Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 10:42:36 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Noonan's nature > From what we've learned about his > practices he does seem to have been a rather "loose" navigator. I think that's true, at least in regard to contemporary times. Keep in mind the year was 1937 not 2003 and there were no "set" airways or flight plans or all the formality we know of now. If folks wanted to fly east they just flew east. They didn't have to stay on J47 or hit specific intersections or fly certain altitudes or make required radio reports. So what difference did it make in 1937 if Noonan was "off" course? It was his own course. All that really mattered was hitting destination and from whatever direction that would get him there. It didn't matter where he was. It only mattered that HE knew where he was. So "loose" compared to what? Alan *************************************************************** From Ric Loose compared to his contemporaries. Loose compared to Harold Gatty, Charles and Ann Lindbergh, and a host other long-distance aerial navigators of that era. I'm not saying that he WAS loose compared to them, but that's what you'd need to look at to make a judgment. ================================================================ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:06:29 EDT From: Marty Joy Subject: Productivity I will be SO glad when you are able to get back on Niku and do something productive! ************************************************************************* From Ric Don't make the mistake of thinking that forum activity is a measure of TIGHAR activity. We have a team in Fiji right now doing top-notch work on tracking the bones and artifacts that were last known to be there in 1941. It's complicated, tedious investigative work but Marty and Roger are doing a great job. We're getting a much better handle on the situation that prevailed at the Western Pacific High Commission in the later years when something (we don't yet know what) was done with the bones. We're increasingly convinced that, whatever happened, there is a documented record somewhere. It's just a matter of figuring out where. This kind of work isn't as sexy as whacking scaevola, and dealing with giant crabs and sharks and killer storms, but it's every bit as important. There is also some pretty intense research going on into the post-loss radio claims of Walter McMenamy and his associates. I had hoped that we could get that all resolved as part of the larger Post Loss Radio Study but it's becoming apparent that McMenamy's involvement is a far more complicated subject than we had realized and it's going to take more time to sort out. Meanwhile, I'll go ahead and finish the Study with what we know now and we'll follow it up with more information as it becomes available. Preparations for Niku Vp are proceeding on schedule and we're, of course, hoping that the trip will come back with new information, but it's just one aspect of the on-going effort to find the answers. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:09:29 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Flying South (Again!) Ben, the longtime Niku Skeptic says: >Why go to all that trouble flying south into God knows what, when She could >have used the extra fuel to search a 'square pattern' and find the Island. She >was looking for Howland Island. We all know she never got there. Four hours >would have been plenty of time to find Howland. Why veer so far off course into >the unknown? It's okay to be a skeptic, Ben, but you also have to make sense and use the evidence we do have. Earhart had decided to run north-south on the 157-337 line, these from her own words. Thus, she must have had confidence in her east-west position, and not in her north-south position. There's no other way to interpret such a statement. A square pattern involves a lot of flying that doesn't help if you're pretty sure of your east-west position. And ... she did not veer off course into the unknown ... she was already in the unknown, lost over the vast Pacific ocean. She didn't say to herself, "Hmmm, Howland must be over there to the north, let's fly south off into the unknown", again that makes no sense. She had to pick a direction to travel to find Howland. TIGHAR assumes that was south. So by flying south, TIGHAR assumes she was looking for Howland; perhaps AE was under the assumption that she was way far north of Howland by mistake. A decision to fly south, if that's what AE did, was not veering off course, it was a deliberate attempt to find Howland. How would the evidence of AE's own words fit into your skeptical view that she used the 4 hours of gas in a square pattern? LTM Paige Miller #2565 ================================================================ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 14:57:24 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Flying South (Again!) > Four hours > would have been plenty of time to find Howland. Why veer so far off course > into the unknown?" Not nicking at Ben again but I don't think some appreciate what amount of time it takes to do a reasonable search. This is just an example using a couple made up assumptions. Don't take this as a suggestion of what might or could have happened. I'm just trying to show how little time there might have been to search. First, there have been many estimates as to how close or far from Howland AE might have been when she thought she was over Howland. I'll use 50 miles for this example. That means to ensure Howland is inside the search pattern the legs must be 100 miles long at least. She will be at 1,000' and throttled back a little so each leg is going to take close to an hour. In four hours she can fly just four legs. That won't come close to covering a search pattern 100 miles on a side. Even flying concentric squares of ever increasing leg length won't cut it. Draw it out and you will see how little area they could cover. Obviously they could stumble on the island early on but given the difficulty Pelligrini had it was not a good bet. And suppose they were 100 miles off. They could search forever and not find Howland. In an email to an off forum friend who likewise thought the rescuers search in the Howland area rather than one of the Phoenix Islands made more sense I pointed out that the Phoenix Islands were specific geographical points with a total of 11 square miles to examine as opposed to somewhere up to 125,000 square miles of open ocean. I don't know what our heroes did or if they did the smartest thing but given what we know I would have looked around for a short time and headed to the Phoenix group. If I ditched at the very least the plane is lost maybe I wouldn't survive the crash. If I could find a reef to put the plane on even if I damaged it I would survive and the plane could be recovered. It seems like a no brainer to me. What am I missing, discounting sheer luck? Alan ================================================================ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 14:58:27 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Noonan's nature > Loose compared to his contemporaries. Loose compared to Harold Gatty, > Charles and Ann Lindbergh, and a host other long-distance aerial navigators > of that era. Picky, Picky, Picky. Alan ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:53:08 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Productivity Ric, Could you give us a very short overview of what Walter McMenany is doing and who he is? A reference to the forum month and subject heading would do. Thanks, Ted Campbell ****************************************************************** From Ric Walter McMenamy was a ham radio operator in Los Angeles in 1937 who claimed to have heard a number of post-loss transmissions from Earhart. He is potentially one of the most credible of the amateurs who said they heard Amelia because he had talked to her during the 1935 Honolulu/Oakland flight and claimed to have recognized her voice. McMenamy and his friend Karl Pierson (a professional radio engineer and also a ham) received tremendous press coverage in the days following the disappearance, but upon closer examination there are some serious problems with what they said they heard. It also turns out that they were associated with several of the other hams in the L.A. area who claimed to hear post-loss transmissions. We're trying to figure out whether, or to what degree, they may have been hoaxers. A Google search on McMenamy (sometimes spelled McMenemy) will bring up some old forum discussions. ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 11:21:07 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Flying South (Again!) I still believe AE and FN flew south for only one reason and that was to pick out an identifiable landmark that could get them back to Howland. To fly south otherwise would only mean they had given up in finding Howland (there is absolutely nothing north or east of Howland without backtracking way west) and they were in desperate straits and were looking for any piece of land to put the bird down and walk away. Put yourself in their shoes: Having missed Howland, but knowing you're so close i.e. radio messages, confidence in their enroute navigation, request for bearings, best guess, etc., and still no landfall what would the typical pilot do? I suggest that they headed toward "something" that would give them a clue as to where they were in relationship to where they wanted to be. Look at the map, there is a whole lot of nothing out there! At some point in looking for that "something" it became apparent that the first landfall opportunity to put the plane safely down was their only alternative. Ted Campbell ********************************************************************* From Ric >Having missed Howland, but knowing you're so close ..... The only independent confirmation they had that they were "close" was the transmission of "A"s on 7500 that AE heard. She could reasonably assume that she was hearing the Itasca but from how far away? Running southeastward on the advanced LOP was the only reasonable course of action. It might bring them to Howland. It might bring them to a "landmark" (another island) in time for them to turn around and still reach Howland, but as you say, at some point it became apparent that they would have to land at the first opportunity. ************************************************************************* From Ben the Skeptic Basically it's like this : I don't know and neither do you. But.... I must admit, my thoughts regarding the square search pattern are not my own. I thought it made the most sense. I read Elgen Long's book. Based on actual documentation, he shows how much fuel AE had when she left. The amount she had, that was listed on the Flight register at Lae, said 1092 gallons. Not 1150 as is generally assumed. 1150 was the maximum capacity of the tanks, but they were not filled to the brim. He charts out the fuel consumption, based on radio messages. I was not suggesting that AE actually used the gas to search a square pattern. I was merely stating that if in fact she had the four hours left, that they would have been more effectively used in this manner. I do not believe the extra fuel was used to search. I do not think there WAS any extra fuel. If the tanks were filled to 1150, okay, it's possible. But they weren't. AE herself said "gas is running low...." I shudder to think how that might be interpreted based on some of the interpretations I've seen of Betty's logbook, but it's right there in plain English. "We must be on you, but cannot see you. Gas is running low...." Just because WE don't know where Fred Noonan was, doesn't mean HE didn't. Elgen Long got his pilot's license in 1938. As far as fuel consumption is concerned, I would rather trust the judgment of someone who was flying around the same time. Furthermore, Mr. long has spent nearly 30 years researching to find and protect the few remaining authentic documents regarding the loss of the aircraft. Ben (again) ************************************************************************** From Ric Your comments remind me of something an FAA inspector once told a friend of mine after a checkride: "I can tell you with confidence that you'll never be injured in a crash ... because you're so far behind this airplane you won't even be on the scene of the accident." If you'll review the archives of this forum you'll see that Elgen Long's speculations and assumptions about fuel consumption have been demolished many times, many ways, by many different authorities. He himself admits that he started with the assumption that the plane ran out of fuel within moments of the 08:43 transmission heard by the Itasca. From there he backed into the numbers he needed to make his case. I don't know what documents you think he is protecting but if you're referring to the Chater Report that he uses as the basis for so many erroneous and unfounded extrapolations, he neglects to mention that the report came to light via TIGHAR and as a direct result of TIGHAR's work. It's fine to be skeptic but you need to get up to speed on the facts. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 11:43:29 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Survival time Ric, Given the evidence to date (regardless of how obtained, where found, who gave it, how reliable, etc.) regarding what TIGHAR believes happened to AE and FN is there anything that might indicate how long they may have survived on Gardner? I've read that TIGHAR's best guess is anywhere from a few weeks to a couple of years - over time has that estimation been trimmed down? Ted Campbell ***************************************************************** From Ric Not really. We feel quite sure that Seven Site is where the castaway (whom we hypothesize was Earhart) lived and died. We know that somebody ate a number of meals at that location because we've found the bones of the fish and animals, and the shells of the clams they ate. If we knew that all of that material was attributable to the castaway, and if we were sure that we had recovered all of it, we could make some estimate of how long the castaway was in residence there. (Archaeologists make those sorts of estimates all the time.) We'd then have some idea of how long the castaway lived at that last campsite, but were there previous campsites that we don't know about? Earhart and Noonan disappeared in July 1937. The bones of the castaway were first found in April of 1940. Our own research and experiments on the island have shown that animal remains are reduced to skeletons and the bones scattered in a few weeks. We also know that there was a severe drought in the region in 1938, but it's also possible that a story about the wife of the island's Native Magistrate seeing a female "ghost" sometime in 1939 or 1940 was actually a sighting of the castaway. We hope that further research will lead to more certainty about what happened. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 16:13:30 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Castaway survival Ric said: >We know that somebody ate a number of meals at that >location because we've found the bones of the fish and animals, and the >shells of the clams they ate. If we knew that all of that material was >attributable to the castaway, and if we were sure that we had recovered all >of it, we could make some estimate of how long the castaway was in residence >there. What evidence is there that more may be found? Are we hoping for more shells and bones within a close (undefined) proximity of the original find or is TIGHAR going to expand the search to include an area covering several hundred (or more) square-feet? Using the very elusive "average," how many ounces of "consumables" could one expect from a local bird or crab? Knowing that figure could generate an estimate of the number of calories the castaway may be consuming. From that figure, a rough approximation of survival time might be computed. If TIGHAR has collected all of the shells and bones at the Seven Site, then I suspect our castaway's life span (combined with lack of water) may be measured in days and hours, not weeks and months. LTM, a lover of Chesapeake Bay crab cakes Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ********************************************************************* From Ric And just how many bones and shells did TIGHAR collect at the Seven Site? I don't recall publishing that information. We recovered a whole bunch of bones. We don't even have an exact count of how many and what types and sizes of fish and birds are represented. We're still tryng to figure out what we have. Tom King has done some interesting research into how much nutrition there is in a Niku-size clam and how many a person could carry at one time. Are there more bones/meal sites there? Almost certainly. How many more? Hell, I dunno. The problem is that before you can even begin to excavate for more meal sites you have to clear away the dense underbrush. We really can't say that we've defined, let alone thoroughly examined, the entire site. Part of the plan for Niku V is to expand the search at the Seven Site. How much we'll be able to do will depend upon the time and the resources available. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 16:52:28 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Survival time If AE and FN landed without mishap on Niku, they probably had limited food and drink with them. I would imagine they would have coffee, juice, soup, water, fruit, crackers, and sandwiches. How much was left after over 20 hours of flying time is anyone's guess, but enough to last a day or two? If they found the cache left by the Norwich rescuers, then perhaps enough to last weeks or months. I also assume that the two probably thought they would be rescued in a day or two. So, no serious attempt to signal someone via a large fire was made. However, at some point in time (four or five days) it must have become quite evident to them that perhaps a signal fire would be appropriate. I would also imagine that they would want to build some type of shelter for themselves. Where would you build such a fire and where would you get the materials to build such a shelter? I think the beach would be the most desirable location for the fire, but would any remains of that fire have been observed in 1940? Probably not, due to storms, tidal, and wave action. As for building materials, I'm sure the Electra had a few things they could have used, and, don't forget about the Norwich City. If they could get aboard, would they have found blankets, tarps, axes, pots, pans, dishes, utensils (such as a sharp knife) and other usable materials they would take back to their campsite? If AE and FN were on Niku for any length of time, a more permanent campsite should have been discovered by Irish. Yet, several old fire pits, clam shells, bird, and fish bones were only found (I'm not forgetting the bones, shoe parts, sextant box). It just disturbs me that more was not found. My only conclusions are that AE and FN perished a short time after landing on Niku or that they were never there. ************************************************************************** From Ric A castaway was there. We know that much. The person had shoes and a sextant box and the bones were judged to be European or at least "half-caste" European (according to the doctor who examined them). Our own assessment of the bone measurements agrees that the person was a European. The presence of parts of man's AND a woman's shoe may be an indication that there were originally at least two castaways, one male, one female. So whoever died there was probably a Westerner and he/she didn't have much stuff with him/her by the time he/she gave out. Why not? Well, for one thing, your assumptions about Norwich City as a source of survival gear are wrong. The ship burned when it went aground. It was a barren, gutted, rusted hulk in 1937. Did the castaway find and use the cache of supplies left by the NC rescuers? No way to say for sure, but in any event the supplies consisted of food, not durable goods. How much survival gear was aboard the Electra and how much opportunity was there to bring stuff ashore? Maybe you know, but I don't. I do know that carrying anything over that reef even at low tide is no picnic. The bones were found a long way (about 2 miles) from the Norwich City and where the available evidence suggests the plane was landed. If the Seven Site is where the bones were found the castaway had been there long enough to select that spot - the only place on the island at that time where you had an open shady area with a breeze and easy access to both the ocean and the lagoon. I'd say that the available evidence suggests a castaway with minimal belongings who had learned how to survive on the island. Let's approach this from a different perspective. If the castaway(s) were not Earhart and/or Noonan, who were they and how did they get there? We have no reports of a lifeboat or a raft or lifejackets or life rings ever having been found. Who is this person with the shoes and the sextant box and the Benedictine bottle? Where did he/she come from and why was he/she not reported missing? LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 16:56:11 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Castaway survival Dennis, you ask some very interesting questions -- which as Ric points out, we can't really answer. We excavated three fire features, and observed two more. It's almost dead certain there are more back in the bush. We removed one cluster of giant clam shells, and left another in place; there may be more. We observed and sampled but mostly left a large feature made up of small butterclam shells. Our volunteer fishbone analyst didn't give me estimated counts of minimum number of individual fishies in the material we brought back, nor estimated minimum meat weight; this would be interesting data to get, and we can get it, but we'll probably have to pay someone to do so. I'm still waiting for a final report on the birdbone from the Smithsonian -- getting the report has been like pulling red-tailed tropicbird teeth, but again it's being done for free, so..... My estimate of clam meat weight, based on experimentation with fresh specimens, suggested that the one feature we disassembled and brought back would have provided at least one very good meal for a person or two, but probably not much more. So the bottom line is, there are lots of variables we don't yet control. The biggest being how many more features of one kind or another are still out there in the scaevola. We really have no way of knowing how many there are or how far they extend along the Seven Site ridge -- until we get back there and whack a bunch more brush. LTM Tom ================================================================ Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 17:00:28 EDT From: Ric Subject: Harbor Lights discount In the latest TIGHAR Tracks we mentioned that Andrew McKenna is offering a 10% discount to TIGHAR members who want to avail themselves of Harbor Lights Villa in the U.S. Virgin Islands (the prize in our recent raffle), but we inadvertently got his email address wrong. It's andrew@harborlights.vi You can see the villa at his website at www.harborlights.vi ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:08:11 EDT From: Ric Subject: Anybody remember? Some time ago, someone on the forum (of the Australian persuasion as I recall) investigated the possibility the Prof. A.P. Elkin at Sydney University had examined the bones found by Gallagher on Gardner. Sending the bones to Prof. Elkin is mentioned as a possibility in the file but the High Commissioner quashed the idea. We wondered if it may have been done anyway sometime later. Elkin's papers are archived at the university and are actually listed online at http://www.usyd.edu.au/arms/archives/elkin/ser41item.pdf Our recollection is that this base has already been covered and the boxes have been looked at but, for the life of me, I can't remember who it was that did it. I'm hoping that whoever it was is still a forum subscriber or at least someone on the forum remembers who it was. Our team in Fiji is steadily eliminating possibilities for what became of the bones and we need to be sure this one was really covered. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:10:04 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: CAN AIRPLANES FLOAT? There have often been questions on this forum on whether Earhart's Lockheed Electra could float after having been ditched and for how long. I ran into an interesting article about this on the website of 381st Bomb Group. One 8th Air Force pilot who was stationed at Ridgewell (England) during WW II ditched his B-17 in the Channel and did this so successfully that it won him a DFC. If anything it shows that aircraft of that technology (the Lockheed 10 Electra and the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, although one was much bigger than the other, were of the same technology and of comparable design. Anyone interested should go to http:/www.381st.org/stories lloyd-munich.html. LTM I'm joining the original posting so you can double click to it without further much ado. A guest book posting was made about Mr. MacGregor's obituary be published in the Toledo Blade. I've pasted it here for you to read. Members might recall that the late Lloyd Sunderland wrote about the ditching incident in his piece, "Mission to Munich". Found here on the 381st.org site: http://www.381st.org/stories_lloyd-munich.html - - - - - - - - - - - toledoblade.com JACK M. MACGREGOR, 1922-2003 Air Force colonel ditched his B-17 FINDLAY - Jack M. MacGregor, a retired Air Force colonel and a bomber pilot whose postwar specialty was management analysis and finance, died Thursday in Blanchard Valley Regional Health Center. He was 80. He had congestive heart failure, his son-in-law Tom Watson said. Mr. MacGregor's last assignment was with the Air Force Eastern Test Range at Patrick Air Force Base in Florida. He retired in 1973, and he and his wife, Rosemary, remained in the Cocoa, Fla., area for seven years before returning to their native Findlay. He was a 1941 graduate of Findlay High School. He went to Ohio State University, where he attended for a year before he joined the aviation cadets and became a B-17 pilot in what was then the Army Air Corps. He was based in England during World War II and flew 30 combat missions over Europe with the 381st Bomb Group of the Eighth Air Force. He received the Distinguished Flying Cross. "He went and felt that he did his job and came home and didn't talk about it," Mr. Watson said. He broke his silence in the years after 50th anniversary commemorations of D-Day and the war's end and began to reveal some of his experiences - including the mission that led to his being awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross: His plane, shot up badly during a mission, was running on only a couple engines and losing altitude despite his best efforts, his son-in-law said. Approaching the English Channel, Mr. MacGregor radioed air-sea rescue operations, which determined where the plane would be. He landed the plane safely in the water. "They stepped off the plane into the boat and never got their feet wet," Mr. Watson said. Mr. MacGregor remained in what became the Air Force and was selected to complete his education. He received a bachelor of science degree in accounting and a master of science degree in commerce and business administration. He became a career Air Force officer and was a command pilot and instructor pilot for a number of years. He also was "a finance guy, an efficiency expert," his son-in-law said. He was director of management analysis at Air Force Pacific command in Hawaii, a job that took him to bases across Asia during the Vietnam War. He was controller of the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, and was commander of the Air Force Data Systems Design Center in Washington. Mr. MacGregor liked the organization of the Air Force, said Mr. Watson. "First and foremost, he was a patriot. He was my mentor. "He was that small town essence that we all admire today: apple pie, the flag, duty, country, God," Mr. Watson said. "His family was the very first thing he thought about and took care of." Mr. MacGregor was a member of McComb Presbyterian Church. He was a member of the Findlay Rotary Club, the Fort Findlay Finance Club, and the Findlay Country Club and took part in Associated Charities. Surviving are his wife, Rosemary, whom he married Aug. 28, 1943; daughters, Karen Watson and Pamela MacGregor; sister, Anne LaBudde; six grandchildren, and three great-grandchildren. There will be no visitation. At Mr. MacGregor's request, his body was donated to the Ohio State University medical school. Memorial services will be at 2 p.m. tomorrow in Kirkpatrick-Behnke Mortuary, Findlay. The family suggests tributes be to Bridge Home Health and Hospice, Findlay. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:36:25 EDT From: Thomas Hamberg Subject: Castaway evidence After following the forum for several years but only having made few inputs, there is one thing I have never seen considered. It comes to my mind again when Ric is saying: "Who is this person with the shoes and the sextant box and the Benedictine bottle? Where did he/she come from and why was he/she not reported missing?" Is it not possible that these items could have reached the island by sea? As far as I can see it is all items that would be floating. Some severe storms and consequently waves could have brought them far up on the beach and even into the bush. LTM Thomas Hamberg #2380 ******************************************************************** From Ric The distribution of the bones and artifacts found by Gallagher made it apparent to him that what he had found was a castaway's campsite, not a jumble of washed-up flotsam. He specifically addressed this issue in his communications with his superiors, noting that the material was 100 feet above the highest tide line. The were also the remains of a fire at the site. Campfires don't float worth a darn. If the Seven Site is that location (and we feel pretty sure that it is) we see no indication that the ocean, even during major storms, ever gets that far inland. It is true that all of the artifacts mentioned would, at least theoretically, float and may have washed up on the island to be beachcombed and hoarded by the castaway. The bones, however, do appear to have been those of a European. If the bones were those of a Pacific Islander we could speculate that some poor devil somehow fetched up there and, for some reason, was unable to leave but collected a bunch of European stuff he found on the beach. We could make the same speculations about a European but it's harder to get a European onto the island without any evidence of how he got there or any record of him being missing. We've had speculation about the possibility that one of the men presumed drowned in the Norwich City disaster somehow survived and was inadvertently left behind when the others were rescued, but that requires more gyrations than the possibility that the evidence of a castaway man and a women found by Gallagher was attributable to the man and woman known to have vanished in that region three years earlier. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:46:39 EDT From: Ric Subject: Speaking of the raffle... The "Paradise Now" raffle we held earlier this year was well-received and raised nearly $8,000 for the Earhart Project. That money was instrumental in helping us launch this year's fieldwork in Fiji and on Nikumaroro. This was the first time we had ever tried a raffle and we'd appreciate some feed-back about whether you'd like to see us do it again, how we could make it better, what kind of prizes you'd like to see, etc. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:53:31 EDT From: Niki Subject: Takeoff Ric, do you have the original "Takeoff" photo; or just the scan? If so, may I purchase/beg/borrow/steal a copy? Thanks, Niki *********************************************************************** From Ric The only still photo we have of the takeoff was provided in the form of a 1200 dpi .tiff The original photo is the property of Mr. Alan Board who is in a nursing home in Australia. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:57:50 EDT From: Simon Ellwood Subject: Re: Anybody remember ? From a forum posting on 12 June 2002:- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Kelly wrote: >Although it now appears that those illusive bones may never have left >Fiji, I have located Dr Elkins papers which now reside at the Fisher >Library. >*************************************************************** >From Ric >Certainly no harm in checking. It would also be interesting to know if he >was ever consulted on other discoveries of unidentified bones. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- What you were looking for ? Regards Simon Ellwood ********************************************************************* From Ric Indeed. Thank you. David is still subscribed to the forum. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 15:46:40 EDT From: Jim Preston Subject: Re: CAN AIRPLANES FLOAT? As a retired Air Force Pilot who flew Big Planes, I know of another plane that landed in the water after running out of fuel. It was a C-97 in the early 50's off Lages (sp) AB, Azores. It floated so long the navy sent a destroyer out to sink it with gunfire as it had become a hazard to navigation. They told stores like this when you went through ground school so that plots were aware that most planes would float. Not the Planes of today. But the Electra with empty tanks and put in the water good most surely would float for time. I would think without lower structural damage it would float a long time. Jim Preston-Capt USAF (ret) 2000 plus hours in the Boeing 377 or C-97 ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 15:54:10 EDT From: Jim Preston Subject: Re: Castaway evidence Have you completely thrown out the possibility of capture by the Japanese and interred somewhere else? I haven't seen anything mentioned about this possibility. Jim Preston ****************************************************** From Ric Until we have conclusive proof of what happened to her we can't throw out any possibility, but I have yet to see any persuasive evidence to suggest that the Japanese were in any way involved in the disappearance, and I've seen plenty of persuasive evidence to suggest that they weren't. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 15:57:09 EDT From: Ron Reuther Subject: Re: Anybody remember? I have asked the Honorable Consul General of Fiji in San Francisco, Narayan Raju. PhD in Veterinary Pathology (Michigan State University), Bachelor of Science in Veterinary Medicine (India), to look into the possibilities of helping your team in Fiji find the bones. He is a native born Fijian and received some of his training there and returned there for awhile after completing his training in India. He is now living here in the San Francisco Bay Area. his email address is Rajufiji@aol.com Ron Reuther *************************************************** From Ric Thanks Ron. I'll pass that information along to Marty and Roger. