TIGHAR
Amelia Earhart Search Forum => The Islands: Expeditions, Facts, Castaway, Finds and Environs => Topic started by: Alan Williams on June 21, 2010, 09:48:03 AM
-
Just wondering what others see as the most compelling argument or reason or confirmed fact or single found object to cause you feel confident Gardner was the terminus of the flight? What most gives you the belief or gut feeling that the Electra came down out of the sky to Gardner where they lived for even a few days?
Also, just wondering what others see as the biggest obstacle to saying confidently the Electra landed at Gardner, to saying it was Gardner beyond a shadow of a doubt? What just hasn't yet been demonstrated? What's the biggest missing piece of the puzzle? What still nags at you about it?
(...and who knows, maybe the uncertainty is one of the things we love about the mystery?...)
So to you, what's the one thing that just says, "Gardner had to be it"? ...and what's the one thing that just says, "If Gardner was it, wouldn't this have been demonstrated or found?"
-
Just wondering what others see as the most compelling argument or reason or confirmed fact or single found object to cause you feel confident Gardner was the terminus of the flight?
For me, that's like asking "which stone in the arch is really holding everything up?" Or, perhaps better, "Which fiber in this rope is holding the weight of the anchor?" But I'll play the game, sort of. Here are big components of the Niku Hypothesis (http://tighar.org/wiki/Niku_hypothesis):
- The skeleton of the castaway. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Skeleton)
- The numbers on the sextant box. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Sextant)
- Navigational logic. (http://tighar.org/wiki/%22We_are_on_the_line_157_337%22)
- Post-loss radio traffic. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Plrm)
- Dissatisfaction with alternative theories. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Alternative_theories)
What most gives you the belief or gut feeling that the Electra came down out of the sky to Gardner where they lived for even a few days?
- Post-loss radio traffic. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Plrm)
Also, just wondering what others see as the biggest obstacle to saying confidently the Electra landed at Gardner, to saying it was Gardner beyond a shadow of a doubt?
The failure to notice the wrecked aircraft:
- Colorado overflight. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Colorado)
- GEIC Survey (1937) (http://tighar.org/wiki/GEIC_Survey_of_Nikumaroro_(1937))
- NZ Survey (1938) (http://tighar.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Survey_(1938))
- USS Bushnell Survey (1939) (http://tighar.org/wiki/USS_Bushnell_Survey_%281939%29)
What just hasn't yet been demonstrated? What's the biggest missing piece of the puzzle? What still nags at you about it?
Possibly demonstrable: that the sextant box numbers are from the instrument maker and the Naval Observatory. That is a question that might be answered by digging deeper into the N.O. archives.
Biggest missing piece: the engines and props.
Nagging questions:
- Who has the kanawa box (http://tighar.org/wiki/The_Kanawa_box)?
- Who has Gallagher's papers (http://tighar.org/wiki/Gallagher)?
There are other items on the "Join the search" (http://tighar.org/news/join-the-search) page.
-
Thanks for a couple of excellent responses, would love to hear more.
***
One of the most compelling things about this mystery is the twists and turns it takes as one discovers more. I've spent a couple dozen hours on the site and I'm half way through the book Finding Amelia and I'm impressed by the meticulous research. What an outstanding job.
As I'm reading or reflecting on what I've learned, I've sometimes thought I might have come up with a most "out of the box" question, only to find it has indeed already been asked. Thinking out loud, though, don't amateurs sometimes add valuable insights? For example, isn't it possible for the amateur who doesn't know much to sometimes ask the question that leads to a question and similar that leads a key answer?
Along that line, questions I've thought of (which have probably already been asked) include:
Could the aluminum discovered to have been used by islanders for jewelry making be analyzed to see if there might be a molecular/atomic signature similar to the aluminum being used by Lockheed in the 1930s? Same thing for the shoe heel and other objects. Could it be determined if the aluminum was heated for forming and if so approximately how long ago?
Could the sea water supposed to be down current from where the Electra engines are presumed be analyzed for decomposition particles consistent with Electra engines or Electra engine lubrication?
Could hundreds/thousands of soil/debris samples be taken randomly or on a grid pattern from the Seven Site be analyzed for traces of DNA consistent with AE? Are AE family DNA samples available in the laboratory now?
