The Brines letter is reproduced in the forum. The cover wording starts "At this time its provenance is unknown but it appears to be a piece of correspondence from one journalist (“Russ Brines”) to another (Richard ?). If authentic, it contains the first contemporaneous reference we’ve seen to Noonan being a heavy drinker and also provides some interesting insights into the attitude of at least some members of the press toward Earhart’s flight and disappearance."
I have read his before. I don't see anything in the forum that says this letter has been confirmed as authentic. Its a letter or note between two correspondents, unauthenticated So does it fall into your category of undocumented supposition? It is documented as a "reference". Not as evidence. Why is it even in this forum? If we are only to make suggestions with documented evidence then why reprint it here? Is this part of your coherent account information you gathered to form your argument?
1) If it is from 3 August 1937, it is the only account we have before 1960 of any accusations about Noonan drinking too much.
2) There is nothing in the letter that disqualifies it as a legitimate source. The Gore Vidal anecdote, by contrast, is undated and is inconsistent with other things we know about 2 July 1937.
3) It is an example of psychic research. If a journalist in Honolulu wrote it, he did not bestir himself to travel to Lae and get real evidence about what actually happened in Lae.
I am basing what I have said on what I read here in this forum. You're right about lack of evidence. But lack of evidence isn't enough to say something didn't happen. You know that. The Brines letter is an example of that. You're making a point to me that evidence is important then you point me at this document. It's smoke with no fire. It's not evidence.
It may be evidence about Fred's habits, if it is authentic.
I can say that Fred smuggled booze onto the plane and was drinking the whole way from Lae to Gardner. Sober when he set his clocks. In good shape early on the trip and rip snorting drunk at the end. But that's just me "suggesting".
Brines claims to have known Fred. You can't make that claim. He doesn't say how he knew him, or when, or where. But there were Pan Am flights into Hawaii, I believe.
Brines is a researchable person. We might find out more about him that would make the letter more or less plausible.
"Suggestions" have no evidentiary value whatsoever. Correct. You have stated in several replies to forum contributors that "What is freely asserted is freely denied". Not always with those words but in principle. But we are allowed to "freely assert" our suggestions. You are allowed to "freely deny" these suggestions. and vice versa.
I have entertained your suggestion. I have done a review of what we have in hand. I have discussed what I have found in detail, and explained the inferences I have drawn from that material.
Evidence can support a "suggestion" or it can destroy it. Now look at your information you say is your coherent account. The same page I provided in my link. Under the "Delayed in Lae" wiki page http://tighar.org/wiki/Personnel_unfitness#.22Personnel_unfitness.22. So we both used the same reference material.
There is two differences I can think of. I'm the author of the page, and I expanded it today.
Granted for different purposes yet I'm called a psychic. Where on that page does it say FN was NOT drinking? It doesn't. Just like it doesn't say he WAS drinking. It just presents information to allow the reader to form their own opinion.
You have added no new evidence to the site, other than to register your suspicions about Fred. That's not "evidence" of any kind.
I am not going to further respond to your psychic comments. I read information on and off this forum and form my thoughts based on what I read and see. You may chose to disagree. For instance the light at Nauru being 5600 feet above sea level. I provided links to information that shows Nauru Island that's essentially flat and 180 feet above sea level. I provided another link to the tallest buildings and structures in the world. I believe the 5600 foot tower is a typo. I believe the tower was shorter than 5600 feet. No clairvoyance. Others disagree with me.
I agree that the 5600-foot light is a conundrum. Thanks for the links. That, too, is a researchable topic. We may be able to find out more about the purpose and placement of that light and find its true height. But the real height of the light won't change much in our imaginative reconstructions of what Fred could have, should have, or would have done.
It is their right. Just as it is your right to disagree with me. However I suggest the legal system is made up of two sides who both believe they are right. In this forum, who is the judge, providing fair and impartial comments without allowing personal bias and attack to creep in?
Every reader is a judge who decides what they will accept as valid evidence and trustworthy reasoning.
If you're calling for my resignation as a member of the webteam or removal as a moderator of the Forum, please feel free to do so. In that case, Ric Gillespie and Pat Thrasher, acting on behalf of TIGHAR's board of directors, are the judges.
I did not ask for anyone's resignation. It is one thing to state your case for your opinion as a forum contributor. It is yet another to claim a contributor has crank ideas or is doing psychic research or, as with others, claim they are fantasizing. Forum etiquette
should suggest that everyone's comments or posts be respected equally. In particular the administrator should hold himself to the highest standard and set the example regardless of his personal opinion.
I respect Marty's knowledge and as I have stated in the past he has a tough job with newbies going over old, seemingly "everyone should know this" ground. However I take exception to ANY post by anyone in this forum who personally attacks others. Take exception with their opinion by all means. Post evidence that substantiates your position. But do NOT say it in a personal negative manner. If I am wrong and personal attacks are fair game then I will leave this forum. I do know one thing and that is if
you hold someone to
your standards then
you are the judge. Marty has replied that the Individuals on this forum are the judges. That's good enough for me.
I am being told that I have not advanced evidence of FN's drinking. Where does it state that I must advance evidence of anything? Are you suggesting that to not advance evidence is some form of failure on my part? I am not allowed to advance thoughts based on current evidence?
Marty accepted his position. It comes with higher standards than a regular contributor. I happen to think he does a hell of a job. His forum management and topical knowledge are excellent.
However, lets look at his responses on the Brines letter. He says it
may be evidence but it hasn't been proven as such. It might be someday He also says it's psychic research. Well Marty which is it? I am supposed to say your right and I'm wrong based on that?? Let's agree Marty to disagree.
Many times I have agreed with his statements and position but If Marty gets frustrated by people like me then he has to decide how to handle it. Who raised the idea of him resigning? It sure wasn't me. Read the threads.
And like Jeff, if TIGHAR decides to throw me off this forum then it has been a pleasure and I am sorry I wont be able to read or contribute any further. I'll just keep talking with others.