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 16:02:25 EDT From: Peter Boor Subject: Re: Speaking of the raffle... I'd like to see it again, even if it's another chance at VI - PMB. *********************************************** From Dennis McGee I would've enjoyed it more had I won. :-) LTM, who know a long shot when she sees it Dennis O. McGee #0149EC **************************************************** From Jim Preston I think the raffle was a great idea. As past President of various organizations I was always open to suggestions for making money. I was skeptical about a rifle or shotgun where only a limited amount of chances were available. The first was 100 chances at $25 for a great hunting rifle that was picked up for $350. We sold 98, great return. 2nd was a 12 ga shotgun for $300 the next year, same 100 @ $25 we sold all and could have sold more but didn't. It does work well. Jim Preston ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 15:43:04 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: Takeoff Ric wrote: > The only still photo we have of the takeoff was provided in the form of a > 1200 dpi .tif > > The original photo is the property of Mr. Alan Board who is in a nursing home > in Australia. Whether or not I should be put in a home is, I guess, debatable... ...but is there any chance of my getting a copy of the .tif ? Thanks, Niki ********************************************************** From Ric I'll send it to you. ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 15:51:57 EDT From: Simon Ellwood Subject: Re: Takeoff Jeff Glickman had a downloadable copy of this huge .TIF file on the Photek web site some time ago - but it was 50mb big and took all night to download ! I'm not sure what the current Photek URL is, or whether it's still there, though. ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 15:54:49 EDT From: Jim Preston Subject: Re: Castaway evidence Ok, just wondering. We used to discuss it in the 60's flying to SE Asia as our flites were 8-12 hrs so we used to speculate. It's a vast Ocean. jim *************************************************** From Dave in Fremont Isn't this getting eerily near the point where we suggest that the website is consulted to get TIGHARs position on the "Japanese Capture" theory? I thought there were discussions in the Forum Highlights about the "official" position. Sorry if I seem a little crabby. Dave (#2585) ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 15:57:44 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Flying South (Again!) Ted Campbell writes: >I still believe AE and FN flew south for only one reason and that was to pick >out an identifiable landmark that could get them back to Howland. I could see them flying south (well 157 actually) hoping to find Baker. If they find Baker Island, then it should be a piece of cake to turn around and find Howland. However, after about 40 miles of flying south, if Baker does not appear, then they know they are not between Baker and Howland, and there's really no landmark that they can identify that will lead them back to Howland. Flying south will either lead them to Howland (if they are north of Howland), or lead them to something else (like Gardner or McKean, if they are south of Baker) that is too far away for them to turn back to Howland. Ted also writes: "Having missed Howland, but knowing you're so close i.e. radio messages, confidence in their enroute navigation, request for bearings, best guess, etc., and still no landfall what would the typical pilot do? I suggest that they headed toward 'something' that would give them a clue as to where they were in relationship to where they wanted to." I am mystified by "confidence in their enroute navigation" in light of the fact that Howland did not appear when they expected it to. They may have been confident prior to that time, but certainly not after. In fact, AE then tried to get the radio to give her more useful information, specifically a direction find ... so they will know what direction to go in. So they may know they are close to Howland (if close means within 200 miles or so) but they don't know what direction to go in. They don't know if they are north or south or east or west of Howland, how do you pick the direction to fly in so, as you said, they could head towards "something" that might help? If you can't find Howland, you also can't find something else. Then, Ben the Skeptic writes: >I don't know and neither do you. Yes, but we can debate which ideas are consistent with the evidence, and which ideas are not. As I understand the word "skeptic", it is someone who refuses to believe in something without credible evidence. It plays an important role in science, and is very often a good thing. However, some people want to be a skeptic just so they can say "I don't believe" and never bother giving reasons, and that would be a bad thing. Ben, you give a few reasons, and as I said, that's a good thing, so hopefully we can discuss further the evidence supporting those reasons. Ben says: "I was not suggesting that AE actually used the gas to search a square pattern. I was merely stating that if in fact she had the four hours left, that they would have been more effectively used in this manner." And yet, the only evidence of a search pattern that we have, this coming from AE's own words, is that she was running north-south on the 157-337 line ... so we have no evidence to believe that at any time did AE think about a square pattern, or execute a square pattern. She was using other methods. I am skeptical of your claim, Ben, I don't see the evidence. I see evidence of AE doing other things. Ben says "Just because WE don't know where Fred Noonan was, doesn't mean HE didn't." Please explain how this fits with the evidence that AE and FN did not find Howland. How can FN know where he was, and not find Howland? -- Paige Miller ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 16:05:55 EDT From: Niels Subject: Castaway evidence ? G'day all, New to this forum, this is my first post, not necessarily addressed to anyone in particular. I have spent quite some time reading (most of) the forum archives. I enjoyed that very much. I did not (yet?) come across an answer to the following question: If AE/FN (or whoever these castaways were) survived long enough to catch some fish shells and birds, light a fire, build a shelter, etc., why on earth wouldn't they have tried to leave an explicit message behind? If you know you're not going to be rescued, wouldn't you want at least to express your anger/despair or leave a 'note' behind you for your loved ones in the form of a message you'd hope someone will end up finding? A message written on a piece of paper that you would stick in the bottle for preservation, or carved on the wood of the sextant box, or written with stones on the sand, or carved on a tree trunk, or whatever you may think of given your imagination and the tools available to you? Wouldn't you try to store in a safe place any identifiable piece of equipment / clothing / jewelry so that whomever and whenever finds it would know for sure YOU have been there? This question has been bogging my mind for quite some time, so I hope you'd share your thoughts on this with me. Cheers-Niels (Oops, I almost forgot: LTM) ******************************************************************* From Ric I've never been a castaway so I don't know what castaways do. Have you ever been a castaway and thought you would not be rescued? Do you know of any instances where the remains of castaways have been found along with the sort of communications you describe? ================================================================ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 16:12:18 EDT From: Eric Subject: Verification Ric wrote: > Until we have conclusive proof of what happened to her we can't throw out any > possibility, but I have yet to see any persuasive evidence to suggest that > the Japanese were in any way involved in the disappearance, > and I've seen plenty > of persuasive evidence to suggest that they weren't. TIGHAR was able to verify the gist of Floyd Kilts' story because of the PISS files which were carefully archived away in England. IF the Japanese were somehow involved in AE's disappearance, there might be some official record of it in the Japanese military files which were removed from Saipan after the war. To his credit, Fred Goerner did make an attempt to locate these files. Without them, none of what he learned on Saipan can be verified. But then again, where would WE be if the PISS files had been lost or destroyed? LTM (who really did believed her daughter had been captured by the Japanese) Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, CA. ***************************************************** From Ric I'm not sure I understand your point. Yes, sometimes anecdotes can be verified by searching out official records. Sometimes they can't, either because the verifying files have been lost or because verifying files never existed. Without documented verification an anecdote remains an anecdote. Aspects of the Floyd Kilts story have been shown to be true. No aspect of the Japanese Capture stories has been shown to be true. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:43:13 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: copyright issue >I'm not one to point fingers, but it seems like Nick Zanzonico is > getting a little free with his use of TIGHAR photos for his experiments: It is not my intention to get "...a little free..." with the use of TIGHAR's photos; nor anyone else's for that matter... The use of this photo is strictly for an analysis pertaining to this case. The photos on my website are all for the same purpose. The site is not advertised anywhere but on the TIGHAR forum - and solely for the purpose of reviewing my findings. I was under the impression that the photos on the site were in the public domain; if they are the sole property of TIGHAR and I've used them without permission, I will either take them down; or ask now for that permission with the understanding that their use will be for the above reasons only... ...and with Ric's permission, I will provide links and credit TIGHAR as the source of the scans. > True, but I'm in a difficult situation regarding our friend Niki. I can't > appear to be trying to stifle opposing analyses. No Ric, please don't feel that way... as I've already stated - this particular pic is for illustrative purposes only... In fact, I will ask permission to use this pic for that purpose now; as you've already explained the copyright issue pertaining to this pic... If not, I understand... I wouldn't go down to the level of crying "foul". BTW, thank you for sending the pic that you did; however, I do need the entire, uncompressed .tif (as Simon described) in order to make the proper judgment call... The pic that you've sent would further support something I've found; but I believe it is due to the compression algo that you've used to reduce the size. > Right now I'm giving him lots of rope to hang himself with. So tell me, Ric... why do I get the feeling that you're just waiting to "pounce" on my every move? LTM, Niki *********************************************************************** From Ric It's right there on the home page: "Copyright 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003 by The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, a Non-Profit Foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved." I hereby give you permission to use the material you've copied but your original failure to respect the copyright is yet another example of the lack of professionalism that has given me a low opinion of you and your work. I'll send the uncompressed .tif of the takeoff photo as you ask. And yes, I'm laying for you. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:51:26 EDT From: Niki Subject: Niki's methods By the by, Ric... has Mr. Glickman gotten back to you about my analysis methods?... ;) Niki ************************************************************ From Ric Not yet. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:16:54 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: Takeoff Ric, just one more question; and one more issue: There's a photo of the "Lae taxi" on Photek's website that I've never seen before......are there anymore pic's pertaining to the takeoff out there somewhere? I would also like to clarify something else... When you use the term "opposing analysis" in the work I'm doing, I would just like to state that any opposition I may present would be for photographic analysis only; I do not oppose the Niku hypothesis - nor do I oppose that the final answer will be found there... What I may have discovered with the antenna issue goes directly against what I believed to have actually occurred on takeoff; but personal feelings aside, I intend to let the photos speak for themselves. LTM, Niki ********************************************************************** From Ric The "Lae taxi" photo you refer to is a still taken from the film. There are other still shots that purport to show the aircraft taxiing out for the July 2nd takeoff but are more likely to have been taken at the time of Earhart's arrival. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:07:54 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: Odds and Ends Niels: I believe your thought on castaway evidence is a good one. I have never been a castaway myself, but I think a castaway would have the type of thoughts you suggest. I have heard of notes and journals left behind by polar explorers who were facing their own demise and wanted to record what had befallen them. It could be that AE left such a record, that it still exists on Niku, and we haven't found it yet. All: I was impressed with Niki's work on the wreck photo. I look for him not to hang himself, but to shed light on the other photos. LTM, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:09:15 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Castaway evidence ? We need to remember several things. First, we've just scratched the surface (pun intended) of the location where we believe the castaway probably died, the "7" site. It is certainly possible that we could find something such as what you describe, as we expand our search of that area. We have to remember that it is densely overgrown, and probably a lot different in appearance than it was when AE was there. Some artifact left in an accessible yet protected location in 1937 could easily be hidden and buried today. Remember, clothing and wood rots away pretty quickly, and I'm not aware of any jewelry or other identifiable articles that went along for the ride - nearly everything that wasn't essential was shipped home prior to that leg. It is possible that there are the corroded remains of a sextant or a watch or something like that somewhere about, but until more of the area is cleared away and examined in detail, we won't know. It's worse than a needle in a haystack - it's a moldering whatzit in a jungle. ltm jon 2266 ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:10:40 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Flying South (Again!) Paige Miller wrote: > I am mystified by "confidence in their enroute navigation" in light of > the fact that Howland did not appear when they expected it to. They may > have been confident prior to that time, but certainly not after. I'm not so sure. The way I see it, when they got to where Howland should have been (and wasn't) they had two choices. They could throw up their hands, admit they were totally lost and wander around (circling, flying a square pattern, etc) until they ran out of gas, not knowing where they were, and maybe more importantly where they were in relation to anything else. Or they could maintain confidence in the accuracy of the sun line (which they apparently did, ref: AE's transmission about running on the line). Knowing how long they had to fly from when they got the sun line to get to where Howland was on their chart, I believe they knew they were close to Howland. I have no doubt that they ran up the line (337) some distance to try to intercept Howland or Baker to the North, then when they didn't the only logical choice would be to follow 157. Believing that Howland was not North, this was the only logical way to potentially intercept Howland, or Baker, or Gardner, or any other island within range. But the motivation was not to search for Gardner, it was always to search for Howland - with insurance. ltm jon 2266 ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:11:50 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: Takeoff Simon Ellwood #2120 wrote: > Jeff Glickman had a downloadable copy of this huge .TIF file on the Photek > web site some time ago - but it was 50mb big and took all night to download > ! I'm not sure what the current Photek URL is, or whether it's still > there, though. Thanks for that info, Simon... ...but I've visited the site and it doesn't appear to be there any longer... LTM, Niki ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:21:26 EDT From: Nick Uribe Subject: Raffle idea for TIGHAR As a faithful lurker and TIGHAR sympathizer, I'd like to propose the following idea as a surefire attention-grabber and fundraiser: Go to Newfoundland, rent a boat and fish up the remnants of the first transatlantic cable laid by Cyrus Field (the part near shore, of course.) You could easily sell souvenirs on e-bay for $100 a foot. The rest, you could use for a TIGHAR raffle. (A great conversation piece for the living room or den.) You've got the wherewithal, knowledge and expertise to do this, so think about it. Kind regards, Nick Uribe Cali, Colombia ****************************************************************** From Ric Thanks for the suggestion. ********************************************************* From Alan What about a spaghetti supper this time? ******************************************************* From Ric How about we cover the Atlantic Cable with marinara? ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:06:43 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Castaway evidence ? Not a great analogy -- but didn't crew members on the Russian Submarine Kursk that sank a few years back pen last letters which were later recovered? Bob ***************************************************************** From Ross Devitt There have been several documented cases of crash victims and lost people who, being lost or believing their fate was sealed, left this kind of record. The last one here is almost relevant to the discussion.... reading it one could almost imagine the sort of things that may have gone through Amelia's mind. An Australian aviator was forced down in the sands of the Sahara if I remember correctly, left a daily diary in his log and tied it to a strut as he slowly perished from thirst. A number of downed aviators I've read about who scratched a diary of sorts into the aluminium of their aircraft, including one fairly recently. At least one party of explorers who left a message in a bottle buried at the foot of a tree and carved the instruction "dig" in the tree. Another explorer who got lost in the desert and was found with a notebook turned diary detailing the events of his gradual decline. Last and more relevant, a castaway! Mary Watson was living on a tropical Barrier Reef island when she and her 2 servants were attacked by natives in September 1881. Over a couple of days one servant was killed and the other speared in 7 places. On October 2nd, after their ammunition had run out and there was no sign of her husband returning, she, her new born baby and the seriously wounded Chinese servant crammed themselves into a small riveted iron tank not unlike the one found on Niku. I've seen the thing and I still can't see how two adults and a baby fitted into it and went to sea! The bodies were discovered accidentally in May 1882. She left a diary on Lizard Island, and another set of entries was found in the tank along with the bodies. Lizard Island is around the same latitude as Niku and like most of the islands in the area, used to be pretty rugged. Most of these islands are waterless and the sun is relentless. It also gives a little insight into surviving and caring for a seriously injured person for a while, as we have often speculated Earhart may have had to do if Noonan was injured in the crash. They managed to pack provisions and water into the tank, but the water soon gave out. (After 3 days - they left Sunday afternoon and by Thursday morning there was no water left). Although there was plenty off food and even some condensed (thick) milk left, with no water they were unable to eat. They survived 5 days without water in tropical conditions more harsh that Niku. The "trees" referred to in the diary are sparse and offer a little shade. Makes one think of the Ren tree in the Gardner report. There are references to things like "anchored the boat" which actually refer to this tiny iron tank. Ferrier was the name of Mary's newborn son, whose wrap she used to try to signal a passing ship. Diary 1 - Lizard Island September 27,1881 Diary 1 .. A Sam saw smoke in S. direction, supposed to be from native camp. Steamer bound north very close about 6pm; Corea I think. September 28 Blowing strong S.E. breeze. September 29 ... A Leong killed by the blacks over at the farm (a quarter of a mile from her cottage). Ah Sam found his hat, which is the only proof. September 30 Natives down on the beach at 7pm. Fired off rifle and revolver and they went away. October 1 Natives (4) speared Ah Sam; four places in the right side, and three on the shoulder. Got three spears from the natives. Saw ten men altogether. Diary 2 Found in the tank October 4 Left Lizard Island October 2nd 1881, (Sunday afternoon) in tank (or pot in which beche de mer is boiled). Got about three or four miles from the Lizards. Made for the sand bank off the Lizards, but could not reach it. Got on a reef. October 5 Remained on the reef all day on the look out for a boat, but saw none. October 6 Very calm morning. Able to pull the tank up to an island with three small mountains on it. Ah Sam went ashore to try to get water as ours was done. There were natives camped there, so we were afraid to go far away. We had to wait return of tide. Anchored under the mangroves; got on the reef. Very calm. October 7 Made for another island four or five miles from the one spoken of yesterday. Ashore, but could not find any water. Cooked some rice and clamfish. Moderate S.E. breeze. Stayed here all night. Saw a steamer bound north. Hoisted Ferrier's pink and white wrap but did not answer us. October 8 Changed anchorage of boat as the wind was freshening. Went down to a kind of little lake on the same island (this done last night). Remained here all day looking out for a boat; did not see any; very cold night; blowing very hard. No water. October 9 Brought the tank ashore as far as possible with this morning's tide. Made camp all day under the trees. Blowing very hard. No water. Give Ferrier a dip in the sea; he is showing symptoms of thirst, and I took a dip myself. A Sam and self very parched with thirst. Ferrier is showing symptoms. October 10 Ferrier very bad with inflammation; verry much alarmed. No fresh water, and no more milk, but condensed. Self very weak; really thought I would have died last night (Sunday). October 11 Still all alive. Ferrier very much better this morning. Self feeling very weak. I think it will rain to-day; clouds very heavy; wind not quite so hard. No rain. Morning fine weather. A Sam preparing to die, have not seen him since 9th. Ferrier more cheerful. Self not feeling at all well. Have not seen any boat of any description. No water. Nearly dead with thirst. I know this is almost off topic, but in view of my own "castaway experiments" on wearing one set of clothing that are only exposed to salt water, and only using salt water to wash/bathe over the last 6 months, and the few similarities to what we imagine Amelia may have gone through I thought it might interest someone. Th' WOMBAT. ************************************************ From Angus Murray In February 1962 a French army patrol discovered the wreck of Bill Lancaster's |Avro Avian in the Tanezrouft area of the Sahara desert (which is avoided even by the Bedouin). They call it Le Pays du Soif - The Land of Thirst. He survived for a week and left a detailed diary. He had crashed after engine trouble on the way to South Africa in 1933. His final message was: "So the beginning of the eighth day has dawned. It is still cool. I have no water....I am waiting patiently. Come soon please. Fever wracked me last night. Hope you get my full log. Bill." His diary was found perfectly preserved, wrapped in fabric and attached to the plane. The aircraft is now in Brisbane Australia. Of course the humid tropical conditions on Gardner are not conducive to the survival of organic material and any paper record left may well have been consumed by insects, UV radiation, moulds and bacteria before it could be found. Regards Angus. **************************************************************** From Ric Earhart may have left a journal. I sure hope she did and I sure hope we find it, but the fact that no journal has turned up so far is hardly a reason to doubt the other evidence that suggests that she was the castaway whose bones were found on Gardner. =============================================================== Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:33:59 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Castaway evidence Jim, Ric was being less than truthful. He WAS captured by the Japanese and interred somewhere in Delaware. Several of us are mounting an effort to free him along with his faithful Indian companion, Pat Thrasher. Seriously the Japanese stuff has been beat to death by a few guys selling books. As Ric said there is just no credible evidence of any Japanese involvement. Most of the Japanese theorists fly our heroes into the Marshalls either directly from Lae or after missing Howland. Neither scenario is possible or logical. Some would have the Japanese steam a thousand miles through our ships and planes in order to pick up our duo AND their airplane from a reef or the open sea for whatever reason no one could imagine. Most will simply not deal with the logistics but magically put AE and FN in custody someplace they could not have got to. All have lots of evidence. It is either second or third or worse hand anecdotal evidence or it is physical evidence which has mysteriously disappeared. I truthfully would not waste a second thinking about a Japanese connection. Alan ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:42:22 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: Evaluating the Last Message At 8:43 am, local time, the USCGC Itasca heard Earhart transmit on 3105 kilocycles, "We are on the line of position 157 337. We will repeat this message. We will repeat this on 6210 kilocycles. Wait." Then, shortly thereafter, the Itasca logs as 'questionable' the following radio transmission from Earhart, "We are running on line North and South." These were the last two messages heard from Earhart. To my knowledge, that the last message was logged as 'questionable' has never been fully discussed in this forum. We have done something similar before with the word, "circling". (Ric, If the annotation, 'questionable', has been discussed in depth before and I somehow missed it, please let me know. I don't want to waste anyone's time.) The more I think about it, the more absolutely extraordinary it seems to me that so few people recognize that Earhart's last transmission was, in fact, possibly garbled -- or worse, it may not even be certainly Earhart -- after all, she says she'll be on 6210 and then inexplicably comes right back on 3105.... Among my questions: 1. What is the context of the term, 'questionable' -- who logged it, what do we know about what they meant? Are there any other circumstances where another transmission is similarly annotated? Are there any other locations/receivers that logged the final message? 2. Could 'questionable' mean that they weren't sure it was Earhart? Or does it mean that the message was not received clearly and they were uncertain if what they logged was what was actually transmitted? 3. What other possible message might have been transmitted? For instance, could she have possibly said, "We are running on (the) line North (to) South"? Or, "We are running (out of gas and are somewhere) on (the) line (157 337 either) North (or) South (of Howland)"? 4. Does Earhart ever use the term "running" to describe flying from one point to another? Was the term, "running" in common usage at the time? Thomas Van Hare ********************************************************************* From Ric No one ever wrote "questionable" in the log. I think you'll have a much better handle on the puzzling last message if you read the analysis at: http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Bulletins/06_05_02Bulletin/analysis.html ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:44:03 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Beyond a reasonable doubt . . . For all of the lawyers out there (and those who play them on TV) does TIGHAR's data meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement? I'm not proposing a moot court, but I'm just curious that if this case were handled using present day rules of evidence, what would be the verdict. Any takers? LTM, whose record was expunged in 1978 Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ****************************************************** From Ric You sure know how to open a can of worms. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:47:52 EDT From: Daryll Subject: From Fantasy (conspiracy) Island Since TIGHAR prides itself as a depository of Earhart facts, I have a request. #1 Do you have any photos of the Electra with static wicks ? #2 From Eric, >.....IF the Japanese were somehow involved in AE's disappearance, >there might be some official record of it in the Japanese military files >which were removed from Saipan after the war..... Japan has never been an open society, certainly not in the aspects of how an American would regard their own government documents. PBS had a special on MacArthur. A Japanese historian (name?) stated on camera, in his own language which was subtitled, that in the two weeks between Japan's surrender and the occupation by US forces, all documents that could be used against Emperor Hirohito in war crimes trials were destroyed. The Japanese still do not acknowledge crimes committed against the Chinese which there is ample outside evidence. Hirohito was the Emperor in the time period of the Earhart flight. Would the Emperor have known that they had rescued Earhart? The "buck" would theoretically stop there. MacArthur and the US had their own agenda with regards to post war defeated Japan. They hoped to achieve stability and cooperation of the people, by keeping the Emperor in place. Jackie Cochran (AE's dearest friend), who arrived in Tokyo almost as soon as MacArthur did, said she found Earhart documents. She never fully explained what she found in her mad dash to Tokyo to "explore the woman's role in Japanese aviation". She evaded direct questions regarding AE. Ask yourself how Earhart evidence found in Japan, could have affected the politics of the time. Daryll ************************************************************** From Ric Good question about the static wicks. I've never thought to look. I will when I get a chance. ================================================================ Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:25:18 EDT From: Wesley Smith Subject: Wake Island Silly question perhaps - but I can't help but wonder why Fred Noonan didn't choose to head for Wake Island from Lae, instead of Howland? Wasn't Wake a familiar destination to him and didn't it also have a Pan Am Clipper station? With such facilities at Wake, why would they choose Howland? Further, isn't it shorter to Wake? Just curious if anyone has ever explored this angle (no pun intended). S. Wesley Smith ********************************************************** From Ric No runway at Wake. The Clippers were flying boats. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:18:27 EDT From: Alexander Subject: Re: copyright issue I read with interest this posting and wondered if TIGHAR license their photographs for publication and/or TV at all and if not do you receive requests for photographs? These days i am busy with work so i don't get that much time to reply but I still read most posts if and when i can. I have also bought a new computer which means that when i do post my text is all formatted unlike this time last year ! Thnx. Alexander (United Kingdom) *********************************************************************** From Ric We can, of course, only license the use of what we own (our name, logo, writings, and photographs or artwork that we have created), but we do that failry frequently. We occasionally get requests for the use of photographs and our response depends upon whether we have the right to release the photo in question and what the anticipated use of the photo will be. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:21:03 EDT From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Raffle idea for TIGHAR I vaguely remember someone selling parts of this cable , on plaques, in the past. It may have been the Franklin Mint or some such "collectable" organization. I wonder if there is any accessible cable left. Dan Postellon ********************************************************************** From Ric I think we'd spend more money just getting to Newfoundland (been there) than we'd ever recoup selling or raffling pieces of cable. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:24:07 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Beyond a reasonable doubt . . . Your standard is incorrect. