I must say that this thread is getting interesting. My friend Jeff Nevill and I have talked at length about this whole investigation, and I would assume that we will talk more in DC. So, Dr. Malcolm is an archaeolgist? I'm probably wrong, as usual, but isnt archaeology the study of activity through "artifacts" from previous times? Please correct me if I'm wrong---since I havent been in school for 38 years, but isnt the Electra wreckage and ARTIFACT of previous times?
I'm not saying the images we see in the underwater pics is the electra. Sure looks like it might be a plane, but the Electra NR16020? I dont know. Could be a Japanese warplane for all I know, and tht is a real possiblilty. Does it warrant an investigation? If to rule out the true identification and move forward, yes I think so. In my VERY simple mind----there are 3 possibilities.
1) it isnt aircraft wreckage after all, which makes 2 & 3 moot points.
2) It is aircraft wreckage, but not of the Electra, as Identified by being onsite and digging up the artifact, and examining it for positively identifiable parts.
or 3) It IS the Electra NR16020 as not only identified by markings, characteristics, and or large NR16020 on battered but identifiable wings. So---an Archaelogists would excavate--underwater archaeologist-and bring forth the artifact for examination.
When Dr. Ballard found the Titanic, I would bet that he knew what he was looking for, and had a good starting point. But I bet when he found her, it wasnt what he expected. Were there other sunken ship in the area of the Titanic? Gee I dont know. Possibily some former German U-Boats, but not a 900 foot ocean liner. Maybe there is anothe ship there. but what he did was make corrolate a theory on where to look, and then LOOKED. Not inlike what TIGHAR is doing here. Dr King and others have done archaeological digs on Niku several times, and have found artifacts. Are they proven to be from AE & Fred? I dont know, and I'm not convinced.
Is the 'wreckage of the Norwich City on the reef and the ocean bottom of Niku? Yep---because people were there and documented it. Did Dr Ballard find the Titanic, the Bismark, PT109 and other things? (i'd like to hear the story onthe PT109 search---a REAL needle in the Pacific!). Yes---because he went and documented it, and has artifacts to show.
Dr. Malcolm, as an archaeologist, you take a theory and go investigate and try to come up with visual documentation by way of artifacts to prove the theory. If I'm wrong----please explain it to me in VERY simple terms so I can understand them, like Gary did a while back on navigation. You dont have to agree with the theory, just how to go about proving its validity. (Was the Bimini Road constructed by ancient astronauts? Is Thera and Santori the site of Atlantis? Why are there Pyramids in Egypt, and the Americas? Is there cheese on the moon? ) All good things to investigate--except the cheese on the moon, but we went there anyway for other archaeological and geological purposes. So---just because you dont agree with the purpose or direction of TIGHARS direction of the Earhart Project, dont bash those of us that have other opinions, and have expressed them here for all to see. It you have one---do tell, and back it up. If you thing the AE & Fred were hit by lightning and disentegrated--say so and show us. OR---show up in DC and you and I and everyone else can discuss this and get a better understanding.
I look forward to learning from you.
Tom