Joe,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I always enjoy reading your posts.
Thanks. I enjoy reading yours as well. I can see that behind the scenes, you've put a lot of research into what you're saying.
I’m not sure Ric is actually saying what you claim he does, but in any case I’m not following how from the map of the Bushnell team’s survey points one can conclude that the Bushnell sailors were not at the Seven Site. Can you flesh this out for me?
What I said above was really just a fancy way of saying, Ric is not absolutely sure, but he thinks the evidence points more in one direction than the other. By "conclude," I should point out, I don't mean to say the answer is final and unimpeachable and that new evidence, such as what you seek, couldn't overturn all of it. What I'm saying is, the conclusion is based upon where some think (not know) the evidence points. By the way, I never let such "conclusions" stop me from pursuing the data, and I don't believe you will - or should - either.
Just one brief example: There was a very brief moment back in 2010 in which we had "concluded" the ointment jar held a food product. We backtracked, took another look, and concluded all over again from glass catalogs that, no, actually it probably didn't. Glass catalogs had ample evidence that the type of jar in question had been used for cosmetic ointments. No harm done. This sort of thing happens all the time.
You say that I have not provided evidence that a Bushnell sailor left a sextant box at the Seven Site. Indeed I have not, any more than Tighar has provided evidence that that Noonan carried a Brandis/Naval Observatory sextant onto the Electra on his last flight.
If by evidence you mean proof, then you're right. I offered no proof. But I did offer evidence, as did you. If you look at the photo of Victor Wright I've attached, you'll see there's some very good documentary evidence that Noonan carried sextant boxes, probably with the same dovetailed joinery Harold Gatty observed when he looked at the Nikumaroro sextant box, on his flights. Wright and Noonan were like Spock and Captain Kirk in those early days, so there's even a chance the box pictured in the background may be the same one found on Gardner Island, according to the bulletin I cited earlier.
Now, this is speculative interpretation of the evidence, but I find this to be an interesting coincidence.
You have proof the Bushnell Party was there and one can speculate they used sextants of the type that may have been contained in the sextant box found on Nikumaroro. It would remain for each to weigh this in his own way and decide what he or she thinks happened. This is fine. In light of the sum total of evidence for the Nikumaroro Hypothesis that TIGHAR has gathered, I rather believe that the sextant would not ultimately be necessary as evidence in its overall case. The sextant box is not worth an argument per se, but it might be a good springboard for a discussion on how one or another approaches the overall evidence.
I’ve suggested that a good case can be made that the sextant box found on Gardner could have been from the Bushnell.
Yes, you've made a good case. If the sextant box were the only thing the Nikumaroro Hypothesis had going for it, I'd even say your case is the most probable version of events. When you combine the fact that the sextant box was found with a diorama of other artifacts, faunal evidence, and human remains of a castaway, along with the radio evidence, the navigational logic, and anecdotal evidence, it seems logical that the sextant box
may have belonged to the castaways who were Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. Please note I did say may. Gallagher, who was there, seemed to have thought so, given that he went to some degree of effort to describe it to the authorities who questioned him about it. The authorities, who examined the box, also thought it worth sending to two experts in air navigation for an opinion. These experts did not share TIGHAR's opinion. You might be pleased as well to know that the Western Pacific High Comissioner would have readily subscribed to your Bushnell Hypothesis.
Alternative solutions can be generated by isolating each piece of evidence. It just becomes much harder to do so when you imagine the entire scene that must have greeted Gallagher when he came upon the bones.
I think one of the problems we are having is that many of us, and I am one, have become so accustomed to ambiguity and uncertainty in the data that we've long since become dependent on probabilities. We have also become quite accustomed not to rely upon any single piece of evidence or artifact as the key to solving the mystery. It's the difference between a smoking gun and preponderance of evidence. I am firmly in the preponderance of evidence school of thinking. By this same token, I believe in the details of each piece of evidence, learning absolutely everything one can possibly know, not to strengthen it as a smoking gun, but to strengthen the overall chain of evidence.
I hope this has not led to any misapprehension that I or anyone else knows any of these things for sure. And, yes, I can see quite clearly how the chain of events with the Bushnell party could have happened. I am simply inclined to suppose that a different set of events happened.
Wouldn't it be better to look for the evidence that will end the argument?).
I personally do not have any immediate plans to do more extensive research on the sextant for the simple reason that I'm already committed to a set of other projects with the artifactual glass. I simply don't have that much free time. One of the reasons I could write more than usual yesterday was a rare vacation day. This doesn't mean that you should not pursue it, or that anyone else should not. Have at it.
By the way, I would like to state, for the record, that the answer to the question below will always be a hearty 'yes'.
- Are there facts of which I am unaware or had not well considered?
Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR