Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz  (Read 11582 times)

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2018, 06:50:22 AM »

Thanks Bill.  I'm happy with the way that came out.  Pat's young Morgan "Ash" even made his national television debut on my screensaver.
Logged

Pat Fontaine

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #16 on: March 08, 2018, 06:59:06 AM »

I thought it was a good interview - know they don’t have a lot of time to go in to the details, but thought they hit it pretty hard.  Well done!
Pat
TIGHAR #5095P
 
Logged

Bill Mangus

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 277
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #17 on: March 08, 2018, 11:04:28 AM »

I agree.  Balanced and fair without overstating the evidence.  I hope they replay it tonight on "Nightly News".
Bill Mangus
Researcher #3054SP
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2018, 11:27:07 AM »

Logged

Paul Mitcheltree

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2018, 02:58:04 PM »

and more BBC coverage , good details . . .

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43323944
www.vimeo.com/tree
(film JUMP RUN has 10E #1042)
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #20 on: March 08, 2018, 03:12:45 PM »

It's amazing what you can learn from the BBC.  Benedictine is an herbal liqueur that Earhart was known to carry.
Logged

Andrew M McKenna

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 634
  • Here I am during the Maid of Harlech Survey.
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #21 on: March 08, 2018, 05:30:25 PM »

Never mind the BBC, get the real story here!

https://www.theonion.com/report-human-bones-found-on-remote-pacific-island-most-1823623725

You know you've made it when The Onion wants to make fun of you.

AMcK
Logged

Matt Revington

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 268
  • member #4155
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #22 on: March 08, 2018, 05:33:22 PM »

Never mind the BBC, get the real story here!

https://www.theonion.com/report-human-bones-found-on-remote-pacific-island-most-1823623725

You know you've made it when The Onion wants to make fun of you.

AMcK

More credible than some of the Saipan theories
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #23 on: March 08, 2018, 05:43:53 PM »

More than one of the Middle School groups I've talked to were sure that Noonan's remains were not found because Amelia ate him.

Some stuff we recovered from the Seven Site in 2010 proved to be human feces that contained human DNA (but too degraded to sequence) from more than one person. One explanation is cannibalism, but nobody wanted to go there.

Burn this posting after reading.  ;D
Logged

Peter B

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #24 on: March 10, 2018, 11:28:08 AM »

Hello AE group,

What a phenomenal collection of information and research this is. Truly a tour de force.

I have a couple of questions regarding the bones that I am guessing may have already been discussed. However, I have not been able to find this information. If someone could address this I would be grateful:

1. Are there any plausible explanations as to how the bones ended up on the island, if they are not AE's (or FN's) bones?
2. Do we know that the bones were disposed of/buried and are they lost for ever or are there efforts to locate them?

Best, Peter
Logged

Pat Fontaine

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #25 on: March 10, 2018, 11:47:13 AM »

Hello Peter,
To the best of my knowledge, there really isn’t a better explanation to the presence of bones.
The island was uninhabited, and while the Norwich City lost some crewmenbers (I think six, if I recall correctly) they were accounted for.  I may have that wrong, but what I took away was that we can discount the bones being from any crewmembers.  Gallaghar’s grave is accounted for.
So it all begs the question, if not hers, then whose?  Reinforce this with the recent Dr. Jantz report that puts her being the ‘person of the bones’ at 99% and that leads us to where we’re at today.

As to the location of the bones - the short answer is they were set aside and lost somewhere.  Here’s a post that gives an excellent summary of the search for the bones:
https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/42_FijiBoneSearch.html


Thanks,
Pat
TIGHAR #5095P
 
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 11:53:10 AM by Pat Fontaine »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #26 on: March 10, 2018, 12:14:44 PM »

1. Are there any plausible explanations as to how the bones ended up on the island, if they are not AE's (or FN's) bones?

As Pat Fontaine said, not that we've been able to find.  There's nobody else missing in the region.  Norwich City had a
crew of 35 men, all of whom went into the water in the storm. Twenty-four made it to shore alive.  Of the 11 who didn't, 3 bodies washed up and were buried by the survivors.  The other 8 are unaccounted for and were presumed drowned or taken by sharks.
The castaway whose remains were discovered in 1940 were found with part of a woman's shoe. Forensic analysis of the skull suggests the castaway was female.  Several of the artifacts TIGHAR has found on the site which appear to be associated with the castaway are female gender-specific (mirror and make-up from a compact, hand lotion bottle, freckle cream ointment pot).  There were no women aboard Norwich City.


2. Do we know that the bones were disposed of/buried and are they lost for ever or are there efforts to locate them?

There is no record of the bones being discarded but exhaustive effort to find them (three expeditions to Fiji) have failed to find any trace of them.  Hope springs eternal but when you consider that the bones were ultimately judged to be of no significance, it seems most likely to me that they laid around until they eventually got in somebody's way and simply got pitched.  Why would anyone hang on to them?
Logged

Jerry Germann

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 409
  • Go Deep
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #27 on: March 13, 2018, 12:23:24 PM »

Forensic analysis of the skull suggests the castaway was female.  ]

What details of the skull examined by Hoodless suggest female?

I have wondered why Hoodless didn't include any details of the skull that indicated sex. Details like forehead slope, eyebrow detail,etc .... https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/forensic-facial-reconstruction/0/steps/25656

Regarding clothing, would the measurements of the cranial vault given by Hoodless help in determining what size hat the individual may have worn for a comfortable fit? And do we know Earhart's hat size from available sources?
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5260
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #28 on: March 13, 2018, 01:17:04 PM »

What details of the skull examined by Hoodless suggest female?

I'm not an anthropologist, but it's my understanding that the combination of skull measurements and ratios provided by Hoodless, when plugged into Fordisc, suggest female.

I have wondered why Hoodless didn't include any details of the skull that indicated sex. Details like forehead slope, eyebrow detail,etc .... https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/forensic-facial-reconstruction/0/steps/25656

It was 1941.  The link probably didn't work.

Regarding clothing, would the measurements of the cranial vault given by Hoodless help in determining what size hat the individual may have worn for a comfortable fit? And do we know Earhart's hat size from available sources?

I don't see a measurement of the cranial vault in Hoodless' notes.
Logged

Jerry Germann

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 409
  • Go Deep
Re: Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones - Richard Jantz
« Reply #29 on: March 13, 2018, 02:55:00 PM »

Items 3 & 4 in the hoodless report,  Mentions the length and breadth of skull at 182mm and 137mm, ..Cephalic index at 75.3 which indicated by Hoodless favors a person of European decent and seems to be backed up by this article; https://www.britannica.com/science/cephalic-index

This hat guide;  https://www.villagehatshop.com/content/38/how-to-determine-your-hat-size.html gives some ideas on how to measure for a hat,...a geometrician might possibly use Hoodless's measurements to arrive at a relatively close circumference size, adding in the soft tissues. 
Do we have an example of Earhart's hat size?
« Last Edit: March 13, 2018, 06:55:36 PM by Jerry Germann »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
 

Copyright 2018 by TIGHAR, 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.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP