Ok I'll bite----Mr McKay----what is YOUR theory, and stand on this investigation? I ask, because every point that is made---even by people that have BEEN to Niku--Ric, Andrew, Tom King, and many others--seems to have a counterpoint of negativity with you.
My point is that despite what you claim and many visits to Nikumaroro there is no conclusive evidence that Earhart and Noonan were ever on the island. My approach to all these sorts of things is to take each piece of "evidence" and look at it individually. So far I have correctly pointed out that this apparent long spar like thing seen by Emily could not be from the Electra - unless Lockheed made a special one in which the main spar was made of tubular steel and I have also pointed out correctly that aluminium doesn't rust. So if you find that upsetting don't blame me, blame reality.
I have also asked several questions regarding the search by Lambrecht and his colleagues. I asked why if now there is supposedly a chunk of the Electra on the reef it was not visible in the fly over in 1937. I have received absolutely no response to that. I also asked like many why if Earhart and Noonan were there they were not seen. The general answer is that they were too weak and ill and under trees out of sight - that is quite possible I'll agree, but it doesn't quite fit with the Electra not being visible, nor, as has been suggested, the Navy aviators weren't up to the task.
In a separate thread I asked about fish traps and possible use on Nikumaroro and discussed the matter of the native reluctance to catch and eat reef fish due to the
Ciguatera toxin. However it would seem that this cultural prohibition seems not to have been completely observed because there is at least one identified fish trap on the island. Is that fish trap of native or European origin? because if it is the latter it is a remarkably efficient way to catch fish and might be proof of Earhart's presence. It might not be though.
In regard to the ash lenses at the 7 site I have raised a perfectly valid point that these do not indicate anything other than at various times people had built fires there and cooked fish. The faunal evidence is differentiated by species but there is no evidence that allows us to safely differentiate who it was that cooked it. Earhart and Noonan could have used the fires but so could the locals - there is anecdotal evidence that the area was a bit of a local "lovers lane".
In regard to the claims by the Nikumaroroans that parts of aircraft wreckage were along the tree line and that they had found the skeletons of a man and a woman I simply stated that these claims appear to grow in detail and certainty over time (like any urban myth). I also pointed out that none of this detail appears in Gallagher's report and I offered the suggestion, based I add on personal experience in dealing with indigenous testimony, that perhaps the accounts stem in the main from local speculation after the finding of the skeleton by Gallagher, rather than existing before that event. That is how any person assessing indigenous evidence works, or for that matter anybody assessing any witness statement works, you find the point at which the accounts begin.
I have suggested that it is possible that the Electra, if it is at Nikumaroro is likely to be in deep water off the reef, and if it landed and disappeared between when Earhart and Noonan disappeared and when the Navy flew over searching for them then it was most likely washed off the reef more or less in one piece and quickly sank into deep water. I have also suggested politely that there is nothing but lumps of coral and one piece of metal cable in the ROV footage.
I remain unconvinced by the reexamination of the
missing skeletal material. Unconvinced means just that, not that I disagree with it or support it, simply that because the material is missing then we cannot make any conclusive decision as to its identity or ethnicity. If the coming trip does find more and it can be identified then excellent but the key is that it needs to be found. The small find evidence is at best inconclusive - if identifiable remains are found or if the Electra is found off the reef by the ROV then it will still be inconclusive because between 1937 and 1946 there were many Europeans on the island and after that until the end of settlement in 1965 the presence of European artifacts would be routine. Much is made of the small finds but they are simply items of European origin, not proven items that originated with the supposed landing of Earhart and Noonan on the island in 1937.
If the next trip finds conclusive evidence, which it now must, that Earhart and Noonan met their deaths on the island then good. If it doesn't then I would say that it is time to consider other options. As for my preferences as to their fate - I admit I have no idea, if I did and had the proof we wouldn't be having this discussion. But questioning evidence claims is what people like myself do, that isn't negativity it is simply working through the data. Oh and it isn't Mr McKay it is actually Dr McKay but you can call me Malcolm.