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard in criminal law. This is not a criminal case. Actually it's not any kind of case but if it was it would be a civil case. That standard is the "preponderance of the evidence." Simply put that means there is more evidence one way than another. To apply that standard to the Niku theory I would argue there is more evidence to support Niku than to refute it or support an alternate theory. Alan ************************************************************************* From Bill Leary Dennis McGee wrote: > For all of the lawyers out there (and those who play them on TV) > does TIGHAR's data meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement? I'm > not proposing a moot court, but I'm just curious that if this case were > handled using present day rules of evidence, what would be the verdict. I've been forced to deal with courts a few times (as a witness, thank goodness, not the suspect). I'd actually thought about this question while waiting to testify. My own very personal view it that TIGHAR's current state is similar to that of a homicide where the cops are just a bit past the "you know, this guy's story is a bit fishy" stage. That is, there's an idea who might have done it (some likely bones, rumors of a plane wreck), there's the means (there was enough fuel, the island is on the last spoken heading), and there's the motive (we'd like to live), but they still have to gather the proof to before they can make the arrest. As to your question of verdict, the DA wouldn't take the case to court at this point, but the judge would probably issue a search warrant. - Bill #2229 ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:28:37 EDT From: Dave in Fremont Subject: Re: Castaway evidence Sorry, I don't mean to be ragging on you. It's just that there is a lot of information about the "Japanese Capture" theory out on the website, and it pretty much establishes (at least in my mind) that the theory is based on not-so-good anecdotal evidence. But speculation is good and like I said, I wasn't swatting at you personally, Jim. LTM, Dave (#2585) ************************************************************************** From Phil Tanner Alan wrote: > I truthfully would not waste a second thinking about a Japanese >connection. And has anyone ever, in the entire annals of "spying on the Japanese", even attempted to explain what they were supposed to observe while overflying the Marshalls in the dark? Phil Tanner, 2271 ********************************************************************* From Ric Parachute flares. The Electra was actually designed to carry them for use in night landings on unlighted runways. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:31:31 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Castaway evidence ? Besides Ric's answer to your question, let me just add that of course, they may HAVE left an explicit message and we just haven't found it. There's still lots of scaevola to hack and rocks to turn over. I have this fantasy about a bottle with a scroll stuffed into it..... LTM (who likes to fantasize) Tom ************************************************************************ From John Having been in law enforcement for 14 years, I have yet to come across a case where a person who dies a natural death leaves a message before dying, other than the obvious with a suicide. This, of course, does not include wills, DNR's and such. Unless the person knew, without doubt that there time was at hand. It would seem to me that if, AE/FN were the castaway(s) that they may have held out hope of rescue until the end, or at least until they were beyond the point of carving/writing whatever. It would make it a lot easier of course, if they (whoever the castaway was) left a note with their name and address so that it would be relatively simple to verify the information. Knowing the who's and the how's and the why's makes for a simple case. This isn't one of them. My hat's off to the TIGHAR folks for their efforts. From my point of view the steps taken to resolve this are logical and, although it would be nice to say that the end result will be knowing AE/FN's fates, no one is claiming that will happen. If Niku is eliminated the search can then focus on somewhere else. If you eliminate all the falsehoods, the truth will remain. Personally, I think they are onto the truth and am looking forward to the conclusive proof that is coming. LTM- John ********************************************************************* From Ric Thanks John. So are we. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:35:58 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Static wicks What are static wicks, and what, if anything, is significant about them? ************************************************************************ From Ric Static wicks are short lengths of frayed metal cable that trail back usually from each wingtip. They are intended to dissipate any static electrical charge that builds up in the airframe while the airplane is in flight. I'm not sure when they first appeared on airplanes but I can't remember ever seeing any in photos of AE's Electra. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:39:31 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Flying South (Again!) > The way I see it, when they got to where Howland should have > been (and wasn't) Jon, we don't know Howland wasn't there. We only know they didn't see it. There is a big difference. There were a number of adverse factors in play at the time that might have made it difficult for them to see Howland. If you will review the archives and the Pelligrini flight you'll see what I'm referring to. Alan ********************************************************************** From Ric We also know that nobody aboard the Itasca or on Howland saw or heard the plane despite intense watching. The visibility was excellent and we know that the plane was below the cloud bases. I think we can safely say that the plane did not pass over or very close to the island. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:53:02 EDT From: Thomas Van Hare Subject: Evaluating the Last Message (reprise) Now I am confused. Please refer to the following page on the TIGHAR website: http://www.tighar.org/forum/navigation.html The following is an out take from that webpage, quoted here for reference and discussion purposes: In that context, Earhart final inflight radio message heard by the Itasca at 08:43 makes sense: "We are on the line 157 337. We will repeat this message. We will repeat this on 6210 kilocycles. Wait." This, like her previous transmissions, was heard on 3105 kilocycles. Having had no luck hearing replies to those transmissions she was going to try her other frequency. But after a moment, suddenly, unexpectedly, and contrary to what she just said, she was back on 3105 saying something that was logged as a "questionable" transmission: "We are running on line north and south." ... And yesterday, Ric, you wrote: >No one ever wrote "questionable" in the log. I think you'll have a much >better handle on the puzzling last message if you read the analysis at: >http://www.tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Bulletins/06_05_02Bulletin/analysis.html ... so, if you have a moment, could you please clarify your source for your statement that the transmission was logged as "questionable", as quoted above from the navigation.html page? Would it be worthwhile discussing the last two questions (numbers 3 and 4), as follows: 3. What other possible message might have been transmitted? For instance, could she have possibly said, "We are running on (the) line North (to) South"? Or, "We are running (out of gas and are somewhere) on (the) line (157 337 either) North (or) South (of Howland)"? 4. Does Earhart ever use the term "running" to describe flying from one point to another? Was the term, "running" in common usage at the time? Thomas Van Hare Historic Wings http://www.historicwings.com/ ************************************************************************** From Ric >could you please clarify your source for your statement that the >transmission was logged as "questionable" If you looked at the analysis you saw that the actual log entry in question begins: (?/KHAQQ transmission.... I don't know how else to interpret that question mark. The question is, what was it that was "questionable"? >3. What other possible message might have been transmitted? What was written in the log can be read as: "We are running on north and south line." or "We are running on line north and south." As a rule, if we want to speculate that something else was said, the fewer words we insert or change the better. >4. Does Earhart ever use the term "running" to describe flying from one >point to another? Was the term, "running" in common usage at the time? As far as I know, "running" meant the same in 1937 as it does today. I know of no specialized usage of the term in aviation then or now. I can't recall any instance when AE ever used the term before, but we have very few examples of anything she said. LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:10:24 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: copyright issue Ric wrote: > I hereby give you permission to use the material you've copied but your > original failure to respect the copyright is yet another example of the lack of > professionalism that has given me a low opinion of you............. ............................. DING! I do thank you for the permission... but c'mon, Ric... you can do better than that... I see that trying to be diplomatic about it gets nowhere fast around here; so let's try something else: In the first place, you knew right from the beginning that my intentions of placing pix on the website was to aid in the determination of the wreck photo as being AE's plane or not... You also knew right from the beginning that any and all work on that site was to be used for TIGHAR's purposes only: as a way of transmitting my work to the forum. Since the wreck photo (...and others that I've used to illustrate my points...) appear on other websites as well, I thought that it was a public domain photo; and since it was to the benefit of TIGHAR only - I also thought there wouldn't be any harm in using it. If this bothered you so much as to give you "a low opinion" of me, why didn't you say something at the very beginning? In the second place - before you go and get your panties all in a bunch - I do not consider it a "failure to respect the copyright ", when at least 2 of TIGHAR's members expressed their curiosity to me in knowing what I would be able to see in the other pix as well... So, if you really want to get technical about it, that indicated to me as being permission enough to continue with analyzing other photos; and then to transmit the work to the forum in the same manner... Ric then added: > (a low opinion of you) ...and your work. I must say that I'm a little disappointed, Ric; I really didn't expect the classic pattern from you... ...but I guess human nature is human nature no matter who you are... When I debunked Charles Berlitz's "Vanished Without A Trace" - pertaining to the boogieman running off with "Flight 19" (...which, BTW, I've located and positively ID'd one of those planes last August...) - the "classic pattern" started with bad-mouthing; and then progressed to the "nail 'em with a legality" level. But that's how it goes when you've struck a nerve... (Copyright law allowed me to quote from his book in a "rebuttal"; so the "legality" aspect didn't work...) The same pattern emerged from a photo analysis case with Mr. von Daniken. It happened again when I showed that the 1946 "Magic 12" papers were typed on a 1964 Smith-Corona typewriter... And now Ric, it appears to me that it's going down again: ...or does it go deeper than that? I guess I must have really struck a nerve... ...because I just can't fathom how you arrive at "a low opinion" of my work - based on my copying some pictures from your website for the purpose of conveying that work back to you... You know Ric, from one treasure hunter to another; I guess it would strike a nerve with me also; if someone came along and started pointed out things I wasn't aware of on my own treasure map... > I'll send the uncompressed .tif of the takeoff photo as you ask. Thank you - I received it; but I'm still trying to find the entire photograph - full background and all, uncompressed... > And yes, I'm laying for you. Ah... a game of "tit-for-tat", eh? Well then... let the games begin! LTM, (...who said Phil Class was proud...) Niki *********************************************************************** From Ric I've explained why I didn't raise the copyright issue and I've now given you permission, so your legalistic concerns would appear to be unfounded. I am not a treasure hunter. The nerve that you have struck with me is that I suspect that you are a fraud. If I am proved wrong I will apologize and feel very embarrassed. In the interest of proving me wrong I'm sure you'll be glad to elaborate for the forum just how you found and positively IDed one of the most famous lost planes in history. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:24:58 EDT From: Eric Subject: Verification Ric wrote: >Without documented verification an anecdote remains an anecdote. Aspects of the >Floyd Kilts story have been shown to be true. No aspect of the Japanese >Capture stories has been shown to be true. I've been under the impression that the Floyd Kilts story (a rather far-fetched anecdode) led TIGHAR to search out the PISS files which in turn verified that aspects of the Kilts bones story were based in fact. This in turn led us to believe in the strong possibility of AE and FN having landed at NIKU, which has driven much of our search efforts, which in turn has served to verify aspects of the PISS bones files. Fred Goerner collected a number of rather far-fetched anecdodes and sea stories but was never able to verify that any of them were the least bit based in fact. Had he been able to locate the Japanese military records from Saipan and had there been some reference to two American aviators being brought in, the anecdodes would have taken on greater credibility. IF those Japanese records still exist someplace, like the PISS files do, they would certainly be worth looking into. LTM, Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, CA. ******************************************************************* From Ric >I've been under the impression that the Floyd Kilts story (a rather >far-fetched anecdode) led TIGHAR to search out the PISS files... I wish we could claim that we are that sharp, but all we did was make the Kilts story known to the TIGHAR membership. It was Peter McQuarrie, a TIGHAR member doing research in his own field of study (WWII and it's impact on Micronesia) who stumbled upon Gallagher's "bones file" while doing research in Tarawa. We took it from there and eventually tracked down the rest of the documentation. Allegations of Japanese involvement in Earhart's disappearance have been far more widely known for far longer than the Floyd Kilts story, and archival research into Japan's prewar and wartime records has been undertaken by countless scholars. Nothing supporting the allegations has ever turned up. I'll leave it to those who support the Japanese Capture hypothesis to do their own research. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:31:27 EDT From: Niels Subject: Little castaway evidence -> japanese kidnapping ;-) Thanks Jon for your welcome message. Ric wrote: >I've never been a castaway so I don't know what castaways do. Have you ever >been a castaway and thought you would not be rescued? Do you know of any >instances where the remains of castaways have been found along with the sort of >communications you describe? Why do I feel agressivity in your reply? Or is it a special style I need to get used to? No I have never been a castaway. And I have no "evidence" nor witnesses your honor. Just sharing thoughts with the rest of the forum. What's wrong with that? At least some readers gave me some interesting replies. Thanks. Ric also wrote >Earhart may have left a journal. I sure hope she did and I sure hope we find it, but the fact that >no journal has turned up so far is hardly a reason to doubt the other evidence that suggests that >she was the castaway whose bones were found on Gardner. No one was suggesting any doubt here, except maybe you in your reply. I am not surprised that it is hard to find anything after all these years, but I would have expected those who were on the island in 1937/38 (Gallagher?) etc. to have found something more concrete then. It all looks like if someone has tried to hide all the evidence away, and the little that was found (including by TIGHAR) is what may have been overseen and left behind. How to explain that? I have no idea. But if I dare let my imagination go, I may come up with something like this: Fasten your seatbelts and read on: AE did indeed miss Howland and followed the line until she found Gardner. She ditched the plane, managed to send a few radio messages before she run totally out of fuel or the generator got drowned and the plane washed away (totally or partially). On 9-July Lambrecht overflies the atoll and does not see the plane (maybe covered by tide) nor the castaways. AE and FN have gone exploring the island for a better place (more shade, fresh water?), and miss to signal their presence to Lambrecht. They may have been exploring the heart of the jungle for water at this very moment and had no time to run to the beach or lagoon when they heard the plane. They may even have not heard them due to wind and sound of waves covering the engine noise. Those who have been on the island, do you know how long it takes for someone in the middle of the bush to run either side to the open?). How strong is the sound of the waves when the sea is rough? So far so good. Some days later, a japanese "fishing boat" or submarine that was on a spying mission in the area stops at Gardner. The japanes were potentially looking for or exploring strategic reefs or abandoned islands in US territory to use as bases in the event Japan were to invade Hawaii from the south. They were far away during the search for Earhart. They could hear it all on the radio and ducked until they knew the search was over, then went on with their mission that brought them to Gardner. Guess what? They find the castaways. The know theyy cannot leave witnesses behind, but they also know who the castaways are (they heard all radio exchanges for the search) and therefore decide not to kill them but to take them away. They take them onboard, comb the beach for all evidence, and sink the wreck or take it on board as well. And off they go to Saipan. As some witnesses saw them the Japanese pretended they found the castaways in the Marshalls as they did not want to reveal they were spying in the Phoenix isles. This is pure imagination of course, but this theory has the advantage to reconcile the Nilumaruru (my favorite) and the Marshall ditching theories. Both theories have troubling evidence, but the link is missing as having the plane crash in the Marshalls is pure nonsense. Oh yes. The bones? Well, based on evidence we have only Gallagher BELIEVES they may have been Earhart's, while that Fidjian doctor ruled this out, right? Now we do not necessarily have to believe that doctor, but for the time being we do not have better (that I am aware of). Niels (dreaming from my hot tub). NTM PS. And Ric, in case you wonder, no I have never been kidnapped by Japanese in the south Pacific and have no idea nor hard evidence that this is what they would have done, nor I am suggesting this is what has happened, nor am I implying or have the intention to in any way whatsoever that this is even a close hint to what has really happened. Nontheless, on the surface of the unmeasurable well of ignorance that I am, there are some bubbles of thoughts floating, and these make this theory appealing to me. ********************************************************* From Ric Well, at least you've given us some idea of how the Japanese Capture crowd might deal with proof that the Electra landed at Gardner. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:34:52 EDT From: Joe Subject: Re: copyright issue Just wondering out loud.....any chance you could go on the Larry King show with all the knowledge you have on AE's disappearance? Im sure it would create renewed interest from people around the world who have no idea of Tighar's existence! It may also create for you new membership funds! Joe *********************************************************** From Ric I wish that getting that kind of publicity was that easy. Look for me on the Larry King Show when we have conclusive proof. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:36:04 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Castaway Evidence Alfred Hendrickson writes: >but I think a castaway would have the type >of thoughts you suggest. I have heard of notes and journals left behind >by polar explorers who were facing their own demise and wanted to record >what had befallen them. It could be that AE left such a record, that it >still exists on Niku, and we haven't found it yet. Polar explorers regularly kept diaries as part of the scientific work that they regularly carried out ... it was not done to provide evidence of what happened if they died. Now, it is true that Robert Falcon Scott kept a diary of his last few days before he passed away, probably knowing that he would never survive. I think the situation is somewhat different between AE and polar explorers ... the polar explorers kept their food and supplies and shelter with them for many many weeks and kept daily diaries. Amelia of course brought no supplies with her other than perhaps a day or two, and upon arriving at Gardner, I suspect that the primary activity was finding food, water and shelter and not leaving behind written records. That's not to say written records don't exist, I just think its unlikely. One other point is that paper records in polar climates do survive long periods of time. Documents have been found in cairns decades after a polar explorer wrote them. It's less likely that a paper or even bark document would survive on Niku for very long; perhaps if AE wrote her diary on a clamshell and turned it upside down, we might have a chance to find it. Paige Miller #2565 LTM ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:37:42 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Re: heading south Jon Watson writes: >I'm not so sure. The way I see it, when they got to where Howland should have >been (and wasn't) they had two choices. They could throw up their hands, >admit they were totally lost and wander around ... Actually, Jon, I agree with everything you wrote (and I didn't quote it all). My only point was that their confidence had to be shaken, it's human nature. At some point, they did have to start thinking they are totally lost, although that's no reason to give up. I agree with you regarding the decisions they made, as you described in the part of the your letter that I didn't quote. Paige Miller #2565 LTM ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:42:40 EDT From: Ben Subject: Can Electras Float? The sound of wings, by Mary Lovell describes a water landing of a Lockheed Electra. I have paraphrased for copyright purposes. After experiencing failure in both engines, the pilot was able to land on a smooth sea just off the coast of Massachusetts, with a 10 mph headwind. The plane landed tail down, to lessen impact. The pilot and passengers survived the landing, and were rescued immediately. It took the Lockheed eight minutes to sink. Even on a calm ocean, it is complicated to judge a planes height above the surface. If AE stalled too high, the impact would likely have killed them both. In rough waters it is even harder to judge the effect of said stall, or the effect of high waves in a rough patch. When Itasca rushed to the area NNW of Howland on July 2, it reported "turbulent" waters and waves that were "four to six feet high" Sound of Wings pgs 288-89 It was largely assumed that the Electra could float "indefinitely" based on the empty fuel tanks. Everyone stuck to that theory and continued to ignore Joe Gurr. Amelia's former radio mechanic stated simply, that the fuel tanks "had vent openings, through which the water could fill them in a certain length of time." Sound of Wings Pg.296 If, in fact Amelia ditched into the water, based on this information, it seems unlikely to me, that the craft would have remained afloat long. Ric, if she's out there, I know you'll find her. ********************************************************************* From Ric Not if she crashed and sank at sea I won't. Nobody will. Besides, as Pat says, I can't find the mustard in the refrigerator. It's the TIGHAR teams and researchers who find stuff. I just point and shout. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:46:49 EDT From: Skeet Gifford Subject: Re: Static wicks Ric wrote: >Static wicks are short lengths of frayed metal cable that trail back usually >from each wingtip. They are intended to dissipate any static electrical charge >that builds up in the airframe while the airplane is in flight. I'm not sure >when they first appeared on airplanes but I can't remember ever seeing any in >photos of AE's Electra. Actually, static charges will dissipate with or without static wicks. The purpose of the wick is to prevent (or minimize) damage to the airplane when this happens. I've experienced several static discharges (lightening strikes) in flight and after landing discovered a couple of wicks missing. In extreme cases, the static discharge may simply take a piece of the airplane with it. I've seen one of the rudders on a C-119 removed that way. No, it wasn't my airplane. ********************************************************************* From Ric I was treated to a spectacular show of St. Elmo's Fire one night in a heavy snow storm in a DC-3 equipped with static wicks. Go figure. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:49:38 EDT From: Emmett Subject: Final Approach Received my copy of 'final approach'. OUTSTANDING! Emmett **************************************************** From Ric Thanks Emmett. I have to say that reviews so far have been universally enthusiastic. ================================================================ Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 13:54:29 EDT From: Margot Still Subject: Copyright As I no longer subscribe to the FORUM, several of the postings on the current debacle on copyright were forwarded to me by some folks who knew I would find them particularly interesting. It seems Ric has some odd ideas on exactly to whom the copyright laws are applicable. I put together a research packet for the 2001 C/E which included multiple photographs for which I paid a whopping sum of $356.00 and signed a copyright agreement with Boeing. My agreement stated very specifically that the photographs for which I had purchased the rights were to only be used in my research paper. Before I signed the agreement, I contacted Ric, asked if he wanted to include TIGHAR, and he DECLINED. Imagine my surprise when they appeared shortly after our return from California on the TIGHAR website! I was not contacted at any time by Ric, Pat or any other yahoo associated with TIGHAR. Not only did this flagrant violation of my copyright agreement open me to lawsuit, it also endangered an excellent source for primary documents for me as a researcher. The photographs were removed from the website only after I explained to Ric I was left no option but to report TIGHAR to Boeing for reproducing the photographs on the website without my permission or my knowledge. The photographs were removed, but not before some heated email was exchanged. So I guess you could say copyright applies to where you sit for Ric. Margot Still Former TIGHAR #2332CE ********************************************************************* From Ric As I explained to Margot at the time, the apparent copyright violation was a misunderstanding on my part and was corrected as soon as she pointed it out. ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:47:10 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: copyright issue > "Flight 19" (...which, BTW, I've located and > positively ID'd one of those planes last August...) Niki, I have to tell you I don't believe one word of that. Please tell us exactly which TBM you found and how you found it and how you identified it. I am beginning to think you are 100% BS. Alan ********************************************************************* From Carl Gee, I, for one, as a long time interested Flt 19 searcher and as such lead the pack in wanting to know more about that allegation in finding one of those General Motors Avengers. By the way if you find one then the rest have to be close by. That brings up the question why don't the rest of us know the location and disposition of those wrecks? I am sure the US Navy wants to know as they keep all equipment as their property as well as the disposition of the crews Carl from SW Florida ********************************************************************* From Alexander Niki wrote: >It happened again when I showed that the 1946 "Magic 12" papers were typed >on a 1964 Smith-Corona typewriter... ...Correct me if i am wrong here but didn't Stanton T Friedman prove the theory behind the majestic papers a few years back... i could be wrong maybe someone else can confirm this... sorry to wander off topic. ********************************************************************* From Ric I had never heard of this but from what I've been able to pull up very quickly with Google there is apparently an old controversy about some documents known as the "Majestic 12" or "MJ-12" papers which supposedly prove that the U.S. Government is hiding information about UFOs. Seems odd that Niki would get the name wrong. Maybe it's like his Beechcraft Electras. **************************************************************************** From Robert Klaus Ric, Am I missing something in the current debate? As I understand it Niki is trying to prove that by using his own methods of photo analysis he can show the aircraft in "The Wreck Photo" is not NR16020, and is probably a Ki-54. I thought that this had already been established to the general satisfaction of the forum by the recent discussion of cowl opening diameter. In fact I was convinced of both these propositions by the work Simon Ellwood did two or more years ago. Is the idea just to find out how many indications can be found on the photo that it's not the airplane we're looking for? LTM Robert G. Klaus ************************************************************************** From Ric The point may have originally been to put a few more nails in the Wreck Photo coffin, but Niki now wants to offer his opinion on other imagery. Some forum subscribers been impressed by his work. I am not. We're always happy to have the benefit of expert help, but when serious questions arise about the expertise of a self-proclaimed expert we have an obligation to make inquiries or we run the danger of having the investigation misled by a charlatan. ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:48:13 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: Copyright Margot Still wrote: > ...So I guess you could say copyright applies to where you sit for Ric. I don't know who the good people are that forwarded the previous messages to Margot; but I would appreciate it very much if you would also forward her a kiss and a hug - and tell her if she's ever in Ft. Lauderdale to look me up... ...I at least owe her a dinner for that one... > ...I was not contacted at any time by Ric, Pat or any other yahoo > associated with TIGHAR. Margot, you're too much... Niki ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:48:50 EDT From: Jim Subject: Re: Castaway evidence Alan, Thanks as a new person to the forum I do not know what has transpired in the past. My knowledge started in 1970 in Siapan when I was there on Vacation, Flying for CAL. I was introduced to the Earhart story by local Siapanese in their 60's. They had no other motive that I was aware of but later while flying for Air Mic for 3 years I heard a lot of stories some of which tied in with other stories from Veterans who were there then. Jim ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:55:35 EDT From: Jim Subject: Re: Static wicks Hey Guy's Seems some pilots are talking now. Try waking up at night flying thru heavy T-Storms and seeing a ball of light,( fire) go bouncing down the center of the plane and exit the rear clamshell doors. It does get your attention. Same as hearing small explosions out on the wings as static discharges happen. Upon getting on the ground and inspecting the wing finding small holes, (like machine gun holes only smaller) there. Also makes a believer out of this pilot. Jim ****************************************************************** From Angus > Actually, static charges will dissipate with or without static wicks. Unless the electric field strength is sufficiently high, static will not easily discharge. Static wicks rely on the principle that charge density is high on highly curved surfaces (ie points). This is because the repulsive component (between electrons) of the electric field is less where the surface is highly curved. Consequently the electrons are able to crowd closer together as they attempt to space themselves out over the surface in accordance with trying to reduce their net energy to a minimum, as required by the laws of physics. The localised high electric field resulting then becomes sufficiently great to overcome the ionisation potential of the air (ie the air breaks down and conducts). The result is that the accumulated charge leaks continuously and harmlessly away to the air. Van der Graaf generators are designed for this reason with smooth curved domes of large surface area which minimise the leakage of charge to the atmosphere. So static wicks do more than serve as a sacrificial part of the aeroplane. They prevent the static accumulating to the point where a sudden discharge from very high voltage is a danger. Look at the 5 or 10 million volt discharges that you can get from a Van der Graaf generator charge storage dome and you will appreciate the advantage of avoiding this type of discharge. Another prime advantage is the reduction in receiver noise associated with the corona discharge that can occur through the antenna or arcing across the antenna insulators. St Elmo's fire is this discharge heating the air and causing it to glow. Regards Angus. ************************************************************************** From Daryll #1. Randy Jacobson wrote: >What are static wicks, and what, if anything, is significant about >them? I'm sure you have have seen them Randy. They are limp (half rigid) little ropes (in groups of 3 or 4) hanging off the tips of wings, elevators and rudders on airplanes. Their location and position are areas that have been found to concentrate and collect static charges. Their purpose is to dissipate static charges that build up on airframes as the airplane passes through rain, dust, and any other atmospheric particles. You've probably seen something similar under cars dragging on the pavement. You have experienced it too walking across your carpet in your stocking feet. If you sit down on the couch and don't touch a door handle the charge will slowly dissipate. It is of concern because of the effect it has on radio communications. If a pilot squawked static on the radio, maintenance inspects the wicks and surface bonding and the electrical bonding of the control surfaces. Skeet Gifford and two of our own researches have reported experiencing violent static discharges. Paul Rafford who flew on the Clippers had personally lost a VHF antenna at it's base. He also knew two instances where he knew that the trailing antenna was lost by other Clippers. These violent discharges are small lighting strikes in the air. The same as a lighting bolt to earth or should I say up from the earth. In both cases it is a matter of proximity and potential difference of the charges. Airline passengers wouldn't like to know that they could be flying in a lighting rod. The wicks can handle a certain rate of static build up on the airframe. When the rate of build exceeds the dissipating rate you have "St. Elmo's Fire" or loose parts of the airplane. One of our researchers has said that he recalls putting wicks on old Pan Am DC-3 & 4's in 1943. The planes didn't show any signs of having them before that time. The question is when did static wicks arrive on the scene and start to be used on airplanes? The problem was recognized. Paul Rafford pointed out that the last radio message heard from the Hawaiian Clipper in '38' between Guam and Manilla was to delay the transmission of the weather report from Manilla because the Clipper was experiencing Precipitation Static. Since no wreckage was found floating (although an oil slick was reported) one theory was that the radio was lost at that point. In Musick's case near Pago Pago they did find burned wreckage from an explosive detonation. I can think of three pieces of evidence that indicate the Electra was experiencing static build-up: Part of the Earhart mystery is why were they experiencing radio problems? If the Electra shows no evidence of dealing with static by using wicks, then that could be a clue. The crash & sankers will surely seize upon this, explosive detonation, to argue their theory. #2. It is amusing to read why the Japanese have been discounted in the TIGHAR's forum research. If preponderance of evidence is used as the standard, the scales are tipped to the Japanese side of the issue. I can understand why Alan is so concerned about confusing the membership on this subject. If you can't keep up,...you just can't keep up. The discussions of a search pattern take for granted that there wasn't a plan "B" . This implies that all the people involved in the world flight were idiots and no one ever suggested to the pair,.."hey would if you don't find Howland???" Noonan controlled the flight using Pan Am's cruise control methods. His job was not only to find Howland but not let the airplane get out of fuel range of land, which he did. This implies that you have to have a land mass or several land masses in mind for a Plan "B". You cannot go looking for the land masses and still call it a plan. It's only 120 miles of open water that separates the Gilberts chain from the Marshall chain. What's Cruise Control ?? Let's say the family wants to go to Grand Ma's house (BCP before cell phones). There are no gas stations between your house and until you're right next door to Grand Ma's house. Dad's small car has a small gas tank. There is only enough gas to get to Grand Ma's house if there are no Traffic delays or back-ups or detours. Dad will have to know when he has to turn around and go back home or face the prospect of walking along the road with mom, the baby and three little kids. Daryll ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:00:21 EDT From: Jackie Tharp Subject: Leaving a journal I have been fascinated by the postings about whether or not Amelia may have left a journal someplace on NIKU that we just haven't found yet. During the entire final flight, Amelia was writing the events as they occurred to be included in the book she planned to publish. She had written the same type of book about her Atlantic crossing, and also wrote books about her love of flying and why she did it. So, its my opinion that were she stranded on an island, waiting to be rescued, she would definitely write about her experiences, be it on paper, or clam shells, or whatever she could find. I don't think it matters whether or not she believed they would be rescued, or felt that they were doomed. She was the type of person who would want someone to know what happened to her, and also to describe what it was like. Wasn't some kind of journal found that was thought to be Noonan's? If that survived, its likely that another journal did. Thanx to all for the interesting and thoughtful reasoning shown on the forum Jackie Tharp ************************************************************************ From Ric No. We have found no journal of any kind. ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:01:57 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Verification > Nothing supporting the allegations has ever turned up. I'll leave > it to those who support the Japanese Capture hypothesis to do their own > research. Well, there you are - the fact that nothing was found proves that there was a massive conspiracy... ltm jon ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:10:49 EDT From: Tom Strang Subject: Re: Betty reply Please pass on to Betty my appreciation for her responses to my questions - Betty's response about her fathers newspaper reading habits begets two follow on questions - Was Betty's mother (Olive) an avid reader? - Did Betty's father as a studious reader find interest in the search for Earhart after Betty's alleged AE broadcast reception? Ric, you and Betty are probably wondering where I'm going with this line of questions - In researching documents some understanding comes from how a document was used, in the case of Betty's notebook I'm at odds to understand why it was not used for 30+ years - Understanding the participants might help me validate Betty's notebook - Something is odd about this notebook and its journey. Respectfully, Tom Strang ******************************************************************* From Ric I'll pass your questions along to Betty but I can tell you that Betty made at least one attempt during the war to get somebody to pay attention to her notebook. She was working as a switchboard operator and had occasion to talk to officials in Washington while she was facilitating calls to military installations in the Tampa/St.Pete area. She tried but nobody wanted to listen. Then again in the 1970s, her friend John Hathaway tried to get Fred Goerner interested in the notebook (we've discussed that on the forum) but he too was dismissive. I see nothing odd about any of that. ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:12:52 EDT From: Tom Riggs Subject: Re: Castaway Evidence Ric wrote: >Do you know of any instances where the remains of castaways have been found >along with the sort of communications you describe? There numerous excellent examples such as the well-known crash of the B-24 Liberator "Lady Be Good" in the Libyan desert in 1943 and discovered in 1959 by oil exploration crews. Here is an extract from http://www.qmfound.com/lady_be_good_b-24_bomber_recovery.htm discussing various forms of communication left by the crewmen castaways before they perished in the desert: During the search, items of equipment and several improvised arrowhead markers were found on an old trail leading northwest. The first items found were a pair of rubber flight boots with fleece lining which had the toes pointed in an arrow facing north. These were found 19 miles north of the crash site near the the vehicle tracks left by a WWII convoy. The arrowhead markers were made from parachutes weighed down with stones, presumably to mark the crew's trail in an attempt to lead Air-Sea Rescue to their location. Not far north of the last parachute found were the shifting sands of the vast sand sea of Calanscio. Despite months of searching no remains were found. In the words of the search team leaders, "The search was abandoned when equipment began to deteriorate and fail and the probability of the airmen being completely covered by shifting sand made the dangers of further search impractical." On 11 February 1960 the remains of five crew members were found on a plateau inside the sand sea by British Petroleum employees searching for oil. The five remains were closely grouped in an area littered with canteens, flashlights, pieces of parachutes, flight jackets, and other readily identifiable bits of equipment and personal effect. A diary belonging to Lieutenant Robert Toner was found among the effects. His short poignant diary entries for the eight days from 5 to 12 April 1943, told a remarkable story of the airmen's courage and superhuman efforts to survive. It established the fact that the crew bailed out at 2:00 A.M. on 5 April 1943; that Lieutenant John S. Woravka, the bombardier, failed to join the main team after bailout; that eight of the crew members trekked 85 miles north to the point at which the remains were found; and that Sergeants Shelley, Moore and Ripslinger continued on in search of help while Lieutenants Hatton, Toner, Hays and Sergeants Adams and LaMotte waited, too exhausted to continue. The eight men had only half a canteen of water among them during their crossing of a desert which reached 130 degrees Fahrenheit at midday. Desert survival experts had predicted before the remains were found that the airmen could only have moved 25 or 30 miles on foot. Tom Riggs #2427 ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 14:24:36 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: copyright issue Niki's post regarding these events was pretty interesting. It was also interesting that he ended his letter "LTM, (...who said Phil Class was proud...)" Phillip J. Klass is a retired Senior Aviation Editor of Aviation Week & Space Technology. His raison d'etre seems to be the debunking of UFO reports. He is currently affiliated with, and I believe one of the founders of CSICOP - Committee for the Scientific Investigation of claims of the Paranormal. All the events Niki lists in his post seem to be events that Phillip J. KLASS has written opinions about. Except that Niki has misspelled his name, just as he did "Magic-12". Usually referred to as "Majestic 12", sometimes as "Majic 12". The reference to the typewriter is interesting. It appears that Phillip Klass was the first person to report that the documents were typed on a Smith-Corona. Different web sources indicate different dates, for the manufacture of the machine. The date most referred to is 1963, but they could be typos. Niki wrote: It happened again when I showed that the 1946 "Magic 12" papers were typed on a 1964 Smith-Corona typewriter... According to an article originally published in The St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Monday, October 30, 1989 which is excerpted below: >Klass said a ''highly respected document examiner,'' whom he calls ''P.T.,'' >claims that Friedman and his collaborators were told that the Truman >document was a counterfeit. >''It was typed on a Smith Corona machine not introduced until '62; the >letter was dated Sept. 24, 1947,'' he said. In addition, Niki refers to a photo analysis case with Mr. von Daniken (_Chariots of the Gods_ etc von Daniken?) and debunking the Berlitz Flight 19 writings. UFO stuff? Certainly all stuff that it is documented that Phillip J. Klass was involved with. Could our Niki really be Phillip J. Klass? Or has Niki deluded himself into believing he actually did what Klass is documented to have done (regarding the identification of the typewriter). Or maybe Niki is the mysterious document examiner "P.T." Hmmmmm..... ltm, jon ================================================================ Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:15:01 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: OH Niki! OK Niki, now you've finally gone over the edge. Unless your name is Peter Tytell who is widely referenced as the person who claims that the MJ-12 docs were done on a 60's era Smith Corona Typewriter, you are full of sh*t. I keep up with this forum and have felt a little uneasy with Ric's treatment of you. But unless you can really backup up your most recent claims -- none of this 'can't you guys tell when I'm kidding around bs' -- I vote to block his access to our forum. If I'm wrong about Niki, I'll be up front in the line to apologize. Bob ***************************************************************** From Jim ACTUALLY THE NAME MAJISTIC-12 IS CORRECT AS WELL AS MAJIC-12. THEY ARE A GROUP OF 12 MEN WHO WERE VERY WELL KNOWN AT THE TIME RUNNING THE UFO OPERATION. FEED IN EITHER OF THE ABOVE NAMES IN THE INTERNET AND SEE WHAT YOU GET. JIM I HAVE A SIZABLE COLLECTION AT HOME ON MY MAC. SOME DAY WHEN I CAN RETIRE I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON ONE OF YOUR EXPEDITIONS BUT ALAS I NEED TO EAT AND HAVE SHELTER NOW. *************************************************** From Lawrence: Having no expertise in photo imaging, I thought Niki's work on the wreck photo was fantastic. However, due to his latest claims, the discovery of one of the Avengers of flt. 19 fame, and now the Majestic 12 papers, I believe I have just entered the "Twilight Zone". ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:34:36 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: priorities > I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON ONE OF YOUR EXPEDITIONS BUT ALAS I NEED TO > EAT AND HAVE SHELTER NOW. Jim, you need to get your priorities straight. Alan ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:49:01 EDT From: Niki Subject: Re: OH Niki! ...OH Whati? Bob Lee wrote: > OK Niki, now you've finally gone over the edge. Oh yea?... well I'll bet you that there are those who'll attest that it happened long ago... > Unless your name is > Peter Tytell who is widely referenced as the person who claims that the > MJ-12 docs were done on a 60's era Smith Corona Typewriter, you are full > of sh*t. ...woo ...such language... I may have to cover my eyes so I can't hear any of this... Well, no Bob; my name isn't Peter Tytell ... ...but let's hang-on just a second here, dude: Now what was that you said? "...the person who claims that the MJ-12 docs were done on a 60's era Smith Corona Typewriter..."? No, it's not the "claims" part I'm after; it's the "...60's era Smith Corona Typewriter..." that I'm after... Hmm... doesn't sound too specific if you ask me... kinda like he wasn't quite sure, Bob? Les'see now... if we span the entire decade, he could've meant anything from the classic "Hunt-n-Pec" model - all the way up to one of them Electric Fancy-Shmancy jobs with all them bells and whistles... no? Now let's just put that along side my original statement: "It happened again when I showed that the 1946 "Magic 12" papers were typed on a 1964 Smith-Corona typewriter..." I'm sorry, on a what?... "...a 1964 Smith-Corona typewriter..." Oh... well, did you read that part right there, Bob? It sure looks like a whole different claim to me... ...sorta like narrowing it down to one of them there "Hunt-n-Pec" models; wouldn't you say? (BTW, the missssspelings were put there for a purpose; but to keep it short, let's just consider them all as typos for now and leave it at that...) Anyways, lets move right along... > I keep up with this forum and have felt a little uneasy with Ric's > treatment of you. Thank you, Bob... I really do appreciate that... but it's just a little something between me and Ric. (I can't put my finger on it exactly; but it's sorta like petting a cat from its butt back towards its head...) > But unless you can really backup up your most recent > claims -- none of this 'can't you guys tell when I'm kidding around bs' -- ...that's it ...I ain't lookin' no more... > I vote to block his access to our forum. From this I may NEVER recover... Okay, Bob... let's start out with a good ol' Bronx cheer... But first I must ask Ric if it's okay to post an off-topic reply... (...just so I don't get pounced-upon for doing so...) Yo, Ric... ...I can? ...what? ...you can't wait to hear this, either? Well, Okay... but just remember: you guys asked for it... Back in '89 (...or there abouts...) I wrote a book entitled, "The Shocking Truth About UFO's". (I say "there abouts" 'cause it took over three years to write; and with all the editing and RE-editing and further additions that always seem to come to mind when you THINK you've completed it; you're NEVER really finished...) Within its pages were many a debunked case: The Apollo Moon Mission, The Merc and Gem Missions (footage analysis), The 1981 Billy Meiyer "Pleiadian Beam Ship" (footage analysis), Gold of the Goofs (von Daniken), Majic (BTW, although you will see this as "Majic 12", "MJ-12", "MJ 12", "Majic 12 Papers", "MJ-12 Papers" and lately, "Magic-12 Papers" (for reasons I'll get to later); the correct terminology for this fiasco is simply, "Majic"), there's also How UFO's (and the people that drive them) Relate to the Bible (uh... oh...) and among a few more, "The 1964 Smith-Corona Typewriter". I would have had the "Roswell Incident" in there also; but the "Roswell Morning Star" wouldn't sell me the rights to any of the "crashed saucer" pix they owned... (I guess sales were booming in that town; and they didn't need another "dad'gummit 'bunker" spoilin' their tourist trade...) ..where were we?... ...oh yea, the typewriter.. I finally got a publisher to handle the manuscript; but after a month-or-so went by, I was informed that there was some feedback from some "proofreaders" pertaining not only to ALL the case data; but the typewriter claim itself. (I just had a STRONG suspicion that, at least, one of these "proofreaders" was a UFOnut...) It seems that since Mr. Tytell used a term that spanned the entire decade of the sixties in his descriptive, I wouldn't be able to claim the year of 1964 as the discovery in mine due to copyright infringement! When you guys see dates posted on websites, which pertain to the typewriter year of manufacture; it is purely speculative: this is why nobody appears to agree on a set date. (I'm sure some of you have read patents where the same game is played: "Well the device will do this and this and this... and it'll also do anything that can or can't be remotely related to this; including anything we can't think of at the moment; and it'll do it for the next 75 years to come...) Well I wasn't changing anything... after getting just about the same pitch from other publishers, "It's well-written; but it seems to be just a bit too controversial for our publishers"; I decided to just go and put it out myself. Mistake #1 After contacting Phillip J. Klass about writing a forward to the edition (...which he politely declined due to his "500 year" work load...) I presented him with more fuel to burn the Majic documents with: Among the MANY inconsistencies in the papers themselves, as to type format, military date format (written in modern computer format) and a host of other gems that have been discovered not only by myself, but by other investigators as well; probably the best one of all was where I detected the header on one of the pages as being a "cut and paste" method of print. (It's interesting to note that Bill Moore, one of the three presenting these documents to the world, was previously employed as a "paste-up" artist... the other 2 involved were Jamie Shandera [a low budget "flick" producer] and Stanton Friedman [a self-proclaimed "Nuclear Physicist"]) The clincher was that he wasn't very good at "pasting up" much: the header on this particular page was cockeyed by a quarter of an inch! Another peach I worked on was with the signature of Harry Truman. Even though I've determined (through a very simple spaced-overlay technique) that the signature was real enough; I couldn't accept that ol' Harry had anything to do with this mess... It then became obvious that this may also be a "cut-and-paste" case. To prove this to myself first, I contacted the Truman Library and got copies of anything and everything that man signed... but nothing seemed to perfectly match the Majic signature. Now, I really can't take credit for this; but it was the Librarian - the "Keeper of the Docs" that came up with the solution to this puzzle... His name escapes me at the moment (I'll post it if need be), but he noticed that there was ONE page missing in the sequence from a particular file that I requested. He thought it odd; and then apologized to me for not having the complete sequence. About a month later, I was quite surprised when I made a follow-up call inquiring about the doc and was informed that the Librarian had located the missing page in a completely different sequence; in a completely different file; and in a completely different aisle! After tossing ideas back and forth on how it could possibly have wound up where it did (as he was the one responsible for their care), I thought to ask him if anyone else -perhaps in the recent past - had made a request for anything from the "missing" sequence... I threw some names at him and he opted to look through the registry for any past visitors... To my surprise, 2 names appeared in the registry dated approx. 2 months earlier: Bill Moore and Jamie Shandera. Do I have to even say that this page contained the EXACT signature that was found on the "White House Memo" page of the Majic docs? Apparently, a "get page - photo-copy page - ditch page" scenario was executed. (It was apparently very smart of them to not get pinched on the way out with the real McCoy on their person...) At the time, this story became very widespread as being part of a very elite government plan to stop these Majic docs from being taken seriously by the public; and by spreading "false" rumors about how they came into being, the general public "shouldn't" want to bother with them and learn how their deceiving government had little green men - or should I say, little "Grey" men - in their possession all along... ...wow... since this is really getting long (...thanks if you stayed with me this far...), I'll condense by saying that the copies of the book that I DID manage to get out led to all kinds of fun events: threatened lawsuits; threatened bad reviews; and just plain threatened... At one point, at some UFOnut symposium I attended; an all-out street brawl was narrowly avoided... the Debunkers vs. the UFOnuts... (I guess it woulda been kinda fun...) Needless to say, it was just too much for me to handle; and I never did have it "formally" published... (Hey Mr. Klass... if you're out there, I'm still waiting for that forward...) Obviously, I can't post the phone calls that took place between myself and Mr. Klass about this matter; however, we did "officialize" this incident through the mail; and I will be glad to post the "evidence" of all this - either here; or a scan on the website - if anyone requests that I should do so... I will post the "missing" signature page - as well as the rest of the Majic docs on the website; and I'll also post the work I've done in this matter with annotated copies of all the discrepancies - if anyone is interested...or even accepts any of this.... And Bob, I guarantee you won't find any of the "cut-and-paste" data on any website; unless it was taken from MY book... But I seriously doubt that: any data from my work has been blown-off servers far-and-wide by UFOnuts moons ago; along with anything Mr. Klass has presented on this subject... (At that very same symposium, I had the utmost honor of being compared with Mr. Klass; when one REALLY top UFOnut [who will remain nameless; I'm not going to bad-mouth anyone] pointed to me after I gave a short talk on these very papers; and exclaimed [pertaining to myself and Mr. Klass], "Well, what do you expect? ...birds of a feather..." I immediately thanked him and expressed how honored I was that someone of his caliber should make such a comparison... [...I really don't have any idea why; but this seemed to be the precise moment when the brawl almost broke-out...]) ...the book? Oh, I still gots it... Of course, I've made MORE additions; and I'm redoing the format in the 'pute again... So I figure it'll be ready in, oh... about another 3 years... > If I'm wrong about Niki, I'll be up front in the line to apologize. > Bob Nonsense, Bob... no apology necessary. ************************************************************************* > From Lawrence: > Having no expertise in photo imaging, I thought Niki's work on the wreck > photo was fantastic. However, due to his latest claims, the discovery of one of > the Avengers of flt. 19 fame, and now the Majestic 12 papers, I believe I have > just entered the "Twilight Zone". C'mon, Lawrence... don't give up on me just yet (...wait'll I pull something REALLY off the wall...) You know what hurts more than anything, though?... It's not the name calling (although after dealing with the kind of people I've dealt with for the past 20 some-odd years or so, being called a "charlatan" does cut deep; and I think Ric knows it...); but I can deal with that: I just consider the source... ...and it's not even the nasty comments that are being made... What really hurts the most is that you guys: researchers - who demand the extraction of every single bit of data from the format of the way something is written, or logged, say, in a radio log; can skip right over what I've actually stated; and then construct a concept based on some outside data and go as far as to have my head on a stick... At no time, did I state - anywhere - that I was the "first" one to make the typewriter discovery; and present it to the world... At no time, did I state - anywhere - that I was the "only" one to make the typewriter discovery; and present it to the world... I merely said that I "showed" that those docs were typed on a 1964 typewriter. ...not on a '65, or a '69, or one that didn't come on the scene until after '62... ...but as a specific 1964 model. I just don't understand it... you guys would NEVER conduct research in such a careless manner in the AE incident; so why this?... I'll explain about "Flight 19" in another post. Niki ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:52:43 EDT From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: copyright issue Phillip J. Klass taught at Penn State, around 1964-1965. He can carry on quite a conversation about why people want to believe weird things. Phil Klass wrote science fiction under the pen name William Tenn. Phillip J. Klass is the UFO debunker. They are not the same person. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR #2263 ************************************************************************ From Jon Watson Hi Ric, Marginally on-topic, one of the Flight 19 avengers may have been located by a guy named Jon Myhre during the search for Challenger debris. According to one of the web sources, video footage of the wreck that was seen shows the last three digits of an identifying number on the left wingtip - 209. The article says that Navy records only show three Avengers with service numbers ending in 209, one of which was the flight leader of Flt 19. Neither of the other two was lost at sea. So maybe it is, and maybe it's not, but regardless, it's still not Niki... ltm jon (but not Myhre) ************************************************************************** From Suzanne: Is the forum is going overboard (and way off-topic) in the "making Niki prove himself" thread? Possibly, when Niki said he "positively identified" Flight 19, worked on a "photo analysis case" of Erich von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods", and "showed that" the MJ-12 papers were fraudulent, he was simply stating that he took the work of other people, and then used his photographic techniques to "positively identify" (TO HIMSELF) that the work was done correctly by others. It's a much simpler explanation. Suzanne ************************************************************************ From Chris in Petaluma, Ca. I just rejoined the forum 2 days ago after 7 months absence. Man, Ric they sure seem to come out of the woodwork! Niki found one of the flight 19 planes? Maybe he knows where AE's plane is? Does Carol Dow ring a bell? At least I'm being entertained. Chris ********************************************************************** From Rich Young Majestic, Majic, and Magic have all been used to refer to these forged documents, and here is the reason: much of the verbiage and format of the documents is, if not copied, at least based on such documents that have been released concerning the United States signals intercept and code-breaking efforts in W.W. II and the pre-war years. In the days before a C.I.A. and N.S.A., radio intercepts and attempts at code breaking, and related activities, (telegram, phone, and mail intercept, human intelligence, attempted code book photocopying, etc), were variously conducted by the Office of Naval Intelligence, Army Signal Corps, the F.B.I., the State Department, possibly the Treasury Dept. (via the Coast Guard), Postal Inspectors, the Federal Communications Commission, the British, Chinese, and Dutch governments, and to a lesser extent, other entities. To prevent redundant effort, and more importantly, to prevent parallel efforts from compromising each other, these efforts and the products thereof were directed at the highest level of government and extremely limited in distribution. This effort and the products of it were referred to as "Magic", a blanket term used to refer to anything related to enemy communications and code intelligence, and an inside joke as well to those in the know. (Question: "How did we know the Japanese were going to attack Midway?" Answer: "Magic!") This information was held at a level above secret for a number of reasons: 1. In 1932 Congress passed legislation strengthening an existing prohibition on "intercepting or interfering" with the communications of foreign governments, (hard to believe, I know....) - technically, everyone involved in this effort before Dec. 7, 1941 was committing a felony. That's how the current myth that we were only intercepting part of the diplomatic ("Purple") code before the war got started - as numerous documents show, we were intercepting and at least capable of decoding "5 number" naval ciphers well before that. 2. The information was closely held because the Axis continued to use variations of the same codes for the duration of the war - any revelation that those codes were compromised would have resulted in their immediate replacement with something else, costing us information and lives. 3. There would be political ramifications if this information got out - if the voting public knew that Roosevelt had the same intelligence capability that made Midway and Yamamoto's shootdown possible in April of 1941, he would be lucky to escape impeachment, much less be re-elected to an unprecedented fourth term. What does this have to do with A.E., you ask? Well, in the summer of 1937, part of the long-range radio direction finding net was already installed and operating - I would be surprised if they DIDN'T attempt to plot A.E.'s flight, if just for practice. (This is the same net that tracked the Pearl Harbor attack force from its assemblage in the Kuriles through its journey along the 40th latitude toward Hawaii.) There should have been operating stations at this time in Hawaii and Seattle, and probably in the Philippines and Dutch Harbor. They should have been able to pinpoint her location if she did make any "post-loss" transmission - with their state-of-the-art equipment and directional antennas, they would have heard her if at all possible, given favorable propagation conditions. Unfortunately, much of the information from this time remains classified and unreleased, but may in fact be the basis for the contemporary judgment in some quarters (the "psychic" - play on "Magic"?) that she headed for the Phoenix Island group. ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:10:55 EDT From: Rick Boardman Subject: Moving on... I'm sorry to be so negative, but this is taking the phrase "off topic" into a ew dimension. I suspect "Niki" is loving every minute. It has been ascinating to study all the postings, but at the point where I'm reading about mystery identities of forum writers, Flight 19, UFO research, the dreaded von Daniken stuff, and a typewriter, I feel personally that enough is enough. The body of opinion seems to be that we are NOT LOOKING AT AN ELECTRA. Fine, then drop the subject, it's thrashed to death. If we cannot know the true identity of " NIKI", then treat all postings from he/she/it as suspect, and LET'S MOVE ON. Ric, you and all of the TIGHAR core seem to have most areas covered. Are there any specific pieces of help that we watchers can help you with, concerning the search for EA and FN? We are a global bunch, I'm in England. Others are presumably dotted around the world. Can't you put us to work? Then we'll be so busy, we won't waste time reading any "off topic" or meandering thought processes.... LTM (who believes in getting to the point). Rick Boardman *********************************************************************** From Ric I've already heard privately from several forum subscribers who feel that Niki has nothing to offer this forum. My gut feeling is that we should let him explain his Flight 19 claim and then impose the "substantive posting rule" (no postings that are not on-topic and offer substantive input). We've seen guys like this before. What they really want is a stage to dance on. The forum is a great research tool. When our detailed investigations turn up a need for general information on a subject we're not familiar with, somebody on the forum can usually fill us in. Right now there is a lot of detailed investigation being done and about to be done by TIGHAR field teams. That work will undoubtedly raise questions that the forum will be able to help with. ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:15:33 EDT From: Denise Subject: Love To Hubby! Niels says: "If you know you're not going to be rescued, wouldn't you want at least to express your anger/despair or leave a 'note' behind you for your loved ones in the form of a message you'd hope someone will end up finding?" I've always considered the "G" picked out in coral to be that very thing! LTH Denise ****************************************************************** From Ric So....if you were marooned on a desert island and wanted to be sure that your husband knew that the bones you hoped would someday be found were yours you'd write the first letter of his first name on the ground. ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:18:01 EDT From: Pat Thrasher Subject: Accessing the Forum Archives Last Friday the Earhart Forum was frozen for a brief time because the Forum Archives had exceeded the allocated disk space. I had to go clear out February and March to free the list. That means that March is temporarily unavailable, as I haven't gotten it up on the TIGHAR website yet. I am hoping to have it done by the middle of next week, but it's a bit of a slog as youse guys TALK TOO MUCH!!! As in, there were something like 300 pages in February alone. But this a good opportunity to remind folks of how to access the list archives. For all (or almost all) postings all the way back to the beginning, the archives are on the TIGHAR website at: http://www.tighar.org/forum/Forum_Archives/archiveindex.html Just click on the month you want. You can either download the text files and read them with any text editor or word processor, or you can read them on line. You can also read Forum Highlights, a selection of the best posts in a given time period, by going to: http://www.tighar.org/forum/ArchivedHighlights.html and selecting a time period. These are web pages, not downloads. For recent posts, an archive is maintained on the server that hosts the Earhart Forum. Send and email to LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM with the message Index Earhartforum You will receive back two emails: one acknowledging your request, and the other with a message that looks like this: * * Archive files for the EARHARTFORUM list at HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM * (weekly logs) * * filename filetype GET PUT size (bytes) date time * -------- -------- --- --- ------------ ---------- -------- EARHARTFORUM LOG0304A LOG OWN 89,310 2003-04-07 16:44:09 EARHARTFORUM LOG0304B LOG OWN 72,013 2003-04-14 15:35:28 EARHARTFORUM LOG0304C LOG OWN 48,438 2003-04-21 12:46:43 ... etc. Here's how to decipher this: LOG log of the forum 03 year 04 month A week Ignore LOGOWN, not relevant 89,310 size of file in bytes 2003-04-07 last entry to file 16:44:09 time of last entry to file Decide which week(s) you want, and send another email to LISTSERV@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM with the message: GET EARHARTFORUM LOG0304A GET EARHARTFORUM LOG0304B and so on. You can put all requests in one email. You'll get an acknowledgement of each request, and a separate email with either the log in the message, or, if it's too long for your email server, an attached text file containing the log. Any problems, let me know. Pat Thrasher tighar@aol.com =============================================================== Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:20:14 EDT From: Niki Subject: Niki to Jon Jon Watson wrote: > Could our Niki really be Phillip J. Klass? No... I'm not Phillip J, Klass... > Or has Niki deluded himself into believing he actually did what Klass is > documented to > have done (regarding the identification of the typewriter). Although I may be guilty of being "delusional" now and then, I don't believe I am this time... > Or maybe Niki is the mysterious document examiner "P.T." Hmmmmm..... ...and no, I'm not "P.T" But I just gotta be honest with you, Jon... After reading your magnificent analogy, I almost wished I was... What a great piece of research! TIGHAR should be proud to have someone who can tie events together as you've done... LTM, (who said that ANYONE would be proud) Niki ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:22:10 EDT From: Mark R. Subject: Niki the Niki We still have our little band of " merry pranksters " up here in the woods of Schenectady that fly planes, chase local mysteries, cruise the Saratoga Battlefield in hopes of finding a Hessian skull for our collection and are supporters of TIGHAR. We all feel that Niki has a place in the grand scheme. His web business about the crash photo was excellent though it didn't bring closure to the question at hand. His latest retort to being challenged on the forum was verbose, harmless and if Ric decided to let it aboard, apparently not completely out of line. Roswell is Roswell, the aircraft of Flight 19 are somewhere as are the remaining parts of AE's aircraft. The search for Challenger wreckage, after all, did find a submerged Grumman TBM off of Florida, albeit not one of Flight 19's. None of us has a take on the typewriter commentary - we're still working on the Lindbergh (sp? ) ransom notes. Its been a slow year. What can I say? LTM, MER ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 13:21:41 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Bravo, Mr. Boardman Rick Boardman said: "It has been fascinating to study all the postings, but . . . . I feel personally that enough is enough. The body of opinion seems to be that we are NOT LOOKING AT AN ELECTRA. Fine, then drop the subject, it's thrashed to death." Well spoken, sir. Ric, you're going to get a higher seat in Heaven for putting up with Niki and his ilk, assuming of course the TIGHAR chaplain approves. Marty? LTM, a stranger to heavenly topics Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *********************************************************************** From Ric Father Marty is in Fiji at the moment (and on Thursday will be on his way to Auckland, NZ to flog the WPHC archives) but he would probably hold out little hope for anything but a hotseat for an apostate Presbyterian. ================================================================ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 13:23:40 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Re: OH Niki! ...OH Whati? Before we dig any further in this... I happen to own a 60s era Smith Corona typewriter but I had nothing to do with that MJ-12 thing... LTM ****************************************************************** From Ric New chapter for Niki's book - "The Belgian Connection". ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:21:23 EDT From: Pat Gaston Subject: "Conspiracy" crowd I do wish Ric and the Forum would quit trying to tar all Marshalls/Saipan theorists with the "massive conspiracy" brush. It does not take a conspiracy -- massive or otherwise --to get Our Heroes to the Marshalls; just a series of improbable and highly-speculative events. One could say the same about the Niku Hypothesis if one were so inclined. In its simplest form, the Marshalls theory starts with the assumption that FN missed Howland by some 100-200 miles to the north. Is this so different from TIGHAR's belief that he missed Howland by 80-200 miles to the south? At that point, so the theory goes, FN either (a)homed in on a radio signal from Jaluit; or (b) reversed course and headed back for the Gilberts. Option "a" has them running out of gas and ditching off Mili Atoll; option "b" has them ditching somewhere between the Marshalls and the Gilberts, whereupon they are picked up by some sort of Japanese vessel and delivered unto the local authorities. There are sundry variations on these two basic themes. Obviously the Marshalls/Saipan theory is fraught with problems and inconsistencies. For example, the crew could not have landed on Mili AND been picked up in mid-ocean. AE could not have died of dysentery AND been executed. Either, or neither, is true. But the point is that neither version requires a "conspiracy" --just a navigational error, a turn to the north or west sted south, and maybe 5 hours of fuel sted 4. Why would the Japanese hold on to AE for months or years instead of currying American goodwill be returning her promptly? The simplest explanation, it seems to me, is that AE may have been treated to the "hospitality" traditionally shown female captives by the imperial Japanese forces (see: Rape of Nanking) before they realized who they had. After which, release was no longer an option. Imagine >that< press conference! Rank speculation? Sure. Ranker than AE leaving the vicinity of the most visible landmark on Niku and hiking 3-4 miles around Ameriki, wading two tidal passages while lugging a sextant box full of provisions, to set up camp at the Seven Site? I'll leave it up to you. Yes, there is a "massive conspiracy" school but those folks are in a Klaas by themselves. In my experience the vast majority of Marshalls/Saipan theorists are perfectly rational, non-drooling types who believe in their hearts, just as TIGHAR does, that AE survived 7/2/37. Unfortunately they lack a Guiding Spirit with Ric's dynamism and (more to the point) fundraising skills. I cannot agree with them, but labeling all as "conspiracy theorists" is unfair and insulting. Okay, back to Niki-bashing. Pat Gaston ************************************************************************* From Ric It will come as no surprise that I beg to differ. First we need to decide what we mean by a "conspiracy". Any time two or more people agree (conspire) to do something they're engaging in a conspiracy, but normally the term is used to refer to an agreement to engage in some secret activity. Earhart and Noonan could have reached the Marshalls without intending to. Nothing conspiratorial about that. However, the Marshalls were densely populated. For knowledge of their presence there to not reach the outside world requires a conspiracy by somebody. Such is not the case with the Niku Hypothesis. >AE may have been treated to >the "hospitality" traditionally shown female captives >by the imperial Japanese forces Is that an example of the perfectly rational, non-drooling type of thinking you mention? ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:23:58 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Moving on... Rick Boardman wrote: > I'm sorry to be so negative, but this is taking the phrase "off topic" into a > new dimension. Yeah. > I suspect "Niki" is loving every minute. No doubt. > >Ric wrote: > > I've already heard privately from several forum subscribers who feel that > Niki has nothing to offer this forum. My gut feeling is that we should let him > explain his Flight 19 claim and then impose the "substantive posting rule" (no > postings that are not on-topic and offer substantive input). We've seen guys > like this before. What they really want is a stage to dance on. Or somebody to do their research for them... > The forum is a great research tool. When our detailed investigations turn up > a need for general information on a subject we're not familiar with, somebody > on the forum can usually fill us in. Right now there is a lot of detailed > investigation being done and about to be done by TIGHAR field teams. That > work will undoubtedly raise questions that the forum will be able to help with. It is interesting, though, to watch Niki make blanket statements, then when challenged moon-walk off into obfuscation. I too am interested in the Flight 19 claim, and can hardly wait to see that develop. It does seem peculiar though, Niki couldn't get his book published, but fed his stuff to Phillip Klass who, even though he didn't have ten minutes to write a foreword, picked it all up and ran with it successfully. So Niki, how's Margot supposed to look you up when she gets to Ft. Lauderdale? The up-side is, the Forum is pretty slow right now anyway while we're waiting for the other things to come to fruition, so as long as it doesn't take TOO much of your time, Ric, it's at least amusing. ltm jon ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:48:49 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Travel Question Ric, This may be unanswerable and is simply a question for my own interest so perhaps it's not appropriate for the board or maybe at all. With Marty down in the South Pacific, how are the finances of his exploration handled. I know he's a Jesuit and was able to secure some things on his own, but I was just wondering about the actual process that TIGHAR employs for supporting field work. I know some members (THANKS!!) manage to not only donate their time, but also share heavily in their own travel and misc expenses. No strings attached with this question, just wanted to know how TIGHAR functions. Bob ***************************************************************** From Ric I'm happy to answer your question. We've wanted to get researchers back on the ground in Fiji ever since the 1997 trip by Tom King, Kris Tague and Barb Norris made a good start at tracking down the bones. Last year Marty stepped forward to say that he could get some time off this summer and would like to tackle the job. He also said that he might be able to room at the local diocese, thus saving on living expenses. We ran the numbers and came up with a proposed budget of $5,000 that would put him in Suva for a month or perhaps a little longer. The money was raised from contributions large and small from the TIGHAR membership. Then TIGHAR member Roger Kelley stepped forward and offered to accompany Marty at his own expense. They ended up sharing a suite in Suva at a good price, so Marty did not have to use his church connections after all. That pattern is very typical of the way TIGHAR has historically funded field work - a combination of general fundraising, special contributions, and self-funded participation. Once in a while we're able to sell exclusive media rights to an expedition, and that can be a big help, but for the most part we "get by with a little help from our friends". LTM, Ric ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:02:32 EDT From: Marty Subject: Re: Bravo, Mr. Boardman Ric wrote: >Father Marty is in Fiji at the moment (and on Thursday will be on his way to >Auckland, NZ to flog the WPHC archives) but he would probably hold out little >hope for anything but a hotseat for an apostate Presbyterian. This is our last morning in Fiji--last visit to my internet home-away-from home for the last three and a half weeks. What I think about apostate Presbyterians is irrelevant to the Forum and, more importantly, to the supreme being. G-d has not asked any help from me in the judgment department, other than to work on some of my own character defects. ;o) LTM. Marty #2359, if I remember correctly. ********************************************** From Ric What a guy. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:07:41 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: OH Niki! ...OH Whati? Is this character really adding anything of usefulness to the Forum? If not let's just ignore him! Ted Campbell ************************************************************ From Alan > Back in '89 (...or there abouts...) I wrote a book entitled, "The Shocking > Truth About UFO's". I just saw on the news that Queen Nefertiti's mummy has been found. Was that another great feat by Niki? Should we ask Niki not to smoke funny cigarettes while posting? Alan *************************************************************** From Ric If Niki has something interesting or helpful to say I'll be happy to post it. ================================================================ Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:14:47 EDT From: Denise Subject: BEWARE OF ISLANDERS BEARING STORIES!!! Jim says: "I was introduced to the Earhart story by local Siapanese in their 60's." Jim, I have to say: beware of stories from locals, especially those in their 60s. and especially when those locals are Pacific Islanders. Give any Islander a famous person who had even the vaguest possibility of once being in their midst, let a bit of time pass and, VOILA!!, wonderful stories emerge. I suspect, as a people with such a long story-telling oral cultural tradition, they can't help themselves. Example: recently I was in NZ, in the area where the Rutherford family once lived (you remember Rutherford? The guy who first split the atom?) Visiting at the local pub, I chatted with a group of old Maori locals - yes, they were in their 60s - and was told wonderful and very funny stories about Rutherford growing up on the family farm down the road, how he'd been in the same class at school with these very guys, what he was like as a boy, how much beer he could consume in a single night in this very pub, how he used to spend his uni-holidays as part of these guys' gang of itinerant flax-splitters, and how he figured out how to split the atom by watching these very Maoris split flax. Intrigued, I immediately bought Rutherford's biography. Naturally, not a single fact matched what I'd been told. Rutherford lived 50 years before the dates they were mentioning, was sent to school in England at 7 years of age, and only once came home in all that time - when he was 17 and wanted to propose to the girl next door - and had never ever joined any Maoris in a flax-splitting gang, itinerant or otherwise. Nonetheless, all these "locals in their 60s" stories were very amusing and I wouldn't have missed them for quids. But I think that session taught me an important lesson: no one should ever take aging Islander's stories as anything more than a bit of light entertainment. LTM (who always enjoyed a bit of light entertainment) Denise ********************************************************************** From Ric True enough, but sometimes islanders' stories turn out to be true (for example, the Niku legends about bones being found) and Lord knows we've heard plenty of bogus tales from our fellow Europeans. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:16:58 EDT From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Love To Hubby! Ric: Maybe you would, maybe you wouldn't - but whether it is a G or some other "letter" or cipher, how about this: You want to leave a "message" or directions or whatever. You can't cut down a tree. A pile of clam shells may seem just a pile of clam shells, but a letter or cipher filled out in the dirt is like and X on a map. Maybe there are more letters and you just haven't seen them yet, like the "supposed" (I don't know one way or another) WWII German supplies located at the letters E.G.Y.P.T. on a map showing where war materiel was buried prior to the war by "archeologists". Anyway, maybe it is just an anomaly, maybe it is the letter G and maybe, if you dig in that spot, you'll reach China. Or find a sextant, or Fred Noonan's bones. Maybe it is a symbol from the wife of the native magistrate marking the spot where she encountered the "spirit" and it was put there to placate the spirit or make a memorial. Maybe some kid was playing around or space aliens or the Japanese. Dig there and see what you find. If you find nothing, so be it. If you find a $20.00 bill, its mine, I lost it there, I'm sure. Good luck with the search. LTM, Dave Bush ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:21:54 EDT From: Lawrence Subject: Re: Travel Question Just a quick question. I seem to remember that Dr. King and crew ran into a little hostility with Fijian officials regarding the bones. Is Marty and crew receiving the same welcome? **************************************************************** From Ric Who could possibly be hostile to Marty? Seriously....Marty and Roger have enjoyed excellent cooperation from everyone. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:05:07 EDT From: David Katz Subject: Re: Love To Hubby! Dave Bush wrote: >Maybe there are more letters and you just haven't seen them yet, like the >'supposed'... WWII German supplies located at the letters E.G.Y.P.T. on a map >showing where war materiel was buried prior to the war by 'archeologists.' This is a significant part of the wonderful 1943 Billy Wilder war film "Five Graves to Cairo" starring Franchot Tone, Anne Baxter, Akim Tamiroff and Erich von Stroheim as Field Marshall Rommel (who had purportedly pretended to be an "archeologist" who secretly buried supplies before the war in the five "graves" in the desert at sites corresponding to the letters "EGYPT" on a map). There was never any truth to this piece of fiction; it was adapted from a stage play. The story has a nice ring to it, and some people even refer to it as fact, but no such thing ever occurred in real life. David Katz ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:15:40 EDT From: Jim Preston Subject: Re: BEWARE OF ISLANDERS BEARING STORIES!!! Ric wrote: >Lord knows we've heard plenty of bogus tales from >our fellow Europeans. Amen to that, especially the french. So as not to tie up the Forum I can be E-mailed at macmnii@yahoo.com Jim Preston ************************************************************ From Ric I think you may have misunderstood my meaning. Among the Pacific islanders you and I are "Europeans". It's an ethnic description and a fairly accurate one. We try our best to remain apolitical on this forum (but I'll admit it ain't easy). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:26:19 EDT From: Dave Bush Subject: Re: Love To Hubby! RE: E.G.Y.P.T. Glad to see that cleared up. I remember the movie and sometimes movies actually use real events as the basis for movies. I had never heard anything else regarding it, but thought it an intriguing idea, but felt it unlikely to be true. Its nice to know the real story. Thanks Mr. Katz! LTM, Dave Bush ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:28:27 EDT From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Travel Question Ric wrote: >Who could possibly be hostile to Marty? Seriously....Marty and Roger have >enjoyed excellent cooperation from everyone. True. My own opinion is that people don't want to talk to us because they know that they can't answer our questions, not because they're hiding anything. "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by garden-variety ignorance" (or something like that). LTM. Marty #2359 (now in Auckland at St. Pat's cathedral) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:33:33 EDT From: Anthony Subject: Ernest Rutherford I quite agree with Denise that locals would spin extraordinary stories about how they knew somebody who became famous, and how they had close connections with them. A cartoon in the English Journal Punch shows a credulous young man, listening to an old sea dog sitting on a barrel. The old sea dog says, "Lord Nelson! Why bless me, of course I knew him!" "Oftens the time he pop in to say hello and would give me plug of backy for my pipe, and a shilling for my troubles." But to return to Ernest Rutherford, I must correct the facts surrounding his life. He was born in 1871, the 30th of August. He did not leave New Zealand until the evening of Thursday the first of August 1895, on a ship going to England. He was at that time 23 years old. He did not return to New Zealand until the eighth of May 1900, arriving at Auckland, to then travel the country to see his family and marry his wife to be. This is quoted from a recent book on Rutherford's life, by a physicist, Dr John Campbell at Canterbury University Christchurch, New Zealand where Rutherford was a student. Anthony Lealand New Zealand ********************************************************************** From Ric This "Celebrity Syndrome" is endemic to the Earhart story. Everyone who crossed paths with the woman seems to have a story about how they were her close friend and confidant. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:35:02 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: Off-topic excursion David Katz is right. It's a bad idea to believe films, especially when they are made in Hollywood. They are made to make money and producers don't mind distorting history from time to time for the sake of a good story. The Germans never had any hidden stores in the Egyptian desert. The North African campaign was mainly fought in the Libyan desert anyway, where the Italians were stopped by the Brits at Tobruk. The Germans came to their rescue but their "Afrika Korps" had to rely on supplies from Germany: thousands of miles across the Dolomite mountains by rail(only the Brenner Pass could be used to cross the mountain range) and through Italy to Italian ports, then across the Mediterranean by ship, next through the Sahara desert using on a single road to El Alamein. There the Germans were defeated for lack of tanks, fuel and ammunition. The German supply route was under constant attack by the British: from the Royal Navy while crossing the sea, from the Royal Air Force when they tried crossing by air, from the Royal Air Force again when traveling through the Libyan desert on the single road. The Italians and the Germans failed to reach the Suez Canal and the Middle East for lack of supplies because Montgomery's Brits (and Australians) controlled their supply route. The only "graves" (on which no film was ever made to my knowledge) were secret airfields the Brits built behind German lines in the desert using PSP on the soft desert sand, operating aircraft equipped with special filters to keep the sand out of their engines. That's the secret why they succeeded in attacking the German supply convoys continuously until the Germans fell back on Tunis and surrendered. LTM (who remembers troops were fighting in shorts in those days) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:36:46 EDT From: Betty Brown, via Ric Subject: Betty's answer For Tom Strang.....I would like to know what you meant by " something is odd about this note book, and its journey " Then I will answer your question OK? Betty ****************************************** From Ric (uh oh) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:44:28 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Forum advice A word of advice about forum postings - If you choose to use a new subject line please try not to pick something that might be confused with spam to lessen the danger that I'll inadvertently delete it. Not that many of you mention Viagra or breast enlargement anyway, but a subject line like "You won't BELIEVE this!" is probably a poor choice. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:45:12 EDT From: David Katz Subject: Re: Love To Hubby! Five Graves to Cairo is one of my favorite movies of the WWII era. Great writing, direction, performances, etc. It's a shame that it's rarely shown on television nowadays. I, too, loved the premise, but it was, alas, fiction. David Katz ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:48:08 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Even further off-topic I know this is WAY off topic but its a slow day and Ric seems to be in good humour lately, so I'll give it a shot . . . . The E.G.Y.P.T. thread reminds me of a Bob Newhart routine years ago where he was a World War II French Army officer trying to psych up his troops for a counterattack on the invading German army. He apologizes first of all for not having up to date maps of the battle area but assures his men they have found a weak spot in the German lines, "Right about here, above the "A" in Gaul." LTM, who is often psyched up Dennis McGee #0149EC ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:21:14 EDT From: Pat Gaston Subject: "Conspiracy" theorists Ric wrote: >Earhart and Noonan could have reached the Marshalls without intending to. >Nothing conspiratorial about that. However, the Marshalls were densely >populated. For knowledge of their presence there to not reach the outside >world requires a conspiracy by somebody. Such is not the case with the Niku >Hypothesis. Point taken, but if we are going to define "conspiracy" to include post-loss coverups then that changes the linguistic landscape. For example, TIGHAR has all but accused Thompson and his superiors of conspiring to cover up the Itasca's alleged missteps. But in the larger Earhart community, the term "conspiracy theorist" has always been shorthand for those who believe in a >pre-loss< conspiracy, e.g., a secret spy mission, secret modifications to the Electra, false position reports, multiple planes and pilots, etc. I completely agree that a conspiracy of that magnitude simply could not withstand the test of time. >Is that an example of the perfectly rational, non-drooling type of thinking >you mention?" I think so. I was using the term "drooling" to connote mental deficiency, not sexual arousal. In many discussions with Marshalls proponents, it's the only plausible reason I have been able to come up with for why the Japs, IF they were holding AE and FN, would not simply have repatriated them. In 1937 the Japanese were badly in need of international goodwill (and American raw materials). I can't envision why they would pass up such an incredible PR opportunity, unless for some reason release was no longer an option. Physical mistreatment seemed the easiest explanation. Pat Gaston ************************************************************************* From Ric >if we are going to define "conspiracy" to include post-loss >coverups then that changes the linguistic landscape. Not at all. Vince Loomis, one of the more prominent Japanese Capture proponents who, with the help of Jeff Ethel, wrote "Amelia Earhart - The Final Story" (Random House, 1985) alleged no pre-loss conspiracy. AE blundered into the Marshalls by mistake and was mistaken for a spy and abused accordingly. The "innocent Amelia" variation on the Japanese Capture theme has long had a following among those who can't accept the idea that pacifist, commercially-focused AE would ever consent to espionage, but can't put aside the feeling that all those eyewitnesses must be telling the truth. >TIGHAR has all but accused Thompson and his superiors of conspiring to >cover up the Itasca's alleged missteps. That the Coast Guard did not tell it like it was is beyond question but, for what it's worth, it now looks to me like the fault lies almost entirely with Thompson. His superiors are only guilty of not checking the veracity of his report. One guy covering his butt is not a conspiracy. >[Sexual assault by Imperial Japanese forces is] the only plausible reason >I have been able to come up with for why the Japs, IF they were holding AE >and FN, would not simply have repatriated them. That some Japanese soldiers behaved abominably (as in the "Rape of Nanking") is not in doubt, but I know of no evidence to suggest that there were any Japanese soldiers in the Marshals in 1937. The Japanese administration of the Marshalls mandate was civilian (under the "Nanyo Cho" or South Seas Company), not military. No army units, no warships, and no reason to suppose that a female foreign celebrity who ended up there would be sexually assaulted unless you buy into the racist assumptions about "Japs" that are, I suspect, at the heart of all of the Japanese Capture theories. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:28:35 EDT From: Daryll Subject: Who were the conspirators ?? Ric wrote: >"....Earhart and Noonan could have reached the Marshalls without >intending to. Nothing conspiratorial about that. However, the Marshalls >were densely populated. For knowledge of their presence there to not >reach the outside world requires a conspiracy by somebody. Such is not >the case with the Niku Hypothesis.....">> The conspiracy seems to have started with the Japanese. Do you agree that the Japanese could have been conspiratorial with regard to their own best interests? The U.S. could have been considered conspiratorial in the same vane by with holding from the public what they only suspected at the time. You seem to view the Marshall Islands as an open society in 1937. I had to modify my view of the Japanese Mandate situation when it was pointed out to me that when the Japanese with drew from the League of Nations in '34' or '35' that the term, Mandates, was changed to the Japanese Imperial Islands. This name change reflected a psychological shift in how the Japanese administered the Mandates. The Japanese now felt that they could restrict travel and information in their own Imperial Islands. In his note (May '38') to FDR, Astor wanted to take the Nourmahal into Jaluit (late '37' / early '38') and was denied permission by the Japanese. How would you suppose that the Marshallese could get the word out about AE? Telephone, radio, tell the local UPI reporter so he could forward the story to Hawaii? There were no telephones and the Japanese owned the radios. The Marshallese did get the word out as soon as they could. Lt. Bauer was the first to take a report. That was in 1944 when the U.S. forces arrived, seven years after the fact. ------New York Daily News - March 22, 1944 (p.45) March 4 (delayed - AP) "AMELIA TAKEN TO JAPAN, SAYS NATIVE' by Eugene Burns : Lieut. Eugene T. Bogan, 325 E. 72nd St., New York City related the story. Elieu, the 30-year-old native limited himself to these statements and stuck to them. "A Jap trader named Ajima three and a half years ago on Rita Island told me that an American woman pilot came down between Jaluit and Ailinglapalap Atolls and that she was picked up by a Japanese fishing boat and the trader Ajima heard that she was taken to Japan!" The story was first told to Lieut. (j.g.) William J. Bauer, Lone Pine , Calif.--------- Before the lawyers on the forum jump up and object to hearsay evidence, this isn't a trial. History is often reconstructed by word of mouth. Just to clarify the time line. Ajima told Elieu this very near Dec. 1941. I would guess that the outbreak of hostilities freed Ajima from any secrecy he felt obligated to. The US suspected (Sec. of the Navy Swanson for one) that AE&FN went down in the Marshalls in '37' . The suspicions were based on their own radio intercepts and direction finding of "carrier waves" and what the British could have intercepted and passed along. That kind of intelligence TODAY would be enough to send the Navy into the Marshalls, but NOT in 1937. Daryll ********************************************************************** From Ric >That kind of intelligence TODAY would be enough to send the Navy into >the Marshalls. I agree. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:22:09 EDT From: Karen Hoy Subject: Noonan's origins I am intrigued by the confusion surrounding Fred Noonan's origins, i.e born in Chicago, Illinois or Norwich, England. Norwich is an ironic choice considering the ship on Niku, Noonan himself said Chicago, and both are disputed. What is the evidence either way? *********************************************************************** From Ric We really need to update that part of the website. There is no confusion. Fred was born in Chicago on April 4, 1893 and was baptized Frederick Joseph Noonan at the St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church on April 23rd. The 8th Edition of our Earhart Project book has an excellent biographical chapter on Noonan by Jerry Hamilton (TIGHAR 2128). ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:26:33 EDT From: Ron Reuther Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd You say the Marsall Islands were densely populated (in 1937). In War Plan Orange by Edward S. Miller, 1991 published by the Naval Institute Press, the 1935 population figures and areas for the Marshall Islands are listed: Wotje, 3.2 sq statute miles, population 600 Maloelap, 3.8 sq statute miles, population 463 Majuro, 3.5 sq statute miles, population 785 Mili, 6.2 sq statute miles, population 519 Jaluit, 4.4 sq statute miles, population 2422 In Mili's case this translates to 34 people per sq kilometer or 83.8 people per sq statute mile. I don't think this is considered densely populated by geographers, demographers, scientists etc. In Jaluit's case this translates to 211 people per sq kilometer or 550.4 per sq statute mile. This might be considered densely populated by some. Overall the Marshall Islands listed above I suggest have a moderate population density; they would not be considered to have a dense population. Ron Reuther ************************************************************************ From Ric Ever been on a Pacific atoll Ron? Only a fraction of the land area is usually habitable. Whether you want to call the population of the Marshalls "dense" or "moderate", the point is that there were plenty of people around to notice the arrival of an airplane with a couple of foreigners aboard. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:33:51 EDT From: Shane Otis Subject: Re: Ernest Rutherford I am new to the Earhart forum, and have been watching the postings with interest. It is entertaining and educational to read what fellow Amelia enthusiasts have to say. I have been interested in Amelia's life and ?death? since I was a small girl, but lately I have developed a much stronger interest. I first learned about Amelia when I was about 7, reading a girl's book on her life. I was very interested to see that her grandfather's and mother's last name was the same as mine, and was told by my mom then that she was probably a cousin "or something". I left it there until a couple of things happened. First, I became a pilot in my own right. This was a long anticipated dream of mine, and the day that I took delivery on my own plane was probably one of the most spectacular days of my life. Second, I read "East to the Dawn", the very well written story of Amelia's life, then followed it up with "Amelia Earhart's Shoes". Third, I did the research of my family tree and discovered that yes, indeed, she is a cousin of mine. I am waiting for the documentation to come that will tell me just how far distant a cousin she is. One thing, though- the Otis genes came through strong for both of us. Amelia and I share the Otis nose and smile. (Based on this, I volunteer to help with the DNA testing if her bones are ever found!) I have attached a picture of me in my plane for you to form your own opinion. Yes, there are those who are victims of the "Celebrity Syndrome", but although I never met her (I'm not quite THAT old!), I still feel I have a "claim" to Amelia, as she is related through blood to me. Keep up the good work, and if you ever have use for a flight nurse/pilot/Amelia relative on any of your expeditions or in any of your research, I'm your girl! Thanks- (Ms.) Shane Otis "For once you have tasted flight, you will ever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward; for there you have been, and there you will long to return." Leonardo da Vinci ************************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Shane. I can't share your photo with the forum because the distribution software doesn't support attachments - but the resemblance is there. To be of use in any DNA comparison you would have to be a direct descendant in the female line. In other words, your mother would have to be (for example) a granddaughter of Amelia's mother. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:35:42 EDT From: Ron Dawson Subject: Re: Ernest Rutherford > I quite agree with Denise that locals would spin extraordinary stories > about how they knew somebody who became famous, and how they had close > connections with them. You would be surprised how many people Jerry and I have talked to who claim to be "cousins" of Fred Noonan, but fade away when we ask for specifics. Smooth Sailing, Ron Dawson 2126 ***************************************************************** From Ric Did I ever tell you about my Uncle Dizzy? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:37:12 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: "Conspiracy" crowd One reads Pat Gaston's latest message and wonders, does Pat think that all arguments are equal in validity, regardless of supporting evidence? Does Pat think that all evidence is equal? Does Pat think that all lines of argument are equal, regardless of the logic supporting them? Having read his latest message twice, I think he does. The fact that many people claim to have seen an American woman in Japanese custody in Saipan or thereabouts, even though no one's story can be corroborated with actual physical evidence, and the stories do not corroborate each other, is equal in his mind to the finding of a castaway skeleton, sextant box, Benedictine bottle and woman's shoe parts on Gardner Island in 1940. It would appear that anecdotes, told by people many years later, are equivalent evidence to Pat Gaston as a contemporaneous transcription that AE was running north and south on the 157-337 line (never mentioning going in any other direction). Pat goes on to speculate on how the Japanese treated AE and then says this is just as speculative as AE wandering around Gardner to the 7 site, forgetting the logic that people need to find food and water to survive, and there was apparently a plentiful supply of food at the 7 site. Why leave the most visible landmark on Gardner? Well, its a moot point, Pat, because whoever the castaway was, AE, FN or someone else, that person did decide to spend some time at the 7 site. That is evidence, hard and solid that cannot be denied, but I guess in Pat's view it counts AGAINST the Gardner theory because his argument is that AE or whomever should have stayed right there at the Norwich City. (By the way Pat, there's no evidence to support AE or whoever it was waded two tidal passages to get there, it's entirely possible that she went the other way around the island, not that wading tidal passages is impossible). So what does this prove? It certainly does not prove that AE made it to Gardner. But if the criterion is to state which theories have SOME evidence, and which have none, then I would claim that the Niku theory has SOME evidence and the "captured by Japanese" theory has none. I do not believe all evidence is equal, and I do not believe all arguments are equal. -- Paige Miller #2565 LTM (who discovered the remains of Flight 19 before it was lost!) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:45:14 EDT From: Denise Subject: Well, the short answer is YES! Ric asks: "So....if you were marooned on a desert island and wanted to be sure that your husband knew that the bones you hoped would someday be found were yours you'd write the first letter of his first name on the ..." Yes. Definitely. Although not necessarily his initial. My husband and I already have a simple code worked out so, if some strange whatever ever arises, he'll know it's genuinely me and vice versa! (Hey, what can I say? We're both writers! We think of things like this!) Who knows? Maybe A.E. and G.P. had some similiar code-thing going as well. And here's another point: This "g" is one of those fancy Grecian ones, isn't it, the type shaped like a parrot, yes? So how did A.E. draw her "gs"? LTM (who certainly had her own code) Denise ************************************************************************ From Ric I didn't know that Grecian Gs look like parrots (but there are many gaps in my education). I don't have an example of how AE made a hand-printed G. In her hand-written notes from the World Flight she always used cursive. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:47:22 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Travel Question > Marty #2359 (now in Auckland at St. Pat's cathedral) Guess we all think Pat's a Saint, but a cathedral? WOW! Th' WOMBAT *********************************************************************** From Ric Anniversary present. Couple years ago. Pretty cool. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:21:41 EDT From: Daryll Subject: The Pan Am factor & Motives Pat Gaston wrote: >Why would the Japanese hold on to AE for months or years instead >of currying American goodwill be returning her promptly? Pat, your question goes to Japanese motive. The court gives the prosecutor the most leeway when motive is presented to the jury. I usually get accussed of a fantasy when I try and connect the Earhart dots. There was a conspiracy between Pan Am and the Government. Each side saw the benefits of working together. When you view the overall Pacific picture with those major players and Musick's survey to New Zealand in Mar. '37', the Earhart flight looks very suspicious as a stand alone stunt flight. Ron Reuther sent me a copy of an article from the United States Naval Institute, Naval History - September / October 1999. I don't know if it is online or not. I will quote ("...") parts of it. The Author makes no reference to Earhart but provides good back ground on Pan Am , the Navy and the Pacific. "Pan Am Gets a Pacific Partner". by Justin Libby. Dr. Libby is a professor of history at the Indiana University/Purdue University Indianapolis. He is the author of numerous scholarly articles and "The Irresolute Years: American Congressional Opinion Towards Japan, 1937-1941" (Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, 1984). The author wishes to thank Indiana University/Purdue University for its financial support in researching and writing this article. "In the mid-1930s while in the midst of forging air routes across the Pacific, Pan American Airways discovered a willing partner in the U.S. Navy. The sharing of information and resources promised commercial success to Pan Am and its fleet of 'Clippers'--and provided vital mapping and navigational facilities to the Navy." The article is only 5 pages long. It has footnotes which are available on request. In the 1930's the Navy was faced with "developing contingency plans" to deal with the Japanese threat. The U.S. owned the Philippines and had to have plans to protect their interests. The "non-interventionist lobby on the Hill" (ie Sen. Hiram Johnson of Cal., William E. Borah of Idaho, Bennett Clark of Missouri and Robert Reynolds of North Carolina) and the "Great Depression" short changed the Navy to the point that Pan Am offered a means to get the job done. The beginning of the Pan Am / Navy "collaboration" began in 1934. October 3, 1934 Juan Trippe sent a letter to Sec. Navy Claude Swanson outlining his goals in the Pacific. Charles and Ann Morrow Lindbergh did the survey and feasibility flight in the northern Pacific. Note that this was also a Man and Woman team similar to AE & FN. The Soviet Union put a halt to that route with their refusal to grant landing rights. "Trippe next had to consider a route through Hawaii. That meant developing long-range four engine aircraft, training competent crews, and convincing paying passengers to participate in this new experiment. It also meant acquiring refueling stations for his planes." "Acting Chief of Naval Operations Rear Admiral J.K. Taussig extended Navy Control to Baker, Howland, and Jarvis Islands....". Some of the "stepping stones" were claimed by the British. "The main concern of the naval strategists, however, was not London's reaction, but rather Tokyo's attitude to a U.S. presence creeping closer to its empire". William Miller had intended "to establish communications facilities on Baker, Jarvis and Howland"...."under the guise of a commercial venture,..". Even if the small islands weren't intended as landing facilities for commercial aircraft they could provide navigation and direction finding for overflights. Captain S.C. Hooper of the Navy's Department of Communications; "From the Navy's point of view," he wrote, "it is highly desirable to have adequate direction-finding service for airplanes established in thePacific, and to train Navy Personnel in the operating of such direction finders for both peace and wartime." This was the OP-20-G nexus that Safford was exploiting in his Mid Pacific Strategic Direction Finder Net using HFDF equipment. The Japanese knew that where ever Pan Am went so did the Navy's traffic analysis people who fed the codebreakers material to work on. Pan Am was a threat to Japanese security. "It did not take long before protests from Tokyo began filtering into the State Department". The Japanese could not protest this Pan Am / US government connection to loudly because they were doing the same thing with their "...Nanyo Kohasta Kaisha (the South Seas Development Corporation) as a front for the Imperial Navy...." in the Mandates. "On 22 November 1935, as the China Clipper was prepared for the inaugural flight from San Francisco to Honolulu, two Japanese were caught tampering with the plane's direction finder....a year later pylons just beneath the surface were found in San Francisco Bay damaging the underside of the same plane as it prepared for takeoff. In both cases Japanese nationals were arrested....no public trials were held, and the affairs disappeared quietly." Harold Gatty's title with Pan Am was "Chief Pan Am World Airways Surveyor of the South Seas Commercial Company--but in reality he was Trippe's front man, looking for Pacific landing zones even if they were located near the Japanese mandated islands." Both Gatty and Trippe thought that by using Marcus island (or Minami Tori Shima in Japanese ) would be the best route to Tokyo, Japan. That plan was met with a " quick and emphatic negative response from ranking US naval officials and the administration." "Nonetheless, Gatty's proposal no doubt haunted Japan's militarists." "Gatty was not deterred. He recommended service to Batavia (Jakarta) in the Netherlands East Indies (Indonesia), with connections to Singapore and Hong Kong." To get to Batavia efficiently would require a central route through the Pacific. The same route AE&FN were flying. Martin aircraft had representatives and a service center in Batavia. Amelia had the Electra serviced there during her trip and had to return there from Sourabaya because the problem wasn't fixed. Pat's question in the beginning was <<....Why would the Japanese hold on to AE for months or years instead of currying American goodwill be returning her promptly?...>> TV's Dr. Phil, has said "the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior". Japan did not want Pan Am in the Pacific as evidenced by the two sabotage attempts in San Francisco Bay and their protests. Asia for Asians was Japan's focus. I'm sure Japan had already decided that AE & FN (a Pan Am ex- navigator ?) were really collecting information for a new Pan Am route on the south side of their Mandates to connect to Darwin, Batavia and Hong Kong. The Japanese saw in the days after July 2nd that the Navy didn't really know where AE&FN were. The British in the Gilberts could have picked up low power radio chatter between Mili and Jaluit from the South Seas Development Company's advance survey and construction party setting the stage for Robert Reimers to bring in construction workers in '38' for the military base. There was no need to hurry doing anything until a positive ID of AE&FN could be made by the governor on Jaluit. The Japanese, if confronted, could state that they had no complicity in AE&FN's fate except in their rescue. The faster they returned them to the US the faster Pan Am could have completed the central route. It was not in Japan's best interest to let the closest search ships (US Navy) into the Marshalls or the newspaper reporters that would surely follow. Japan didn't want an exchange to take place at the US Navy's convenience. Saipan was close to Guam, a Clipper stopover. A slow boat to Saipan could still be considered a rescue in progress as long as both remained well and alive. To further complicate matters, war broke out in China on the 7th of July. What I outlined in the paragraphs above could be considered a fantasy by some, but it still goes to Japanese motives. Daryll ****************************************************************** From Ric I hadn't realized that PAA had flown a survey flight to New Zealand in March of 1937. I found one website that supports that claim and another website that says that the airline actually began scheduled passenger service to New Zealand at that time (which I'm sure is not correct). I had been under the impression that the New Zealand survey flight which blew up on the appraoch to Pago Pago in January 1938 was PAA's first trip down that way. Pan Am's interest in the southern Pacific routes is of interest because we have often wondered what charts Noonan used for the Lae/Howland leg. We know that for the Oakland/Honolulu flight in March he used two Pan American charts of the northern Pacific. Eventually Pan Am did fly scheduled service on the southern route down through Kingman Reef and Canton Island, so it seems safe to assume that they at some point produced charts of the southern Pacific - but when? Perhaps our Pan Am scholars on the forum can help us. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 14:22:13 EDT From: Carol Dow Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan As you know I very seldom post, but all this talk about no evidence at Saipan I believe is misleading. Tom Devine's new book with Mike Campbell has an analysis of the handwriting on the wall at Garapan Prison. I have permission from Lucky Books to reproduce Lily Gelb's analysis. The conclusion is that the handwriting could have only been written by Amelia Earhart. I happen to agree with Fred Goerner's statement that Tighar needs to open it's eyes to what was going on with the Japanese in the Pacific. All the official "yes" men including Alan Caldwell need to take stock of themselves, in my opinion. That's all. Sorry, I won't answer e-mails. Everyone has their own ideas, and that happens to be mine. I also believe that Naval Intelligence had broken the Japanese codes pre WW II and that Roosevelt knew Earhart had gone down in the Marshall Islands. Thusly, for all you nay-sayers, the cruise of Astor's yacht, the Nourmahal, with Kermit Roosevelt aboard, the president's cousin. Again, I'm repeating I won't accept e-mails. Please check your thirty-fives and six-shooters at the front desk. Carol Dow From Tom Devine's new book with Mike Campbell: Lily Gelb, of Boulder, Colorado, is an Earhart devotee with an amazing story of her own. Besides having the same birthday as Earhart, July 24 (I omit the year out of respect for her privacy), she lived a series of incredible coincidences that link her intimately with our heroine. She contacted me in October 2001 to offer a somewhat more esoteric interpretation of the graphic. Neither Devine nor I have any working knowledge of matters astrological, but since Lily's interpretation seems so appropriate, I present it here unedited: Return to Saipan Mr. Devine's interpretation is partially true. 7/2, of course, is the date of her unfortunate descent. I would like to comment further on the lower symbol, AND what immediately struck me when I saw the graphic is the meaning of the upper right hand symbol. The upper two symbols are not 39, her age (for three more weeks) when she landed. The upper two symbols are the astrological symbols for Mars and Jupiter. The arrowlike symbol on the left is Mars, representing the principle of action. The right hand symbol, rather like a 4, represents Jupiter, the most fortunate planet, the beneficent. Together they stand for fortunate action. This tells me very clearly that Amelia Earhart was aware of her own astrological chart because she had this very conjunction in her chart. Amelia's astrological chart is a map of where the planets were located in the sky on the date she was born. On July 24, 1897, as any Ephemeris or computer program will show, Mars was conjunct Jupiter in the sky. Anyone who is a student of astrology (as I have been for 30 years, and I believe she was) certainly knows their own chart, fIrst and foremost. Amelia was crying out to the forces saying, "What about Mars/Jupiter? Where's all my "fortunate actio\1" now? She is crying out to her own fortunate combination of Mars and Jupiter together to come through for her in her hour of need. The bottom graphic, somewhat less obvious, is also calling upon THE CREATIVE heavenly forces of the universe to help. The 7/2 is contained within 6 unbroken lines. This symbol, rather than Japanese, is the fIrst (and strongest) of the 64 symbols of the Famous ancient Chinese book of oracles known as the I CHING. All 64 "hexagrams" as they are called, are comprised of different variations of six lines, bro- ken and unbroken, of which six straight lines represents Hexagram #1. The Creative power of Heaven. The 7 and 2, the unfortunate date, are sort of mixed into it. Amelia is crying out to the Creative forces of heaven to intervene. Also the 7 is underlined twice. 7 is considered to be a lucky number. Amelia Mary Earhart was a 7 in numerology. Again, It's "I'm a 7! What has happened to all my good luck and good fortune? HELP!" All this is mixed together, a very full and meaningful expression. As I'm sure you know, Amelia, in addition to her piloting, was interested in many esoteric subjects. She definitely had a mind for all sorts of esoteric knowledge, as is evidenced in her desperate graphic. ********************************************************************** From Ric I'd like to thank Carol and Daryll for reminding us why we're doing this. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 15:40:15 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" theorists There was a least one Japanese "warship" or a ship manned by IJN personnel in the hunt for Amelia Earhart. Namely the slow moving converted German freighter , the Koshu. The Koshu was dispatched into the Marshalls to look for Amelia. It was manned then as a "survey" ship with Japanese navy sailors. According to the well known witness Bilerman Amran, interviewed by Goerner in the 70s, he treated FN and saw Amelia on the deck at Jaluit, and a "silver plane with a broken wing hanging from the stern." AE was reportedly not under guard nor did they appear to be "captured". The Koshu left Jaluit on or about 19 July 37. Later a Japanese researcher reviewed the Koshu logs and interviewed the Communication officer in the 80s but found no confirmation that AE was indeed a guest of the Japanese. Conspiracy buffs beleive that the Japanese "cooked" the logs,etc., But if you hang your hat on Amran, who was a highly respected business man at Majuro, you have the very beginning of the Japanese capture story. And our own Woody, a longtime Tighar member, has continued to look for the Electra at Taroa, where he says photo reconnasiance pictures show the Electra before the Island was destroyed. So far no luck. Others believe that the Japanese launched a fighter attack to shoot down Amelia from the carrier Akagi, but records show Akagi was at Japan during this time. The seaplane tender Kamoi was at Sasabo Naval yards from April 37 to 31 Aug 38 being converted. ltm, Ron Bright ********************************************************************** From Ric Ron, I'm surprised at you. You usually get your facts fairly straight. I think you'll find that Goerner never interviewed Bilimon Amaran, and certainly not in the 1970s. Amaran first surfaces in 1981 when he was interviewed by Vince Loomis (see Amelia Earhart - The Final Story, page 107). I've talked to two people who were with Loomis and the stories they tell about the way the researchers conducted themselves and how they obtained their information are scandalous. Amaran was subsequently interviewed by Knaggs and Brennan and Gervais and Prymak and every other Earhart conspiracy buff that could find him before he died. The transcribed interviews are comical examples of how to lead a witness and ol' Bilimon's story got better everytime he told it. Loomis described him as a Japanese-born store owner but he later evolved into a native-born respected businessman. "Longtime Tighar member" Woody has never been a TIGHAR member. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:10:19 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Koshu Koshu was an oceanographic/hydrographic vessel. I have scientific reports detailing the location of stations just prior to, and just after the Koshu's search for Amelia. She departed the Truk area July 9, arriving in the Marshalls on the 19th, and resumed her survey work on or about the 27th. Based upon the time/distance between hydrographic stations, the journey to the Marshalls is about right. ************************************************************************* From Ric So the only Japanese ship that searched for Earhart, if at all, didn't arrive in the Marshalls to begin operations until after the American search had concluded. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:11:09 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan > Amelia was crying out to the forces saying, "What about Mars/Jupiter? > Where's all my "fortunate action" now? She is crying out to her own fortunate > combination of Mars and Jupiter together to come through for her in her hour of > need. Wouldn't a simple "help" been easier? Alan ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:12:04 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" theorists Ric, it is easy to believe the Japanese/Marshall theory. The difficult part is deciding which of the countless and all different stories to believe. I'm, personally, at a loss. It is also necessary to decide which of the known facts in contradiction to ignore. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:13:01 EDT From: Dave in Fremont Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan If it's written in a book someplace it HAS to be true; they wouldn't publish it, otherwise ;) LTM (whose thirty fives and six-shooters were duly checked-in) Dave (#2585) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:28:07 EDT From: Ron Reuther Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd I have been on Pacific atolls including Kwajalein, Wake, and Johnston Islands. On many land masses only a fraction of the land is inhabitable. Your evaluation of the potential for an aircraft to be seen landing in or near a portion of one of the Marshall Islands (atolls) needs to be qualified by many variables, i.e., time of day, sun angle, weather factors, whether the particular area is near a populated area, height of the aircraft, whether the aircraft is using power, etc. Ron Reuther ************************************************************************* From Ric The issue, as I see it, is not whether someone would necessarily have seen the airplane land/crash. I think it would have been entirely possible to crash an airplane on Niku during the colonial period without any of the villagers witnessing the event. I do not think it is reasonable to say that people from the plane could have been captured by the British and the villagers not know about it. This thread got started when Pat Gaston tried to say that not all Japanese Capture adherents are conspiracy theorists. I disagreed and still do. You can't have AE in the populated Marshalls and not have a conspiracy. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:41:18 EDT From: Jim Tierney Subject: PAA Survey Flts to NZ As a Pan AM scholar---I can reply. Pan Ams first survey flight from SFO to Auckland NZ-operated from March 17-April 9, 1937--S-42B aircraft--Pan Am Clipper II under command of Capt. Ed Musick. It went SFO-Honolulu-Kingman Reef-Pago Pago-AucklanOutbound-3/17--3/29, inbound April 4--April 9. They had to station a ship at Kingman Reef since it is underwater-90% of the time. The second SFO-Auckland flight was from December 23,1937 to Jan 6, 1938 under Captain Musick--sme route--carried mail on return trip only. The next flight was the disastrous one. The first mail flight TO Auckland from Honolulu. The S-42B Samoan Clipper left Honolulu on January 9th under command of Capt Ed Musick-staged thru Kingman Reef and Pago Pago and was returning to Pago Pago on January 11 with an engine problem. While dumping fuel to get to landing weight the aircraft exploded off the coast of American Samoa with no survivors. This ended all service to Auckland until July of 1940. I hope this helps. Any questions --please advise-- My reference is Jon Krupnicks-Pan American's Pacific Pioneers--The rest of the Story--Published in 2000 by Pictorial Histories Publ. Co-- Missoula , MT. Jim Tierney Simi Valley, CA ************************************************************************* From Ric Thanks Jim. Very interesting. Based on that I'd say there is an excellent chance that by the time Earhart and Noonan left Miami on June 1, 1937 there was a Pan Am chart (actually, probably two charts - East and West) of the Southern Pacific Ocean. If such charts existed I can't imagine that Noonan would not have had them. Given the scale and detail of Pan Am's Northern Pacific charts, Pan Am charts of the southern waters should have shown the Phoenix Group in whatever detail was available (which wasn't much at that time). If Gardner's size and shape was represented according to the then available information it could cause real confusion for someone coming up overhead the island. I wonder if there is any chance that an example of the first Pan Am chart(s) of the Southern Pacific still exist? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:38:59 EDT From: Ron Reuther Subject: more "Conspiracy" theorists You need to study further the history of the Japanese in the Marshall Islands (and elsewhere) in 1937. They could be and often were brutal and totally without limits as to what they would do to other humans, especially those who were affiliated with opposing forces and/or nations at odds with Japan including ourselves (the USA), and/or even nations and people who they subjugated, i.e., the natives of the Mandated Islands. Even in 1937, beheading was not infrequent as a penalty for those who opposed them or even displeased them. The Japanese mentality then was that the were divinely inspired and that they were greatly superior to most other groups. Beheading was allowed and even encouraged among many Japanese units. Women, even so called low caste Japanese women, but especially foreign women were treated like dirt and often sexually abused, with the acquiesence of Japanese officers. You say "I know of no evidence to suggest that there were any Japanese soldiers in the Marshals in 1937. The Japanese administration of the Marshalls mandate was civilian (under the "Nanyo Cho" or South Seas [Trading] Company), not military. No army units, no warships, and no reason to suppose that a female foreign celebrity who ended up there would be sexually assaulted unless you buy into the racist assumptions about "Japs" that are, I suspect, at the heart of all of the Japanese Capture theories." It has been stated by a number of American millitary intelligence personnel, that the Nanyo Cho or South Seas Trading Company was heavily staffed with Imperial Japanese Navy officers who wore civilian clothing. There were Japanese military officers, almost exclusively naval officers, on duty in the Marshall Islands in 1937. It is also well known that there were Japanese naval vessels in the Marshall Islands in 1937, at least Admiral Yamamoto said there were (the Japanese Navy's 12th Squadron) - looking for Amelia Earhart.!! In addition Norwegian Ship Capt. Alfred Parker, skipper of a ship which sank in an explosion near Jaluit in March 1937 said in a report to the American Consul in Japan a couple of months later that he had been interrogated by Japanese military personnel in the Marshall's and had observed an "aircraft carrier" (most likely the seaplane tender Kamoi) and 3 destroyers in the Marshall Islands while being held captive by the Japanese in 1937 immediately after his ship was sunk. Per the [Admiral] Hewitt inquiry/hearings as part 37 of the Pearl Harbor hearings of late 1945: It lists a Wotje landing field completed 1937. It lists Eniwetok - 1935 - "Building in Progress - submarine base?" On page 1134 it lists the (AVS) KAMOI (F) as part of the Forth (Mandate)Fleet. Rear Admiral Edwin Layton, trained in Japan in Japanese language beginning in 1929, the Fleet Intelligence Officer at Pearl Harbor, 1940-45, and when the Japanese attacked , said in his book And I Was There, 1985, that "Ever since my time in Tokyo [beginning in February 1937] I had suspected that they [the mandates] were being fortified as military bases. One of the biggest islands, Jaluit, was just over two thousand miles southwest of Hawaii and its proximity as a possible enemy base made it a priority in my intelligence mission to find out what Japan might be doing in the mandates. The islands of the Japanese mandate, sprawling across the central Pacific, offered ideal jumping-off points from which their powerful surface and suibmarine fleet could sally forth to sever our communications lines to the Philippines - or even to raid Hawaii." "We had worked closely with Yamamoto's office during the July 1937 search for Amelia Earhart, a mattter in which they cooperated politely, but only halfheartedly." "...by the late spring of 1941 we were paying very careful attention to the one ("Japanese rattlesnake") that menaced us from the mandated islands. At the beginning of May [1941], I prepared for the admiral [Kimmel] and his staff detailed charts of the larger mid-Pacific atolls showing where I believe that Japan had illegally established military installations [in prior years]. The evidence had been provided from monitoring their radio traffic, careful submarine surveillance, and occasional help from Pan American Airways, whose flying boats passed close to the Japanese-held islands on their way across the Pacific..." "All this information built up to a disturbing picture. On Kwajalein and Jaluit in the Marshalls there was evidence that seaplane and submarine bases had been blasted out of the coral lagoons..." 'The most productive source of accurate information on Japanese military activities in these islands [the mandates] had come from radio intelligence as a result of my work on the low-priority WE WE cipher for Hypo [US Navy communication intelligence unit in Oahu, Hawaii]." "It was inconceivable to me that the chief of naval operations might be unaware of the intelligence contents of intercepts sent to his office. But after that dispatch [a top -secret message to Layton requesting certain vital information dealing with the militarization of mandated islands by Japan...] it became clear that no one in Washington had paid proper attention to the Guam WE WE cipher intercepts..." 'This failure was just one example of the underlying flaw in the intelligence procedures of the office of naval operations in Washington." There are other very substantive statements by other US military officers involved in intelligence activities prior to WWII commenting about Japanese military activities in the mandates in the 1937 time frame. Ron Reuther ************************************************************************** From Ric This is an old, old lesson that never seems to get learned - don't believe ANYBODY's "intelligence" without asking how they know what they claim to know. How, for example, did American military intelligence personnel know that the Nanyo Cho was heavily staffed with Imperial Japanese Navy officers who wore civilian clothing? Post-war reviews of records showed that many of the wartime intelligence assessments you cite were simply wrong. For example, the Wotje landing field that the Pearl Harbor inquiry listed as being completed in 1937 was, in fact, started in 1940 and completed in 1941 (USNI Proceedings, April 1955). And whatever Admiral Yamamoto is alleged to have said, the records show that the only Japanese ship to search for Earhart was the survey ship Koshu that didn't even arrive in the Marshall's until the American search for Earhart had concluded. Conspiracies, of course, do exist but most are fairly clumsy and are eventually exposed. We never know about the really good ones, if there are any. And there is the paradox. Some people deal with it by insisting upon hard evidence before accepting something as fact. If a conspiracy is so good that nobody can find any evidence for it, it effectively does not exist. Some people take the opposite approach. All information is subject to interpretation based upon the assumption that unseen forces are at work. Absence of hard evidence is merely proof of a really good conspiracy. Grasped straws become haystacks of verification. The Earhart Japanese-Capture theories are classic, if largely harmless, examples of the conspiracy mind-set. