In previous posts it has been pointed out that Putnam stated:
"'There was a two-man rubber lifeboat aboard the plane, together with life belts, flares, a Very pistol and a large yellow signal kite that could be flown above the plane or the life raft.'
Putnam said his wife had planned to take emergency food rations and plenty of water on the hazardous flight, the most dangerous on her trip around the world." New York Herald Tribune, July 3, 1937, page 1.
If Amelia became this “ castaway of the seven site “ as some would like to believe, then why would she choose to carry a freckle cream jar, and a compact with her, but not the Very pistol or the canteens (or similar vessels) she must of had to carry this “ and plenty of water “ that Putnam stated she was caring?
Yes, and where is that rubber life boat and the parachutes? And where is anything else that can be proven to have been on the airplane?
gl
That is the million dollar question isn't it?
There are items found that "might" be marketed to a woman as per Ric's post. However, they might be marketed to the general public as Sunburn cream as previously suggested. If you find a Talcum powder can, is the next leap to say it's a woman's?
Assigning gender to any cream or oinment is self serving in my opinion.
Women by nature use more creams and ointments.
However, sunburn cream, burn cream, and vaseline, and a lot of products are obviously used by both genders.
Since we do not know what the artifact held, how can it be said to be marketed to women, and then leap to the conclusion that it was bought by a woman?
The jar could have held 1916 sunburn cream. That has not been eliminated as a source. Which would be pretty natural to find and may have no connection to Earhart. Hazel atlas sold this jar to any company that wanted to buy it and fill it with an unknown number of ointments.
Picking "freckle cream", is just picking the one that fits AE best.
If she was known to have a rash, we could say it held rash cream.
But the reality is we have no clue what this jar contained.The evidence 'so far' indicates per Alan Harris's research, and a little myself, that this jar was an old jar long before Earhart's flight. Per Hazel Atlas's own advertisement in a National trade publication, this clear jar was made before 1917.
That is pretty clear.( thanks Alan for your correction..the fact this ad was placed by Hazel Atlas themselves in a National trade publication gives even more weight that the company was selling this jar in white exclusively by 1918.)
So what does Tighar have?
An old bottle, dated WWI era, that held an unknown cream. I do not see how this can be gender specific. I disagree with Ric about it being gender specific. That is not proven.
Now onto the point of whether it was "used" by Earhart. Like maybe she found the bottle and used it in her struggles.
I personally would assign no weight that it was intentionally busted. If you search a former gun range used by men with guns shooting old bottles, you will probably find a lot of intentional busted glass in a variety of odd looking shards. To pick up a shard, and then imagine it was used for cutting or whatever, is no better than camels in the sky on a coral reef in my opinion. Imagination and "could have used", is very weak. IMHO. This peice may have held vicious crabs at bay from attack. This peice may have skinned sharks. That can be done with any old shard found. An old shard with a worn down edge. From a gun range. Is it not likely a shot up old bottle run over by a Coast guard jeep or bulldozer a couple of thousand times?
You search an old coast guard station, you might find old glass shards and broken shoes. Bottom line, it's all guessing, and weak guessing in my opinion. It's old broken WWI era glass from an area known to be used as a gun range. Assign it the weight you wish.
Per Gary's point, until a plane, or her parachutes, or her flare gun, or her kite, or anything else matched to her by her Husband and by her flight records is found, you will be left with finding shards and turtle bones and shells, and then imagining them to have been touched by Earhart. It's a big leap for me.
Some buy that as strong evidence. I do not. My opinion.