Well I suggested that perhaps it was once more opaque and Ric said he talked with collectors who said that Milk glass would not turn clear. Never mentioned there were other milk glass examples that were practically clear to begin with. Case closed, and the reason we have all been looking for clear glass. Have we all been looking for a clear jar that never existed? Maybe.
So it appears this jar was either a very early pre WWI example or Ric's advice from collectors was incorrect, and it indeed faded to clear (maybe after being mostly clear to begin with). In fact one chemist on another article suggested just that. That milk glass made of tin and antimony would probably change color if heated in a fire pit.
I don't know. I am not a chemist, nor have I conducted heat tests on milk glass.
But I think it should have been done.
I think that is the only option left if this is to be a relevant artifact dated to the right period. Either it was weak milk glass that turned clear and could have been Earharts, or it was clear glass all along, and has no connection with Earhart as the bottle would be too old.
I do find these announcements made to the press too early to be concerning. For instance when it was first found, all newspaper articles said Dr.Berrys was the ONLY glass found that matched this jar. The implications was there. This was a Dr. Berrys. There was no mention of 6 other products. I didn't find that on any press release by any news agencies. I found that information here and by doing some quick googling in a week.
As late as last month, newspaper reports said that not only did this product match Dr.Berrys', it was the ONLY item found that contained mercury.
Again not true. I brought up Velvetine which was a skin lightener, and skin lighteners contained mercury. Same jar style, shape and size and also opaque. Yet There is Breaking news, right now on this site, from Mr.Cerniglia that Dr.Berrys was the ONLY product that used this jar and contained Mercury. NOT TRUE! I am not sure if the theory is if it's repeated long enough it makes it true. How many times has he told this to some gullible reporter? How many news stories have been done stating the same.
So the Mr C. is to this day putting out incorrect information in press releases and interviews possibly. Not good.
In the beginning of this thread it was suggested that the example be tested for mercury on any residue remaining. Ric said there was no residue to test for mercury.
So there is no residue, but finally 2 years later the glass is tested for mercury? If there is no residue, how can the glass itself show mercury?
Glass in inert, and I do not believe it absorbs the surrounding elements.
But it took all this time to test it?
And it was tested by a guy who just happened to hear the story and took it upon himself to do some testing?
I understand budget constraints, but seems like the artifact evidence is being analyzed haphazardly, if at all, some by volunteers who happen to read a news story. Some by Tighar forum members.
I think all the science should be done professionally, and an exhaustive search done for any clear bottles, also testing to find whether an opaque bottle heated to near red changes color(not just relying on the word of a glass collector), and finally any other known examples shared with the public as well.
Like I said, I understand budget constraints, this is being done on a shoestring compared to the navy sponsoring Dr.Ballard, but It took Joe.C two years to find the above ad from National Druggist in 1921 that this jar was produced in opaque only?
I have been looking at jars for a week and found these same references in Google books.
So not to discredit Mr.Cerniglias work, he is probably working for nothing, but a lot of press releases were made that this was the only bottle found that matched this shape, now it's released to the public, Dr.Berrys was the only bottle found of this shape that had mercury.
It seems like folks wanted to believe something and released it as news, because neither of those press releases were exactly correct.
Now, like the movie JFK, the internet stories have been done with an incorrect version of the truth. you can't take it back. There are a lot of people out there who think that absolutely a mercury containing freckle cream from Dr.Berrys has been found with an exact bottle that matched the time of the flight.
Not proven. Do the science right, take your time, then do the press release.
Just my opinion and probably not a popular one, so shoot away.
I still believe Gardner is it based on the radio transmits, but this glass stuff was put out way too early before testing and exhaustive archive research and it creates a perception that may be invalid, and once that perception is put out there by NBC, CNN, Discovery, its tough to modify it.
Otherwise, if new information does come up, it looks like Tighar wasnt professional or thorough enough and raises credibility doubts.
(Not from me I hasten to add, but there are rumblings out there even Ric and Tighar members are keenly aware of).