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:17:09 EDT From: Dave Porter Subject: Pensacola 10E cowl rings Have the cowl rings the Navy has at Pensacola that are labeled as Lockheed 10E rings been matched up with any confirming data? Original written specs, Lockheed shop drawings, etc? I ask because the ring dimensions have been used recently to check scaling and sizes on the Carrington wreck photo. Without some corroborating evidence, how can we be certain that they are indeed 10E cowl rings? They could have been labeled by the same guy who drew the North arrow on the Lambrecht Photo LTM, Dave Porter, 2288 ********************************************************************* From Ric You're right. The circumstances were as follows: The airplane now at Pensacola is a late-production 10A that was being rebuilt as a replica of NR16020 but the work came to a stop about 2/3 of the way through the project and the partially disassembled airplane was given to the National Museum of Naval Aviation and stored in a hangar at Pensacola. When I saw it the fuselage had no interior, the outer wing panels and tail surfaces were off, and the engines were in crates. There were cowlings stacked beside the airplane labeled "P&W 1340 Lockheed 10E cowl". Because it was a 10A, the original cowlings could not be used. I assumed that these cowlings came from some other airplane and were intended for use on the replica. The guys who had done the rebuild were long gone and nobody at Pensacola knew anything but that the airplane and all the parts had been dropped off for storage. So, there remains a possibility (although, I think, a remote one) that the cowlings were mislabeled. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:19:38 EDT From: Jeff Lange Subject: Nikis' Explanation - Flight 19 I am glad that the forum hasn't held its' collective breath in waiting for Niki to post his explanation on how he discovered and positively identified one of the TBM's of flight 19. Unless he posted it and it was withheld by Ric, I'd say he has proven himself to be full of just what we thought he was..... We are waiting Niki ......... LTM Jeff Lange #0748C Ann Arbor, MI. ************************************************************************* From Ric I have withheld no postings from Niki. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:03:58 EDT From: Denise Subject: Re: NFP My mind puts these things together automatically! ***************************************** Thanks, I'm continually amazed at what your mind puts together. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:24:58 EDT From: Robert Klaus Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan Carol Dow writes: "Please check your thirty-five's and six-shooters at the front desk." I know what a six-shooter is, but what's a "thirty-five"? LTM Robert *********************************************************************** From Ric Oh man....I'm not touching THAT one. ******************************************************************* From Carol Assuming the six shooters are still checked at the front desk, Ron Reuther sent this e-mail to me quite some time ago. A year after Earhart disappeared there were observation balloons and searchlights installed by the Japanese in the Marshall Islands. When Vincent Astor wrote his famous letter from the Nourmahal I would imagine a Japanese patrol boat chased them off. I wasn't there I don't know what happened except to say it was common knowledge pre WW II that everyone was spying on everyone else. In fact, Vincent Astor became a master spy in WW II and reported directly to Naval Intelligence at Pearl Harbor. There have been several books written on the subject. Ron Bright clued me in on one written by a man named Dowarts who became a fairly well known historian on the subject. It's available from Amazon.com. If you read Astor's letter from the Roosevelt library as below you should have an idea of some of the things that were happening circa. 1937. Alan Caldwell your naivety at times is amazing. Good lord. Maybe when Earhart wrote her last message on the wall it was coded for a purpose. Possible? It was over 65yrs. before any one could even figure out what it was. And yes I do believe AE left a message behind, and if you look at the message on the wall, you'll see the last wishes and prayer of a condemned woman. I DON'T KNOW HOW OR PROFESS TO KNOW HOW SHE GOT TO SAIPAN. It could have been by way of Nicumaroro or the Marshall or Jaluit or some damn island somewhere courtesy of the Japanese Navy or a Japanese seaplane. I do believe one thing and that is if Earhart was captured by the Japanese, she would have been quite a public relations problem for the Empire of the Rising Sun. In the meantime, go away and leave me alone with all the crazy arguments. No more e-mails. That's enough. Please read Astor's letter. You guys decide and leave me out of this. Carol Dow *********************************************************************** From Alfred Hendrickson: Carol: We're supposed to "open our eyes" and take seriously this missive from Lily Gelb, and it contains occurrence(s) of things like "astrological symbols", "forces of the universe", "hexagrams", "lucky number", and (my personal favorite; I fell out of my chair when I read this one), "numerology"? Come ON, Carol, get a grip! You have every form of black magic in there except an ouija seance. (Or was it there and I missed it?). If you wish to bring me over to take a look at your point of view, please consider posting something that does NOT contain the word "oracle". "I don't read Horoscope. I'm a Libra, and Libras don't believe in Astrology" (Thanks & credit to J. A. Paulos) LTM, who must be rolling over in her grave, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ************************************************************************ From Ric Alfred, you may not know Carol like we do. It's okay. She means well. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:32:32 EDT From: Tom Strang Subject: Re: Betty's answer Betty wrote: >I would like to know what you meant by " something is odd >about this note book, and its journey " Then I will answer your question OK? Betty I must say, I'm much impressed by your response to my latest set of questions. First before I answer your question let me first try to put you at ease. I find you and your notebook quite genuine and harbor no suspicions otherwise. I have no hidden agendas nor am I a skeptic, just someone of youthful curiosity who approaches researching events and documentation as if through the innocent and exploring mindset of say a 5 year old child. My 20 question approach I must admit sometimes puts people on the defensive, but that is never my intention. As to " something is odd about this notebook and it's journey", yes I'll stand by the characterization of "odd". It is my burden to unravel why it looks and feels odd to me. Nothing sinister was meant by that comment on my part. I just have more questions about your notebook and it's journey through time than I have reasonable answers at this date. Hopefully with your help and that of others on this forum I'll be able to unravel these odd feelings I have in regards to your notebook. Betty if you are ever uncomfortable with my questions please feel free to say so, I'll understand. Your notebook has the potential of becoming a stepping stone towards eventually determining the fate of Amelia Earhart and Frederick Noonan, but only if we interpret it correctly. Betty I appreciate your comments and thank you for your stewardship of your notebook. All the best to you Betty. Respectfully, Tom Strang ************************************************************************** From Ric Tom, I have forwarded your message to Betty but you didn't answer her question. All you did was reaffirm that you think there is "something odd" about the notebook and its journey. You say you have no hidden agenda but then you won't say what it is that strikes you as odd. I personally think that Betty has every right to ask you to explain why she should answer questions that seem irrelevant. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:33:29 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan Are we talking about the name scratched on the iron plate from the cell door, or some other "graffiti"? If it's the plate from the door, I went back and looked at the picture I have of it and find nothing like what's being discussed. If it's something else, I'd like to see it... ltm jon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:35:53 EDT From: Jon Watson Subject: Re: Pensacola 10E cowl rings Should be a simple matter to get L-10-A cowl dimensions and compare with the Pensacola cowl dimensions, just to be sure. Perhaps one of the members who lives near a 10-A could get the measurements if they're not in your archives. That would eliminate the concern. ltm jon *********************************************************************** From Ric Been there, done that. We measured the 10A cowlings from c/n1052 at the New England Air Museum. The cowlings in Pensacola are bigger. This horse has been beaten to death. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:42:20 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Goerner interviews of Amran Yes, I did extensive research on Amran but perhaps I didn't send you my lengthy research monograph "AMELIA EARHART; THE MARSHALL ISLAND EVIDENCE", dated Jan 02, with revisions.[Unpublished research project] I critically reviewed the witnesses testimony and the movements of the Kamoi and Koshu as reported by many researchers; I did not address the witnesses at Saipan. I documented that the first known "formal" interview by any Earhart researcher was indeed long time reseacher Fred Goerner at Majuro in 1975 and 1977. A summary of his interviews and opinions of Amran are contained in a letter in wrote to fellow researcher J. Gordon Vaeth on April 19, 1993; and the tapes of his two interviews with Amran are reportedly available at the Nimitz Museum, Fredericksburg, TX. Note: I personally interviewed two shipping executives, Robert and Tom Coleson, who heard the story from Amran AFTER Goerner and Loomis, circa 1983 at Majuro. Over cocktails, Amran related essentially the same story as below. Both Coleson's attested to Amran's reputation as a respected businessman. I have a photo of Amram as the "Director" at Majuro, of the Micronesian Interocean Line Inc. In this letter Goerner traces the history of testimony from various Marshall Island natives beginning with Michael Madison, Elieu ( who Goerner personally interviewed in 1962), Dr John Iman, Rudolph Mueller, Bilimon Amran and "many others". The Navy's invovlment was also cited starting with Lt Eugene Bogan,USNR, and Lt Charles J. Toole, both who talked with Elieu at Majuro in 1944. (Adm Cruise's report of those interviews has never been found). From Goerner's letter: " I first encountered Bilimon Armran (sic) in 1975 during ...my third visit to the Marshalls. (In 1962 he interviewed Elieu, but Elieu did not refer Goerner to Arman) . Amran's story varies in several important aspects from that recounted in the Loomis/Ethell book, "AE: The Final Story". As I recall Loomis interviewed Amran in 1979 and he trumpeted the testimony as a great discovery. ( I have two Amran interviews, 1975 and 1977 on tape). Basically, however, Amran, a Japanese Medical orderly in 1937 was called aboard a ship at Jaluit to render medical assistance to an injured man, who appeared to be white. Amran beleives there was a woman present at the time." "Did I and do I believe Amran? Yes, I do , but with reservatons. First Amran is a rather retiring man, and he NEVER seemed concerned about renumeration...and he NEVER SOUGHT a guarentee that he was going to be the subject of a book or article. There may, however, be answers other than AE to Amran's experience." [ emphasis Goerner's] Goerner then goes into detail describing scenarios that could be confused by Amran. For those interested, let me know. Goerner towards the end of this letter states unequivocally he does not believe that AE landed at Mili atoll, based on Eric Sussman's ( a Peace Corp rep) inquiries. On April 23, 1993, Goerner followed up his letter to Vaeth with photos of Cruise, Amran, Elieu and Harry Manning. And also took a couple of shots against the Tighar research citing the S.F. Chronicle article by Ernie Zehms, who headed the Loran station at Gardner, and how the aircraft metal "got there". I am sure you and the Tighars are familiar with Zehms rather critical review. And he concludes citing letters from him (Goerner) to Prof Maude, a letter from Maude to Goerner, and a letter from Maude to Tighar. In the latter Maude refers to Gillespies efforts as "bull" and "makes the point that if anything had ever been found on that tiny island which might suggest that a plane had crashed there or woman had died there it would have been broadcast by the native grapevine throughout the Pacific". Speculation? I think you have successfully rebutted the claims of Zehms and Maude, and I only include Goerner's remarks because they are in the letters to Vaeth about Amran. LTM, Ron Bright ********************************************************************* From Ric Thanks Ron. I was not aware that Goerner had ever interviewed Amran. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:46:27 EDT From: Anthony Lealand Subject: On the topic of I knew AE A writer who runs a web site http://www.waynegreen.com/ says on it. When I dutifully went off to college (I didn't know any better then) and joined a fraternity, beer drinking was the big deal. They had weekend parties where my fraternity brothers would drink beer until they puked, and then drink more. I tried beer. Ugh. Phooey, again. And this despite everyone in my family drinking. Heck, during prohibition my dad had a bar in the cellar where he entertained his aviator friends -- like Amelia Earhart, who kept her plane at dad's airport. Everyone those days smoked and drank. But me. I wasn't righteous about it. I wasn't worried about my health, I just didn't like the taste, case closed. Another case of I knew Amelia? Anthony Lealand ********************************************************************** From Ric He could be right. Depends on where his father's airport was. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:52:10 EDT From: Eric Subject: Witnesses Ric wrote: > Whether you want to call the population of the Marshalls "dense" or > "moderate", the point is that there were plenty of people > around to notice the arrival > of an airplane with a couple of foreigners aboard. I've never read that members of U.S. military intelligence, the FBI, etc. ever went to the Marshalls in 1937 to interview any of the population to find out if, in fact, they had noticed the arrival of an airplane. After W.W II, all kinds of people came forward to claim that they saw AE and FN. When asked why they hadn't spoken up earlier, the most common reply was "Nobody asked me." Does this automatically brand them as liars? LTM, Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, California *********************************************************************** From Ric No, of course not. Very few people who offer eye-witness accounts of an event intentionally fabricate a story. The only way to know whether their recollection is accurate is to find corroborating hard evidence. In the case of the Japanese Capture stories, the various accounts conflict with each other and no hard evidence to corroborate any of them has ever been found. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:25:37 EDT From: Dave in Fremont Subject: Re: "Conspiracy" crowd- Saipan Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Carol originally lurk around here researching some play or literary work about AE? I guess her completed "castaway" tale wasn't seen as having much potential by agents, so now she's seeking more "irony" or "pathos" for her endeavours by going the Saipan route and finding more literary latitude in that camp. In either case, I wish her well. Then Carol wrote: "In the meantime, go away and leave me alone with all the crazy arguments. No more e-mails. That's enough. Please read Astor's letter. You guys decide and leave me out of this." I don't know if that's acceptable, Carol. It's called reaping what you sow. You can't poke the stick into the hornet's nest and not expect some stings. LTM, Dave (#2585) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:27:39 EDT rom: Carol Dow Subject: Re: Witnesses The ref. to the thirty-fives was a typo, and yes I know how to use thirty-eights. The handwriting at Garapan Prison that appeared on the wall was astrological. Evidently AE knew astrology and superstition and don't ask me why because I don't know. It took over 65yrs. to even figure out what it was. The only conclusion I can arrive at is that it was written by Amelia Earhart. Jupiter and Mars are evidently in her astrological chart. I know nothing about astrology or I-Ching. I'm not interested in the subject matter. All I know is that it is smeared on the wall at Garapan Prison. So laugh your heads off....it's there. Too bad. Carol Dow ***************************************************************** From Ric And how do you know it's there? Have you seen a photo? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:34:27 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Niku Visits? Sorry for this rather clumsy question, but do we have any idea how many "unofficial" visits Niku has had. In other words, were the islands of the Phoenix group visited with any frequency by locals during the time period that AE and FN may have been there? Bob ******************************************************************* From Ric The short smartass answer is that we don't know about visits that we don't know about. What we do know is that there were no "locals" in the Phoenix Group until late 1938. Any Pacific islander who visited Niku would have had to come from another island group many hundreds of miles away. The British banned inter-island canoe travel in their Pacific territories in 1930. Even after three islands of the Phoenix Group (Gardner, Hull and Sydney) were settled, there is no record of inter-island travel by canoe. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:54:46 EDT From: Niki Subject: Flight 19 Sorry for the delay in getting back to you all on this subject; but I was asked to refrain from posting anything on this until it was decided by other interests involved on what could be said - and what shouldn't... Since this originally started out as another party's interest, I felt it necessary to comply with that request. In June of 2002, I was contracted by a group of individuals to search for the remains of a wreck that occurred on 10 November 1633; thought to be off northeastern Florida. By mid-August, 2 Avenger aircraft were pinged: the first was an unknown; the second, a known. With permission, I can state the following: The aircraft was NOT located in the same vicinity as John Myhre's find. The aircraft was NOT a "TBM"; but, rather, a "TBF". The ID was NOT made by numbers from the left wing tip. The aircraft's canopy was open; but the compartment containing survival gear was closed. Since I am not a "publicity hound" I decided, at the time, that it would be best to not run to the mainstream media; but for the parent organization to make a report to the proper authorities concerning the incident. (Ric understands what the value of keeping a find "quiet" is all about... and, this should also give Ric a clue as to how much I need this forum as a "stage to dance on"...) Although I've been involved with the locating and raising of various objects from the ocean floor, I've never raised an aircraft and took it upon myself to seek a method from "professionals"... ...this is what originally led me to TIGHAR in the first place. (I'm surprised Jon hasn't tied that little tidbit together...) ------------------------- From Rick Boardman: > I suspect "Niki" is loving every minute. No sir, I think this whole deal is not only a waste of your time; but mine as well... ------------------------ From Alan: > I just saw on the news that Queen Nefertiti's mummy has been found. Was that > another great feat by Niki? > Should we ask Niki not to smoke funny ciarettes while posting? These kinds of remarks are to be expected from those that do not understand the whole story; but I'm a little surprised to see them coming from someone of Alan's caliber... ------------------------- From Jon Watson (Ric's statement): >> I've already heard privately from several forum subscribers who feel that >> Niki has nothing to offer this forum. My gut feeling is that we should let >> him explain his Flight 19 claim and then impose the "substantive posting rule" >> (no postings that are not on-topic and offer substantive input). We've seen >> guys like this before. What they really want is a stage to dance on. > >Or somebody to do their research for them... I'm sorry, Jon... but I don't quite understand that statement... Jon continues: > It does seem peculiar though, Niki couldn't get his book published, > but fed his stuff to Phillip Klass who, even though he didn't have ten > minutes to write a foreword, picked it all up and ran with it > successfully. Jon, let me give you an idea of what would've been involved for Mr. Klass to have written a forward; and maybe you won't see it as being so "peculiar": Mr. Klass would have to read the entire book; research each case; check-out all my references and sources (quite a task in itself; as it took me 3 years to gather); compile his findings and compare the outcome to see if they matched the data I presented; and THEN - assuming that he even AGREED with my findings - would he pen his name to the manuscript. Jon, if you've indeed found a way to accomplish all that in just 10 minutes, I ask - no I BEG of you - to please contact Mr. Klass and furnish him with the method... > So Niki, how's Margot supposed to look you up when she > gets to Ft. Lauderdale? ...uhh ...seems like a no-brainer to me... --------------------------- From Jim Preston (Ric wrote): <> >I think you may have misunderstood my meaning. Among the Pacific islanders >you and I are "Europeans". It's an ethnic description and a fairly accurate >one. We try our best to remain apolitical on this forum (but I'll admit it ain't >easy). In other words, Jim, this was a direct shot at me and my "bogus tales"... ---------------------------- From Dennis McGee: >Ric, you're going to get a higher seat in Heaven for putting up with >Niki and his ilk, assuming of course the TIGHAR chaplain approves. Hey Dennis, how much you charge to haunt a house? ---------------------------- From Ted Campbell >To All, >Is this character really adding anything of usefulness to the Forum? If not >let's just ignore him! Yea, but you've at least got to admit, Ted; it is said that I AM quite amusing... --------------------------- Well, ladies and gentlemen, that is the explanation for my "Flight 19" statement. Even though I'm sure it will be misconstrued as a "cop-out", or whatever; it is presented in good faith. I find it interesting how NOBODY has said a WORD about how my "typewriter" statement was mis-read; and the condemnation that followed... I guess that it was all simply "blown-off" to make room for the next challenge... Niki ********************************************************************* From Ric >In June of 2002, I was contracted by a group of individuals to search for >the remains of a wreck that occurred on 10 November 1633; thought to be off >northeastern Florida. > >By mid-August, 2 Avenger aircraft were pinged: Are we then to understand that in addition to being a forensic imaging specialist you also do underwater search and recovery? Perhaps (without revealing the specific location) you'd care to describe what technology and methodology you employed in the search and identification of the aircraft. >Since I am not a "publicity hound" I decided, at the time, that it would be >best to not run to the mainstream media; but for the parent organization to >make a report to the proper authorities concerning the incident. So, having made the ID, you had the option of contacting the media but elected to let the parent organization make a report to the proper authorities. That was almost a year ago. >I've never raised an aircraft and took it upon myself >to seek a method from "professionals"... >...this is what originally led me to TIGHAR in the first place. I can help you out. The proper authority is the U.S. Navy History Office, Department of Underwater Archaeology. They're good people. I'm sure they'd be very interested in your discovery but they'll need to see the proof. I can put you in touch. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:58:33 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Niku Visits? Thanks a million Ric. You were able to decipher my real question. At my advanced age I should never post until that 2nd cup of coffee. Bob ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:09:06 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Flight 19 > These kinds of remarks are to be expected from those that do not understand > the whole story; but I'm a little surprised to see them coming from someone > of Alan's caliber... Niki, you don't get it. You get these responses because what you write doesn't fly. Most doesn't make sense. You don't respond directly to what you are asked and we don't buy anything you post. Guess why? No one could understand "the whole story" because you don't give it and what you DO write can too easily be seen through. If you want everyone off your back and some respect for what you think you can do then you need to get your stuff together and your stories straight. Alan ************************************************************************* From Rick Boardman Noooooo!!! PLEASE don't start him off again, I'm not waiting to hear anything about Flight 19. Not on this forum anyway. Rick Boardman ************************************************************ From Niki, Ric wrote: > Are we then to understand that in addition to being a forensic imaging > specialist you also do underwater search and recovery? Underwater search, yes; recovery, no... The underwater recoveries that I've been involved with came about as a result of the use of search equipment of my own design and operation. The actual recovery operations were headed by other teams. My involvement in the actual recoveries fell somewhere between the occasional pressing of a button or two on the lifting device; to just getting in the way... > Perhaps (without revealing the specific location) you'd care to > describe what technology and methodolgy you employed in the > search and identification of the aircraft. Sure. The broad search consisted, mainly, of towing a proton precession magnetometer (of my own design) over a predefined grid pattern. Since our target was a specific shipwreck, any sizable "ping" or "hit" that the mag returned was given closer examination. (Objects on an ancient shipwreck that will return such an indication would be a cannon, cannon balls, an anchor, anchor chain, etc.) After a hit was indicated (in relatively deep water), I employed the use of a (borrowed, sob) side-scan sonar unit to further aid in the ID of just what was down below... In the case of the aircraft, it was assumed by just about everyone on board that it was just another "drug plane" that ditched; although finding an airplane was the last thing on anyone's mind... (I could tell you of some WEIRD things we've found in DJ's Locker...) The final step in the ID was to lower a "live" cam over the side. I will also add that this ID was my own doing; as to not throw the burden on anyone else involved. > So, having made the ID, you had the option of contacting the media but > elected to let the parent organization make a report to the proper > authorities. Generally, in being contracted on a project of this magnitude (...and not being the head "nut" calling the shots...) you are confronted with 2 options... ..in a "nutshell": a. You can be compensated for your services by receiving a daily wage; ...or 2. You can provide your services for a "share" in the outcome. Option "a" seems simple enough; but a careful study of the 2-pages worth of fine-print that goes along with it will reveal - among other things - that you "...waive any and all claim, right, gain, publicity, fame, copyright attachment, sales, proceeds, or legal connection to and from the outcome as a result of said search." (In so many words it states that I was just out for a boat-ride that day...) Due to circumstances from past experiences, I did choose option "a"... All of the above is why the "parent organization" makes the final call on the publicity issue. It was made VERY clear to me that contacting the media was not one of my options. The contacting of the proper authorities was nothing more than a suggestion by me to those in charge. Sorry if I was misleading in that the decision of how it should be handled was mine... (But, personally, this is the way I would have carried it out...) > That was almost a year ago. Yes, and as far as my "contract" is concerned, it means FOREVER... > I can help you out. The proper authority is the U.S. Navy History Office, > Department of Underwater Archaeology. They're good people. I'm sure they'd be > very interested in your discovery but they'll need to see the proof. I can > put you in touch. That would be great... I would like to know how the situation is handled; and to what extent the site would be classified... (...the LAST thing I would EVER do is get involved with "poaching" an historical site; and/or a military gravesite...) Perhaps I should clarify one more thing, Ric... When I stated that, "...I took it upon myself to seek a method from 'professionals'...", I wasn't indicating that this was the next step for the organization to take; rather, I was seeking a proper method to how it would be done - just for my own knowledge - should a decision ever be reached on who owns what... LTM, Niki ************************************************************************ From Ric Okay, to summarize: Last summer you were working under contract to a group of treasure hunters who were looking for a 17th century shipwreck in deep water using a proton precession magnetometer of your own design when you came upon two Avengers, both of which you ultimately identified and one of which turned out to be one of the famous Flight 19 aircraft. Question: These are the only occasions I've ever heard of where an aluminum aircraft was found with a magnetometer (which can only detect ferrous metal). What did the magnetometer "hit" on and how strong was the hit? Your previous statement, <> did not accurately represent the situation. You now say that you are contractually prohibited from contacting the media and that contacting the proper authorities was only a suggestion you made to the treasure hunters. However, you have now disclosed the "fact" of this find, if not its location, to the entire Earhart Forum and you have accepted my offer to put you in touch with the proper authorities. I can tell you right now that it is the official policy of the United States Navy that any USN aircraft found underwater (or on land) remains the property of the Navy. If you make the claims to the Office of Naval History that you have made to this forum, they will want to know all the details that you have a contractual obligation not to disclose. You're probably already in violation of your contract with the treasure hunters and my advice to you is to pull your neck back into your shell and shut up about all of this (if any of it ever happened), but I'll stand by my offer if that's what you want. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:11:12 EDT From: Tom Strang Subject: Irrelevent? I appreciate your go between status with Betty - You have every right to be suspicious of me and I of you - Just don't confuse me with Niki and "Flight 19" - Irrelevent? - Irrelevent to one person may just be relevent to another - Irrelevent to me was the "Wreck Photo" where as to others? I'll wait for Betty's response which I expect to be some what tainted having read your reply. Respectfully, Tom Strang ************************************************************************* From Ric Betty is not a subscriber to this forum and has not seen my comment. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:13:59 EDT From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Witnesses Alchemical practice uses the Mars symbol to refer to iron, and the Jupiter symbol to refer to tin. The most common object made of both is a tin can. Maybe AE wanted a can of beans? Dan Postellon TIGHAR ************************************************************* From Dave in Houston: In reply to Carol Dow's hypothesis that AE left a "message" on the prison wall in Saipan - she wasn't referring to astrological symbols. She was sending a message that she was captured by aliens from Mars and Venus - or maybe she was saying she would really like a Mars almond bar. I don't know for sure, but it sure wasn't an astrological sign - I know for sure because I read it somewhere. LTM, Dave Bush ********************************************************************** From Jon Watson And undoubtedly the Japanese built that cell JUST for AE, and NO ONE else was EVER in it....and even if they were, they NEVER scratched ANYTHING on any of the walls, etc. ltm jon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:17:40 EDT From: Denise Subject: Re: Ernest Rutherford Anthony says about Rutherford: "He did not leave New Zealand until ...(he was) 23 years old." However, the book I read was very definite on the subject of rural Kiwis getting together to raise a special scholarship to get this brilliant young flax-farmer's son over to England to get the education he deserved. And he was definitely 7 years old when he went. So it's my book against your book and either/or, neither/nor could be right so let's agree not get into this because 1) it's waaayyy off topic and 2) neither of us knows enough on the subject. However, let's just say that obviously what we've discovered here is that the definitive biography of Ernest Rutherford has yet to be written. And if anyone out there wants to write it, I know where they can find a bunch of old Maoris who will explain in some depth how to split both flax and atoms ... apparently the procedure is much the same! LTM (who wonders if Ric will let us debate the 7 vs 23 question in the way he allows the equally silly debate about The Saipan Hypothesis.) Denise ********************************************************************** From Ric No. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:27:07 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Niku Visits? If I might follow up with another question. How about commercial and/or military traffic? Would seeing a ship in or near the Phoenix group be a rather remarkable occurance during the late 30's. Bob ********************************************************************* From Ric Yes. For one thing, prior to late 1938 there would be nobody there to see it. Naval traffic in the Phoenix Group is well-documented and the only commercial traffic should have been associated with the Burns Philp plantation on Hull and the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony establishment of the PISS. In short, we're fairly confident that we know who was in the Phoenix and why and when in the 1930s. It's possible that private yachts transited or even visited the islands during that period, but if they did we've never seen any mention of them. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:39:43 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Conspiracy! Ric said: "I have withheld no postings from Niki." Because you deny it and there is no proof you didn't withhold any posting from Niki, this is obviously a conspiracy. The black helicopter is piloted by Oliver Stone. See how that pulls everything together? LTM, who never forgets her meds Dennis O. McGee ************************************************************************ From Ric But of course! (slapping forehead) Now it all makes sense. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:51:51 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: What Conspiracy ? Don't worry, all; I've figured this out: If you put all the letters in "Niki" and "Carol" together and unscramble them, they spell "I lack iron". AE was obviously suffering from the effects of iron deficiency, and she is using Niki, Carol, and THIS VERY FORUM to tell us that from beyond the grave. LTM, who had a grasp of the obvious, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:12:55 EDT From: Carl Peltzer Subject: Re: Flight 19 Regarding magnetometers and aluminum airplanes they more than likely pick up parts of the engine [heads valves engine mounts con rods and crankshaft] as they are steel along with parts like the landing gear and perhaps the arrester gear and the wing mechanisms and of course the machine guns. ********************************************************************* From Ric Yes, but its a question of resolution. A cannon is a great magnetic target - long and dense. A scatter of parts normally produces a much weaker return. I've just never before heard of an airplane producing a magnetometer hit that was strong enough to investigate further with other technology (sidescan sonar or video). I'm also bothered by Niki's explanation that he identified the airplane by lowering a "live" cam over the side. He described the water as "relatively deep" but any depth that was too great for scuba divers would also, by necessity, be too dark for video photography without powerful lights. Now you're talking about a fairly complex array that has to be manipulated to photograph the desired features while it dangles on the end of a long cable from an unanchored boat in whatever currents are present. Usually that sort of thing is accomplished by an ROV that can "swim". Like so much of what Niki writes, it sounds more like a layman's impression from watching the Discovery Channel than the report of a professional. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:19:23 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: How Lost Assuming the TIGHAR hypothesis (Niku, etal) is there any consensus whether AE and FN knew where they were -- ie, on Gardner? Bob ************************************************************************ From Ric The only way we would know that they knew where they were is if they said so in one of the post-loss messages. None of the alleged messages we know about contains any island name, unless you want to say that Betty's "N.Y., N.Y." is "Duke of York, Duke of York: (aka Atafu in the Tokelaus and also, by coincidence, on the 157 line). So, I would say that if they were on Gardner, one of two situations was probably the case: 1. They didn't know they were on Gardner (or at least not sure enough to say so). or 2. None of the post-loss messages we know about was genuine. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:24:01 EDT From: Mike Juliano Subject: Re: How Lost Just reviewing Betty's note book. Could you ask Betty if when she transcribed "NY,NY" (as kind of a short hand) meaning New York City what might have actually been "Norwich City, Norwich City"? LTM Mike J.#2591 ********************************************************************* From Ric That is a possibility that has been discussed on this forum at length. It's a possibility. That's all we can say. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:30:37 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Flight 19 > I'm also bothered by Niki's explanation that he identified the airplane by > lowering a "live" cam over the side. It would appear to me that unless Niki immediately informs the Navy department he may be subject to prosecution for withholding information relevant to a government investigation. My guess is that Niki has nothing to inform the government about other than his unsupported bragging. If one of the planes of flight 19 had been found the world would know about it by now. Identifying those planes as specific TBMs is an awesome task. Alan ************************************************************************ From Ross Devitt > >From Ric > > Question: These are the only occasions I've ever heard of where an aluminum > aircraft was found with a magnetometer (which can only detect ferrous metal). > What did the magnetometer "hit" on and how strong was the hit? Ummm, didn't the Avenger have a rather large chunk of ferrous material spinning the big cooling fan the pilot sits behind? Just curious? I mean, if the precession proton magnetometer can pick up cannon balls, it might possibly pick up on an engine, guns and things like oleo struts.. I wonder why he uses a proton precession mag instead of a fluxgate unit, which I thought was more sensitive? Did Niki use a differential rig, which would help to pick up the smaller objects? Th' WOMBAT ************************************************************************ From Ric The Avenger's R-2600, like most airplane engines, is mostly non-ferrous. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:37:41 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: From Ric re Niki As I said I would, having allowed Niki to explain his claims regarding Flight 19, I have now imposed the "substantive posting" rule. If he offers information that has some substantive bearing upon our investigation of the Earhart disappearance I will post it. I have today rejected two postings from him that do not meet that criterion. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:38:52 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Witnesses I have a letter from a longtime researcher who claims he interviewed Guy Galbadon, 2nd Mar. "Navy Cross" hero, and the "first Marine to enter the Garapan Jail" at Garapan, Saipan, just after it fell. Galbadon, says the researcher, claims he had searched for signs of AE/FN in the jail "without results". He spoke and read fluent Japanese and was raised by a Japanese family in LA, prior to WW2. He married a Japanese, and resided on Saipan for years. He is also mentioned in Devine's last book, "With our own eyes", but there is no indication that he reported seeing AE or any signs on the wall of the jail. I have no idea of the above is true or reliable information concerning his entrance into the Garapan Jail. The researcher who sent me the information by email in March 2001 is deceased. Perhaps Mike Cambpell or Tom Devine interviewed him in person. Ron R or Cam Warren, any info on Galbadon. Reportedly few if any researchers have talked with him. LTM, Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:42:32 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Ernest Rutherford - exposed? Denise wrote: > Anthony says about Rutherford: "He did not leave New Zealand until ...(he > was) 23 years old." However, the book I read was very definite on the subject of > rural Kiwis getting together to raise a special scholarship to get this > brilliant young flax-farmer's son over to England to get the education he deserved. > And he was definitely 7 years old when he went. So it's my book against your > book and either/or, neither/nor could be right so let's agree not get into > this because 1) it's waaayyy off topic and 2) neither of us knows enough on the > subject. The following two items should throw sufficient light on the subject to bury it. Words enclosed in **** are mine. Rutherford, Ernest (1871 - 1937) Lord, FRS Online Sources Archival/Heritage Sources Published Sources Physicist Born: 30 August 1871 New Zealand. Died: 19 October 1937. Rutherford was appointed Director of the Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge in 1919 where he specialised in nuclear physics, having previously been Professor of Physics, McGill University 1898-1907 and Manchester University 1907-19. He won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1908. Career Highlights Born 30 August 1871. Died 19 October 1937. Kt cr 1914, OM 1925, Peer (Baron Rutherford of Nelson) 1931. Educated Canterbury College, Christchurch (BA 1892, MA 1893, BSc 1894) **** Canterbury College is in Christchurch New Zealand. The dates, if accurate would put him in NZ at age 21, 22 and 23. **** and Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge. **** Which I understand is somewhere near the U.K. part of the world**** Professor of physics, McGill University 1898-1907, Professor of physics, University of Manchester 1907-19, Director, Cavendish Laboratory 1919-37, professor of natural philosophy, Royal Institution, London 1921-37. Bakerian lecture, Royal Society 1904, Silliman lectures, Yale University 1905, Rumford Medal, Royal Society 1904, Nobel Prize for chemistry 1908, Bakerian Lecture, Royal Society 1920, Copley Medal, Royal Society 1922. President, Section A, British Association for the Advancement of Science 1909, President, British Association for the Advancement of Science 1925, President, Royal Society 1925-30. **** It is possible that the Maori story is partly true, and that the locals did in fact raise money to educate this brilliant man. Perhaps he was educated in NZ, before heading off overseas to continue? Another piece by a teacher visiting the university is... **** "Across the street is the former Canterbury University, now a multiuse city block of Gothic buildings : a brewery, a kite shop, an internet cafe, a couple of theaters. I discovered Ernest Rutherford's Den. It turns out the Nobel Prize winning, nucleus-of-the-atom discovering physicist studied at Canterbury before going off to England, and the site of his undergraduate lab is a small museum. He had to beg a basement cloakroom, useful for its solid concrete floor, from the university in order to run electricity & magnetism experiments. The exhibit's high-tech, low content. In the basement, a sort of holograph is projected of an actor pretending to be Rutherford, lecturing in a sort of droney, English-stuffed shirt way. I was disappointed by the lack of science stuff, although they had a really nice static charge demonstrator that made 2 inch sparks. But Rutherford's best quote is conspicuously absent : "All science is either physics or stamp collecting." One year, for a final, I had physics students write about what he might have meant by that." **** which would suggest that Rutherford may have stayed in new Zealand a little later than his seventh birthday. **** Th' WOMBAT ****************************************************************** From Ric I have forgotten what connection this Ernest Rutherford character is supposed to have had to the Earhart disappearance, if any, but I do know that we're not going to talk about him any more. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:48:48 EDT From: Christian D. Subject: Re: How Lost > So, I would say that if they were on Gardner, one of two situations was > probably the case: > 1. They didn't know they were on Gardner (or at least not sure enough to > say so). > or > 2. None of the post-loss messages we know about was genuine. Or, number #3, there is a chance that FN did get a celestial fix within a day or 2 of arrival. Christian D ******************************************************** From Ric Post-loss messages continued well into July 5th and few beyond that date. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:51:25 EDT From: Gary LaPook Subject: Re: Can Electras Float? On the other hand I am preparing for trial based on the ditching of a Piper Navaho near Hilo two years ago. The plane sank in one minute and one of the pax went down with it and was drowned. gl **************************************************** From Ric Well - I say you're innocent. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 10:30:04 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Flight 19 Ric wrote: > The Avenger's R-2600, like most airplane engines, is mostly non-ferrous. I checked out the use of magnetometers with several sources. One was a group trying to find a B-25 that went into the Mongahelia (sp) river in PA. I'm sure Ric is aware of this lost aircraft. The reply was "the magnetometer was written off as a usable remote sensing instrument." In all fairness the background debris made it impractical if for no other reason. Two others said possibly it might work with a large four engine plane. They were not all that enthusiastic. The fourth response was from Dr. Raymond McAllister who participated in the search for a TBM off the East coast of Florida. (This may start to sound familiar) The TBM was a possible target noted during a search for Challenger wreckage. It was not found using a magnetometer. It was found according to Dr. McAllister by side scan sonar. The TBM WAS salvaged. It had broken in half. There was no indication it was one of Flight 19. If Niki was involved my mention of his name did not elicit a response. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 10:53:28 EDT From: Rick Metzger Subject: FLIGHT 19 Check out this site on Flight 19, could this be Niki? http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Gallery/1868/netx17.html FYI: Nov. 10, 1633, an English vessel carrying supplies to Alxacan sank 70 leagues south of St. Augustine, FL Rick (no matter where you go --- there you are) ************************************************************************* From Ric Niki said: >In June of 2002, I was contracted by a group of individuals to search for >the remains of a wreck that occurred on 10 November 1633; thought to be off >northeastern Florida. Very interesting. I can see a number of reasons to suspect that the operation Niki is referring to was the discovery of the "Phantom Five" by Graham Hawkes and his "hi-tech vessel Deep Sea". * Niki specifically said it was not the airplane found by Myhre. * One of the Phantom Five aircraft had the same number on its wing as the Flight 19 leader's plane. * The canopies were open (another detail that Niki mentioned). However, if this is the operation Niki claims to have been involved in, his claim to have IDed one of the Flight 19 aircraft is bogus because "...closer inspection revealed that the aircraft have different numbers and are older Avenger models than those in Flight 19. The plane bearing the 28 may even have a third digit, Hawkes said." How about it Niki? I'll post your reply. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:03:21 EDT From: K Subject: Skeletel Identification and Osteomas Recently, I have been examining pictures of Fred Noonan. I am now wondering if the "protrusion" on his forehead was an osteoma. It appears very similar to the osteoma on the frontal of a skull that I remember from my anthropology undergrad daze. It also seems to me that Dr. Hoodless, or any medical expert (even if not an osteologist) could not have failed to mention such an obvious anomaly on the frontal of the skull found by Gerald Gallagher. It could also provide a useful point of identification if another skull is found on Niku. Has Dr. Burns ever researched this possibility in relation to FN? Osteomas are a symptom of Gardner(!) Syndrome. I found more info at www.emedicine.com/derm/topic301 LTM (who enjoyed Bone Pathology classes) K ************************************************************************** From Ric Hoodless also thought that the person was shorter than Noonan's 6 ft. height. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:14:51 EDT From: Russ Matthews Subject: Re: FLIGHT 19 The Phantom Five won't fly -- Nikki says he was contracted in June 2002 and Graham Hawkes made his discovery 12 years earlier (Ric, you may remember we were all in Seattle when the story broke). Besides, I don't think Hawkes is the kind of guy who needs the help of an outside "underwater search specialist." In addition, the earlier article about John Myhre's plane (the one specifically not found by Nikki) states that numbers visible on the wreck matched a Flight 19 aircaft and only two others, neither of which were reported lost at sea (which , if I recall correctly, is the exact same claim specifically made by Nikki as to how he determined his "positive I.D.") LTM (who thinks something's fishy in the state of Florida), Russ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:26:24 EDT From: Niki Subject: Niki re Flight 19 I was unaware (and a little surprised) of that page's existence... But, I will state that I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT PAGE BEING POSTED!!! I suspect that it was put there by someone who's "roped and tied" also; rather than some kind of reporter: hence the signature of "Anon." (Anonymous). If it is well with everyone here, I would prefer to just let this topic go over the side to DJ's locker as well; any opinions and feelings formed as a result of this being accepted... (...even though they're not without warrant: I may have "fudged" a date - bad recollection, or necessity? ...sorry) To those parties directly involved in my statements: I trust that you do not have to be reminded that contracts work both ways; since I revealed no one's name and/or position other than my own in connection with my duties in this matter (my option); it does NOT null and void anyone else's obligation to that same clause. (Alan, I would deeply appreciate if you would e-mail me the response you get to your last question) In closing, since it is already posted, I refer you to the next to last statement on that page as my final position on "Flight 19"; until a more opportune time would permit otherwise. Perhaps I've said too much already... Thanks, Ric; for letting me post this... ...and to Mr. Boardman: I PROMISE ...no more Flight 19! (Rick Metzger - would you e-mail me?) And to keep it ON topic, Ric, do you have the data on the belly antenna as being hollow or solid; and how it was mounted to the fuse? Was it on a former, plate, or did it actually protrude through the skin to an internal mounting? Thanks, Niki ******************************************************************** From Ric The aft mast was similar, if not identical to, Lockheed Part No. 68968 on the Model 12. It's a streamlined aluminum tube 7/16 of an inch across the front and 1 3/4 inches front to back, tapering to 3/32 inch radius at the rear edge. The mast is 15 inches long. It is welded to a diamond-shaped aluminum plate that attaches to the belly with four screws. There is no internal structure. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:05:19 EDT From: Ric Subject: Slow Forum/Expedition plans For all of you who have written asking if the Forum is down let me reassure you that everything is just fine. There just hasn't been anything submitted that is worth posting so far this week. Just to bring everyone up to date: Marty and Roger are back from Fiji. On the way home Marty also spent several days in New Zealand doing archival research. We'll be posting a report about their trip on the TIGHAR website soon. They did not find the bones but they did eliminate a number of possibilities and rumors that had been puzzling us for some time. They have significantly narrowed the search and greatly added to the body of knowledge about the context in which this whole mystery played out. They did excellent work for which we are sincerely grateful. The Niku Vp team has changed once again. Tom Roberts has stepped aside and will have a spot on the Niku V team next year. TIGHAR expedition veteran John Clauss will take his place on this trip, so the team will be: Van Hunn - Expedition Leader Howard Alldred Walt Holm John Clauss Accompanying the expedition will be Kiribati Wildlife Officer Aorbure Teatata. The expedition vessel S/V MOLLIE is now in Pago Pago, American Samoa awaiting Van's arrival on June 30. Mr. Teatata will arrive on the same flight from Honolulu. Van will help provision the vessel for the expedition. Howard will arrive from New Zealand and Walt and John will arrive from the States on July 3 and the expedition will sail on the next tide. We anticipate three and a half to four days enroute to Nikumaroro which should put them at the island on July 7. They'll spend the next seven days carrying out the objectives of the expedition and should be back in Pago Pago on July 19. TIGHAR headquarters here in Delaware wll be in touch with the expedition daily by satellite phone and we'll post daily reports on the TIGHAR website. This has been a very difficult trip to put together, but that's par for the course. It will be the first TIGHAR expedition that I will not be leading in person - and I think that's great! My confidence in Van and the rest of the team is absolute. The information they'll collect on this trip will be vital to the planning for next year's major effort, and we of course hope that the interesting lead they'll be checking out proves to be something from the airplane. Let's all wish them smooth sailing, good luck and good hunting! LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 15:35:27 EDT From: Warren Subject: Re: Slow Forum/Expedition plans Thank you for the expedition update. There has been some banter on the forum regarding how to dispense updates about the potentially ID-able "Electra" part (or whatever it is). I am curious what the final plans are-immediate info updates, or info withheld until the items are secured or definitely identified. Thanks, and best wishes for the safe voyage of the Niku team. Warren *********************************************************************** From Ric My plan hasn't changed. Once the team has arrived safely at Niku we'll put up a research bulletin on the TIGHAR website that tells everything we know at this point. If the team subsequently can't find the darn thing there is no harm in telling everyone where it was supposed to be. If our guys can't find it, nobody can. If they find it and it turns out to be some dumb thing that has nothing to do with Earhart we'll have only shared our frustration (there's usually plenty to go around) with all of you. If they find it and it turns out to be something promising we'd want to everybody anyway. Don't get your hopes up for a smoking gun. Even if the thing has smoking gun potential, those kinds of judgments can almost never be made in the field. The best we can hope for at this time is something that looks like it might be important that can be recovered and brought home for conservation and analysis. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:38:32 EDT From: Mike Juliano Subject: Three???? Three Electras? One for Saipan? One for the Marshalls?And one for Niki? Oops! Niku? (But under which shell is the real pea?) ******************************************* From Ric I've heard of theories that there were as many as five. The Earhart Mystery should come with a warning label "Caution: May be hazardous to your mental health". ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 09:58:22 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: Three???? Of the three, or five, the one that kills me is the splashed and sank model. How, oh how, does ANYONE, think, if it exists, it can be found? If it is there, it is three or more miles down, under water, somewhere in an area of ocean the size of Texas or something. I notice that there have been no recent postings from Nauticos on their search for a small, nonexistent needle in a very, very large haystack. I asked them to keep me posted. I'd love for them to prove me wrong, but I'm not planning on it. LTM, who'd be looking for her glasses while they were perched on her head, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ******************************************************************* From Ric Nauticos is no longer what it used to be. Dave Jourdan sold pretty much everything but the Nauticos name to Oceaneering International and he and his wife have gone back to Maine. Dave still has hopes of pursuing the Earhart search and other projects using Oceaneering assetts under a special "partnering" arrangement. I don't know whether the very expensive but technologically disastrous Nauticos Earhart search had anything to do with consequent sale of the company. Dave says that he sold out to Oceaneering (the 800 pound gorilla of the commercial underwater world) because the company was getting too big and it wasn't fun any more. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:03:29 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Three???? Only if you are the moderator. The rest of us are only along for the ride - I wish it wasn't so. Ted Campbell **********************************************************\ From Ric What would you prefer? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 11:40:34 EDT From: Hans Subject: Amelia Earhart Im interested in the search for AE very much and am following the search with some interest. I think that the search is up against strong odds as it's one small plane(if it's in one piece), many square miles of ocean several miles deep and many years since the incident. Logic says that it wont work but emotions say keep looking for as long as it takes and solve this last big aviation mystery which captivates us all. I want the crew and plane found and answers provided as it is very possible to find an answer but just as likely to never hear anything, it's like a game of chance but very interesting. Being an aviation enthusiast for 22years has brought me to this mystery but ive never looked into it till now and it's almost unbelievable, yes truth can be stranger than fiction. I dont like conspiracy theorists, theyre all mad, this is reality and has no place for crazy stuff like that. By the way where did all the ideas of three or five(!) Electras come from? Hans ***************************************************************** From Ric Welcome Hans. All the ideas of three or five Electras came from those crazy conspiracy theorists you mentioned. Pay them no mind. If the airplane is on the bottom of the ocean I think you are quite correct in sayng that finding it is a hopeless task. Fortunately, however, there is a large and growing body of evidence to suggest that the plane did not go down at sea and that conclusively identifiable pieces of it may still be findable on the island of Nikumaroro in the Phoenix Group. You'll find a great deal of information about that evidence on our website at www.tighar.org and in discussions on this forum. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 11:44:16 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Three???? At my age I'd have to give the question you posed a lot of consideration. You know how it is the mind's willing but the body's weak. Ted Campbell **************************************************** From Ric No problem. Earhart research specializes in the reverse condition. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:24:30 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Three???? Some Tighar members may not have run into this theory, but there really was only ONE AE Electra, the one that ended up on Saipan; and on or about July 1944 was burned to the ground by James Vincent Forrestal, (Secretary of the Navy), at Saipan, according to Tom Devine and Mike Campbell. Devine says he himself witnesses the event. See their recently published book "With our own eyes" for details.[I don't beleive it.] LTM, Ron Bright ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:28:56 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Three???? Ted Campbell wrote: > Ric, > Only if you are the moderator. The rest of us are only along for the ride - > I wish it wasn't so. > > Ted Campbell > **********************************************************\ > From Ric > > What would you prefer? WE want to be the moderator and YOU just along for the ride but we don't seem to have the vote. Alan ******************************************************************* From Ric We're all just along for the ride and you all vote with your checkbooks and credit cards. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:33:54 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Cliffhanger In accordance with TIGHAR's "Share the Angst" policy, I may as well bring everyone in on a little cliffhanger we're dealing with right now with regard to the departure of the Niku Vp expedition. To set the scene - The expedition vessel S/V MOLLIE is presently standing by in Pago Pago, American Samoa awaiting the arrival of the TIGHAR team and our Kiribati government representative Aobure Teatata. Mr. Teatata will be flying from Kiritimati (Christmas Island) to Honolulu on Sunday. Our team leader, Van Hunn will meet him their on Monday and they'll both fly to Pago Pago on Hawaiian Airlines, the only carrier that services Pago Pago. The rest of the team will arrive on July 3 and the expedition will depart. That's the plan. However - Hawaiian Air has suspended service into Pago Pago and at this time we don't know whether it will be reinstated in time for Monday's flight. Here's the problem - Last October, the FAA warned the government of American Samoa that the 10,000 foot runway at Pago Pago had deteriorated to the point where it needed extensive repairs. The surface was starting to get crumbly and there was an increasing danger of FOD (Foreign Object Damage) to jet engines, especially in reverse-thrust braking. Like most local U.S. governments these days, increased security requirements without additional federal money to pay for them, and the stagnant economy, has left American Samoa (never a wealthy territory) unable to afford the needed runway repairs. Nothing was done, but there were no particular consequences until two new factors exacerbated the problem. About a month ago Samoa experienced unusually severe rainstorms which hastened the breakdown of the runway surface, and Hawaiian Air replaced the aging DC-10s they had used on the Hono/Pago route with new Boeing 767ERs. The engines on the Boeings are much closer to the runway than were the intakes on the DC-10s and last week Hawaiian Air experienced two separate and serious FOD incidents at Pago Pago. Quite naturally, they stopped flying into Pago. This creates something of a crisis for American Samoa. The territory relies on the Hawaiian Air connection to Honolulu not only for travel but also for much of the food consumed on the island. This is also a peak travel season. Samoan students in Hawaii can't home and tourists in Samoa can't leave. The only way in or out is via commuter flights to neighboring Apia in Western Samoa (an independent nation) which is serviced by it's government-owned airline Polynesian Air and by Air New Zealand. Their capacity is far below what is needed to pick up the slack if Hawaiian Air is not flying. Pago Pago has put on a big push to clean up the runway to make it usable in the short term. For the long term repairs they are citing the rains and asking for federal disaster relief money. Yesterday (Thursday) the FAA and representatives of Hawaiian Air were supposed to inspect the runway and decide if it is safe to resume service. Technically, the flights on Monday have not been canceled and we're now waiting to hear the outcome of yesterday's inspection. If Monday's flights are canceled our plan is to postpone the expedition for one week. (Fortunately MOLLIE's schedule is flexible.) Complicating the situation is the fact that phone, fax and email service to Kiritimati has been down for the past few days (as it often is) and we haven't been able to alert Mr. Teatata not to leave for Honolulu without confirming that Hawaiian is flying. If it looks like service to Pago Pago will be shut down for longer than that we'll get refunds from Hawaiian Air, rebook our people on Air New Zealand, and send MOLLIE over to Apia to meet them there. The catch is that Air New Zealand is quite a bit more expensive than Hawaiian Air. Shifting the point of embarkation to Apia will put the expedition an estimated $6,000 over budget. We'll do it if we have to and launch a fundraising campaign to make up the difference. Stay tuned for the next exciting episode. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 08:41:35 EDT From: Monty Fowler Subject: Very impressive print Just got my copy of "Final Approach" back from the framing shop and all I can say is - WOW! TIGHAR definitely has a winner on its hands with this idea. To anyone who is thinking about buying it, go ahead and take the plunge, you won't regret it. LTM, Monty Fowler, who can't find his membership card this late at night. ****************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Monty. We like it too. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 08:59:38 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Expedition update Well, it looks like Pago Pago will be closed to jet traffic for a couple of months while they resurface the runway. The USAF is reportedly now flying the mail and essential services with C-130s out of Hawaii. Hawaiian Air is hoping to work out a way to fly into Apia, Western Samoa but they'll need to figure how to get all those people over to Pago Pago. You can't bring in several hundred in a 767 and then ferry them 19 at a time in Twin Otters. For us it means changing our port of embarkation to Apia. Our gear that was FedExed ahead will be loaded aboard MOLLIE later today and by tomorrow (Tuesday) morning the ship will be provisioned for the expedition and will depart for the short trip from Pago for Apia. We'll get our team and our Kiribati rep to Apia as soon we can get them there but we're still sorting out the best way to do that. I finally got a fax through to Christmas Island yesterday but have had no reply as yet. These things are always an adventure. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 16:00:47 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Roosevelt's Request We have a strange situation that needs research. Betty phoned me today and said there was something she's sure she remembers but can't prove. She was almost embarrassed to mention it, but she clearly recalls that some time after the search for Earhart had ended - may be a month, maybe as much as three months - there was a piece in the newspaper in which President Roosevelt asked everyone to just drop the whole matter of Earhart's disappearance. There was even an implied threat that people who didn't could get in trouble. That's why she and her father didn't try harder to get somebody to pay attention to the notebook. It sounds absurd on the face of it. As far as I know, FDR was not directly involved at all, much less put out any such public notice or request, but what got my attention is the fact that I've heard this same allegation before from another shortwave listener. Back in 1990, Mabel Duncklee (Mabel Larrimore in 1937) explained why she hadn't tried harder to get someone to pay attention to her story. "I called out local paper to let them listen to her message also. When one member of the family reminded me that our President had asked that no one give out any information if they heard anything, as it might endanger her life." Mable's version seems to imply that the request/notice came out during the search but it's just too similar to what Betty said. It seems like there has to be something to explain these two very similar but seemingly bizarre stories. If there was some kind of government notice that was perceived this way it could have squelched other reports of post-loss receptions. Any ideas? LTM, Ric