of the murder bullet and the gun that fired it?  It's our most critical evidence"  And the reply coming back, "Chief, our inquiry has been very diligent and we're proud to say that we've managed to come up with 22 new questions to ask you about it."  I don't think so.  Even civil servants would get fired for that.
Civil servants don't seem to have the best track record on Earhart's disappearance.  Maybe this is why.  Seems to me a woman named Betty had some information and some questions for some civil service agents a while back.  As I recall their response was about what you describe.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Lauren Palmer on February 27, 2013, 10:18:49 AM
Whatever/whose-ever the stupid ointment comes out to be: Even if AE comes back from the grave to claim it's hers, apparently some would still not believe it, judging by some of the comments here. I had a college German professor (a Nazi officer from WWII) claiming no German Nazi hurt any Jew.  Since I wasn't born at the time to watch, I cannot refute him "scientifically" then or now, according to some of these readers I'll bet!
We need to get out of the trees and start looking at the whole forest, I think. :-*
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2013, 10:38:32 AM
Perhaps I have gone beyond the scope of the original question but personally I can see no firm evidence to safely assume anything about the jar or its relations with Earhart or anyone else.

You didn't even answer the original question but you have confirmed my suspicion that you are more interested in flinging down caltrops (nice metaphor) than in any rational assessment of the evidence.  We'll continue to assess the likelihood of what the jar contained and who brought it to the island based on the research and testing we're able to do. 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2013, 10:54:10 AM
We need to get out of the trees and start looking at the whole forest, I think. :-*

Thank you Lauren.  The jar is one tree in a forest of artifacts, faunals, features and archival records that clearly describe the presence of a castaway, almost certainly a 1930s female, who lived and died at the Seven Site.  Rather than offer evidence of who such a castaway might be, if not the 1930s female who is known to have disappeared in the region, the Naysayer Brigade attacks a single aspect of a single artifact and does it with bird dung no less.  Such desperation is a measure of the strength of our hypothesis.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Swift on February 27, 2013, 01:29:04 PM
Well said Lauren!  And well said Ric! 
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Tim Mellon on February 27, 2013, 01:42:09 PM
Rather than offer evidence of who such a castaway might be, if not the 1930s female who is known to have disappeared in the region, ...

Ric, of course you may be correct that there was a castaway at the Seven Site, possibly a female of stature comparable to Amelia Earhart. But that does not mean that the castaway was Amelia Earhart, I am sure you will agree.

The sequence I now believe in based upon my extensive search of the deep via the Xtra High Definition videos is as follows:

     1. NR16020 lands on reef 2 July 1937;
     2. Radio transmissions are heard by at least six credible witnesses for three days;
     3. Lambrecht overflies Nikumaroro 9 July 1937 and observes signs of "human habitation" but reports no sighting of lost aircraft.

IMHO, the aircraft must have been washed off the reef in the several days between the last transmission and the time of the Lambrecht over-flight. And inasmuch as I believe, through observation, that essentially the entire aircraft lies directly off the shore from the so-called "Bevington Object" (which may or may not be one of the landing gears from the subject aircraft) and that within the debris field I believe I can see the bodies of the two crew members of NR16020 (in a somewhat disturbing configuration), I then do not see how one or both crew members could have walked to the Seven Site, set up camp, cooked birds and fish, strewn artifacts to be found by future generations, and then returned to the aircraft to be swept off the reef before the arrival of the US Navy.

But maybe I am missing something. I will keep an open mind.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Will Hatchell on February 27, 2013, 02:55:59 PM
Well said, Tim! And based on your own direct observations through hours of studying the evidence at hand.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Dan Kelly on February 27, 2013, 04:59:33 PM
Perhaps I have gone beyond the scope of the original question but personally I can see no firm evidence to safely assume anything about the jar or its relations with Earhart or anyone else.

You didn't even answer the original question but you have confirmed my suspicion that you are more interested in flinging down caltrops (nice metaphor) than in any rational assessment of the evidence.  We'll continue to assess the likelihood of what the jar contained and who brought it to the island based on the research and testing we're able to do.

With respect Mr Gillespie I did answer the original question - but because I am not a hostile witness on the stand required to give yes/no answers I pointed out how loaded your question was as to what was required by it and what can be implied by simple yes/no answers.

In a nutshell show me data that demonstrates conclusively that the jar did indeed contain a mercury compound freckle cream by also ruling out contamination from environmental factors and I will accept that it is a freckle cream jar. Then show me evidence that Earhart had a clear glass jar of Dr Berry's Freckle Cream (one that had appears to have been out of production for over 15 years) on her last flight and I will accept that you have found her. Is that unreasonable? Now there isn't a strawman there at all that I can see, but no doubt someone will find him hidden.  :)
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Alan Harris on February 27, 2013, 05:51:22 PM
. . . a clear glass jar of Dr Berry's Freckle Cream (one that had appears to have been out of production for over 15 years) . . .

No offense to you personally, Mr. Kelly, but just in general: unless new dating evidence has been shown that I've missed, it's been getting a little sloppy here recently about the jar's production date, e.g. casual references to "1905-1935", "1900-1930" and the like.  Hazel-Atlas advertising shows that sales of cosmetic jars in clear glass ceased in 1917, so it's 20 years.  Complete production records for H-A have not been found and so this is not conclusively proved to be the last possible date, but in my opinion everything that has so far been exhibited supports and adds weight to that date, and nothing firmly contradicts it.  Again, I have not scrupulously followed the topic on a daily basis, so please correct me if there are recent discoveries/developments.
Title: Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
Post by: Ric Gillespie on February 27, 2013, 06:06:25 PM
In a nutshell show me data that demonstrates conclusively that the jar did indeed contain a mercury compound freckle cream by also ruling out contamination from environmental factors and I will accept that it is a freckle cream jar.

To do that we would have to do a chemical analysis of the dung of birds that have been dead for 75 years.

Then show me evidence that Earhart had a clear glass jar of Dr Berry's Freckle Cream (one that had appears to have been out of production for over 15 years) on her last flight and I will accept that you have found her. Now there isn't a strawman there at all that I can see, but no doubt someone will find him hidden.

Your straw man isn't hidden at all.  You set up the straw man that we are asserting that the jar belonged to Earhart even though we have repeatedly said that the jar can never be proof that Earhart was there.   It's clear that you are either unable or refuse to engage in honest discussions about the evidence.  Goodbye Mr. Kelly.
I think Jeff is right.  This thread has run its course. We'll open a new thread on the jar when Joe Cerniglia is ready to make his full report.