This would require rejection of ALL post-loss Radio Messages. As thin as they are, any one of them require the Electra to be on dry ground.
So if even one of them was real, this means they could not have ended up North of Howlamd.
Thopmson or Friedell, my feelings point to Friedell's theory.
We all have our
feelings - and while feelings themselves are not a good guide, that is a fair point: as I said, one must pursue what one has
confidence in. I have seen so much "I believe this" or "that" over time that I have decided to step back and refresh my view of the whole.
By what I just wrote above, I am encouraging others not so much to challenge the beliefs and confidences that lead us to Niku VIII, but to look at the abundance of information that TIGHAR has gone to much trouble to provide here and to think critically for themselves. In the long run that is not only good for sustaining the search to success, I think it may make TIGHAR stronger as well.
Consider -
Why does TIGHAR have confidence in 'what's next', and what phase of the search does it seem to put us into? The final end-game, at last? Obviously one hopes for that - but
what got us here? Why do any of us believe there is a chance of still solving this great mystery?
My
point in whole does
not require outright rejection of ANY post-loss Radio Messages - I hope it goes a bit deeper than that. Note that for one thing, Thompson obviously had no 'post-loss' messages by which to judge his 'next action'; Friedell had the benefit of not only Thompson's search already conducted, but additional thoughts about signals that might relate to Earhart, etc. That is part of the interesting evolution of the search, IMO - each main effort proceeded as best it could by what was understood at the time of that particular effort.
That process is in a way a foreshadowing of where we find ourselves today, still searching 76+ years after the fact: TIGHAR proceeds by its own best understanding and interpretation of the facts and most reasonable conjecture it can produce in terms of a testable hypothesis. We are not looking at new ground (or sea), we are merely looking more closely, and more intently on one narrow aspect of the whole that was searched in 1937.
Part of my point is also that there still exists a potentially massive search effort beyond Niku VIII, should that not find the Electra. Were I Ric Gillespie and his board, I would believe one thing and go after it with laser-like focus: that we have so narrowly and confidently defined the search box that the airplane must lie within the bounds of where those subs will go and look in 2014. No fault there - I expect nothing less of one who would lead such an effort. I also believe Ric and his board and those who have labored with them over the years believed nothing short of that every time they went to Niku - that is as it should be. But that long effort is part of what causes me to go back again and again and consider why we are here - and why others were here, and elsewhere in the search: it is far too late to save Earhart and Noonan, obviously - but the goal of knowing their fate remains elusive so far. So we mount the mightiest effort to-date at Niku and hope, again - and I merely share that I realize I must be prepared to 'go again' there or somewhere (figuratively, and as one tiny individual; I don't function comfortably in sub-tropical heat, nor am I crucial to any search, obviously) if I insist on pursuing this to the end. In sharing that, I note that finding the Electra may truly remain a massive challenge.
You are correct in part however that my point does include, in part and obviously,
some possibility that NONE of the post-loss Radio Messages are genuine, hence that in time (and only time and effort will tell) those who would find the Electra may yet be forced to look elsewhere and one day discover that whatever all those signals were, they could not have been from Earhart. I may not like how that prospect
feels or even wish to reject it (I do not 'reject' it outright - I merely recognize the risk for now). By that, IMO I, for one, am for now stuck with some possibility that it is so, despite the things we believe support post-loss messages as genuine.
And as I said, none of that is meant to discourage what now goes toward Niku VIII. The expedition is smartly aimed at conducting a detailed look at a particular seamount area in one aspect, because the hypothesis that is being tested is well-defined in terms of where it is believed the airplane landed and then went into the sea. It also necessarily presumes something - at least for now, about where its remains are likely to have settled. Obviously TIGHAR, no more than the U.S. Coast Guard nor navy at the time, cannot search the whole of the Pacific in one effort. Reasonable search terms must exist for each sortie.
That takes me back to what I would hope is the major part of my
whole point - that folks
who visit here ought to spend what time they can actually reading the stuff I've linked, for one. If this quest is to have passion for the long run, people (supporters and potential supporters) must have the best first-hand knowledge that they can get. We cannot relive the experience, it is long-gone. We do not possess a great deal that is concrete in terms of 'where they went' - what we read of Thompson, Friedell and others is vapor compared to crumpled sheetmetal with "NR16020" on it lying somewhere out there. We can only possess ideas based on reason gained from understanding.
I see three primary challenges for those who are determined to find the hard evidence ("airplane" in my view) of Earhart's fate -
1 -
A willingness to accept great risk: no search comes cheap, nor without human effort and risk to life and limb.
2 -
Intelligent focus and direction: how did we arrive at planning for Niku VIII, for example; how did Waitt-Nauticos arrive at their own effort, for example (and not as a 'competing' effort but in terms of understanding how these hypotheses come to be). If one is determined to find the Electra (ask Ric if he is if you don't get it by now... and I thought I had the hots for this), one must have a box - one box at a time for most human efforts - in which to search. What built the box? If you have passion for this, examine that - and make your
'feelings' come from the best reality you can come to.
3 -
Stamina: if Niku VIII does not yield the grail, how should the 'box' be modified? In what direction / where? That is not to forecast failure - it is meant to say if one has passion, one faces that prospect and
thinks again. IMHO it is wise to not wait for that thinking, but to try to develop thought along those lines everyday. Yes, by all means - go and look at the seamount - and smile for the camera if it succeeds; have an idea of 'what's next', however, if the look into that camera is more somber at the end of that effort. 'What's next' may be expanding the same box, or creating a new box, or some combination - and that can only be done intelligently by informed and critically thoughtful minds (see "challenge #2" above). That is what one must do if one is to not abandon the search.
So pardon me, but I guess I'm a bit bored of late, other than reading in these things and thinking it all through - and wishing to encourage a bit of passion in others for the chase. I don't want to ever see focus and passion for finding Earhart's fate fade before the bird is found. If Friedell is your man of the hour, then Niku VIII is your logical next effort as I see it - very good. Each one of us - if we have strong 'feelings' for the search - should simply be thinking ahead: how far to chase Friedell's view? When might one reconsider Thompson's experience at the time? God forbid - are we ever to be stuck accepting the search challenge faced by Dowell and his Lexington group? One prays not.
Do I find Thompson compelling? I do - as a 'possible future step' - one already examined obviously by others to some degree, and one that may be more appealing one day if we do not succeed elsewhere. Thompson was the most immediate witness to the day's events. As compelling as much of the later information can be, it remains wispy and unproven. Yes, even Thompson had an imperfect lens, I well realize that too.
If you'd be passionate and desire to be focused and find stamina for this search, then be well informed and willing to accept risk. That's the real point. Consider what TIGHAR has put here for you, BTW - and what that is worth: no matter where you would look, where are you going to find so much good information? Maybe I don't need to 'promote' - TIGHAR necessarily also does that or she can't survive - but I invite others to consider the value of what lies here, whatever your focus.
To me, the crucial point in the 1937 Earhart search came on July 10 when Friedell handed off to the Lexington Group and reported to Admiral Murfin that "all islands of the Phoenix Group have been located and carefully searched for any sign of Earhart plane or inhabitants." That assertion led to the dismissal of the post-loss radios signals and freed the Lexington Group to conduct their planned open ocean aerial search north and west of Howland. From that moment, Earhart's fate was sealed.
Ric,
I think your point well illustrates that we do not look at new ground, we merely look at old ground with new light.
We go to Niku again with the burden of history having done what you've said - and we still do not know what Lambrecht saw that made him comment later on 'markers of some kind'.
The searches of the past seem to foreshadow those we'd do today. But they did not have the tools we have today. I think our advantage lies in taking on one haystack at a time with the modern microscope; I think one great challenge we have is displacement in time - we are further from the things that fed Thompson's, Friedell's and other's impressions and decisions.
Time also means that nature robs us of opportunity, so I hope readers can see that part of my plea is "if you care about it, get busy - sharpen your focus and your resolve". You exemplify that approach by your own focus and stamina. We don't have forever, so I hope people notice and care.