Could any cabinet or room or table or tools or clothes that might have possibly touched the original bones be located and be examined for trace samples of AE DNA or simply even one of AE ethnic origin? Would the discoverers of the bones possibly kept a souvenir that could be located?
Could any type of surface based detection system differentiate metal from rock and possibly be "tuned" to detect a subsurface object consistent with a 73 yro decomposing eight-hundred and some odd pound Electra engine?
Could the world's most sensitive search and rescue dogs be presented with some AE articles and allowed to roam the island for possible locations of bones/artifacts? (Granted, pretty far stretch 73 yrs later)
Where might there be more photos, civilian/military, of the island from the time closest to the lost flight to examine for clues?
Could artist's renderings of potential crash landing scenarios be constructed, some believed to be accurate and some clearly not, to be presented to survivors of island population for feedback?
On the next expedition can a large object consistent with the size and weight of the Electra be positioned where the Electra is imagined to have come to rest for the purpose of examining it later satellite/air photos and to study it's movement by tide/surge/storm activity?
At the lowest possible tide could air photos be taken of the reef where landing was presumed to later be forensically analyzed for marks consistent with blown-tire gear scraping groves in the reef or for metal deposits? (Roman ruins have been discovered revealed exclusively through air photo analysis, Oregon Trail wagon tracks are still visible in satellite images)
Is the depth/arrangement of objects found at Seven Site consistent with the presumed time frame? Can other types of studies be performed on the historical campfire such as ferric particle orientation or similar that would shed a clue as to the time of fires?
Was any type of organic matter, fruits/vegetables/leather/natural rubber, presumed carried on the flight that upon decomposing would have left a signature in the soil different enough from native materials that could be analyzed for?
What else?...
-
Well sir ,
That is a very compelling list of questions! The one regarding cadaver dogs caught my eye especially. I have experience with cadaver dog owners and "they claim" that if the grave site is located in a moist environment, Cadaver dogs have been known to locate graves as old as 50 plus years. Now I would assume Niku would be considered a moist environment. Great questions!
Michael
-
(I apologize for altering the spirit and intent of my original post and "getting off track". I now realize I should have started a different thread in the proper discussion area. Is it possible to move this to start a new thread? I remain very genuinely interested in the original questions)
***
After posting that list of questions, the one that I've fiddled with the most has been this one:
"At the lowest possible tide could air photos be taken of the reef where landing was presumed to later be forensically analyzed for marks consistent with blown-tire gear scraping groves in the reef or for metal deposits? (Roman ruins have been discovered revealed exclusively through air photo analysis, Oregon Trail wagon tracks are still visible in satellite images)"
Hm, I like this question ...so, to restate, how about at a predicted several year low-tide event, that is tide so low the entire reef is cleanly exposed, a series of aerial images were taken to be analyzed for indications of blown-tire gear altering the surface of the reef. And, consider, coral or other material may have long since filled-in any deformations, but wouldn't the new growth have a potentially different signature and appear differently under different types of analysis? Who knows, maybe the new material that filled-in was higher in some particular mineral due to ocean water conditions changing over time that could be detected under some type of spectral analysis. Again, Roman ruins that had remained undetected while people worked and lived directly on top of for two thousand years are just as plain as day when viewed in aerial images.
-
One of the most compelling things about this mystery is the twists and turns it takes as one discovers more. I've spent a couple dozen hours on the site and I'm half way through the book Finding Amelia and I'm impressed by the meticulous research. What an outstanding job.
Agree. Ric did an outstanding job on the book. (http://tighar.org/wiki/FA) It should probably be required reading for all posters in the Forum. :D
As I'm reading or reflecting on what I've learned, I've sometimes thought I might have come up with a most "out of the box" question, only to find it has indeed already been asked. Thinking out loud, though, don't amateurs sometimes add valuable insights? For example, isn't it possible for the amateur who doesn't know much to sometimes ask the question that leads to a question and similar that leads a key answer?
I don't know what the statistics are on that. TIGHAR is a mixture of amateurs (I'm in that class) and professionals (e.g., Tom King, Ph.D. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Tom_King)). TIGHAR started working on the AE case in 1988. (http://tighar.org/timeline.html) A lot of amateurs have asked a lot of questions, for good or for ill.
Could the aluminum discovered to have been used by islanders for jewelry making be analyzed to see if there might be a molecular/atomic signature similar to the aluminum being used by Lockheed in the 1930s? Same thing for the shoe heel and other objects. Could it be determined if the aluminum was heated for forming and if so approximately how long ago?
See "History Detectives Report: A Piece of the Grail?" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/54_HistoryDetectives/%20%2054_HDreport.html) My Wildly Amateur Guess is "no," but other EPAC members are optimistic.
Could the sea water supposed to be down current from where the Electra engines are presumed be analyzed for decomposition particles consistent with Electra engines or Electra engine lubrication?
No. Apart from the massive quantities of water that have flowed over and around the seamount, any signal from the engines would be swamped by noise from the wreck of the wreck of the Norwich City. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Norwich_City)
Could hundreds/thousands of soil/debris samples be taken randomly or on a grid pattern from the Seven Site be analyzed for traces of DNA consistent with AE?
"If you've got the money, honey, TIGHAR's got the time." I don't think you understand how expensive it is to get a team to the Seven Site to collect samples nor how expensive DNA testing is.
Are AE family DNA samples available in the laboratory now?
Yes.
Could any cabinet or room or table or tools or clothes that might have possibly touched the original bones be located and be examined for trace samples of AE DNA or simply even one of AE ethnic origin?
No. The original furniture and rooms are long gone. The WPHC (http://tighar.org/wiki/WPHC) pulled out of Suva in 1952. The Fiji School of Medicine (http://tighar.org/wiki/FSM) is in new buildings.
Would the discoverers of the bones possibly kept a souvenir that could be located?
Possibly. Roger Kelley and I were the second TIGHAR team sent to Suva (http://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_II) to look for the bones and the sextant box. We couldn't find any leads to them.
Could any type of surface based detection system differentiate metal from rock and possibly be "tuned" to detect a subsurface object consistent with a 73 yro decomposing eight-hundred and some odd pound Electra engine?
No.
Could the world's most sensitive search and rescue dogs be presented with some AE articles and allowed to roam the island for possible locations of bones/artifacts? (Granted, pretty far stretch 73 yrs later)
"If you've got the money ..." But I don't think you understand the size of the island or how long such a search would take. I also doubt that any museum with AE's clothing would allow it to travel to Niku for such a search. However, money talks.
Where might there be more photos, civilian/military, of the island from the time closest to the lost flight to examine for clues?
Anywhere in the world.
Could artist's renderings of potential crash landing scenarios be constructed, some believed to be accurate and some clearly not, to be presented to survivors of island population for feedback?
This would have been done if the Solomon Islands were safe enough. A TIGHAR researcher did visit Nikumaroro Village (http://tighar.org/wiki/Nikumaroro_village,_Waghena_Island) before TIGHAR knew about the bones file. (http://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_file)
Of course, the survivors are probably very few by now. The PISS colony (http://tighar.org/wiki/PISS) folded in 1963.
On the next expedition can a large object consistent with the size and weight of the Electra be positioned where the Electra is imagined to have come to rest for the purpose of examining it later satellite/air photos and to study its movement by tide/surge/storm activity?
All it would take is time and money. Of course, if you take an Electra to the island and allow it to be destroyed by surf action, you're liable to contaminate the search area for the pieces of the real Electra. And tick off the folks who created and manage the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) (http://www.phoenixislands.org/index.php). But sufficient funds wisely applied might overcome even those obstacles.
At the lowest possible tide could air photos be taken of the reef where landing was presumed to later be forensically analyzed for marks consistent with blown-tire gear scraping groves in the reef or for metal deposits? (Roman ruins have been discovered revealed exclusively through air photo analysis, Oregon Trail wagon tracks are still visible in satellite images)
Yes and no. Yes, you may fund the aerial photography, if you wish. You'll need quite a good aircraft, but it could be done; someone once bought a Consolidated PBY Catalina, hoping to use it to search Niku--it may still be available. No, skid marks and scratches from a rough landing would not be visible, given the nature of the reef. The ruins and wagon tracks provided a strong signal-to-noise ratio for photographic analysis. One skid track wouldn't survive on the reef.
But it's your money. You get to invest it the way you see fit.
Is the depth/arrangement of objects found at Seven Site consistent with the presumed time frame? Can other types of studies be performed on the historical campfire such as ferric particle orientation or similar that would shed a clue as to the time of fires?
If those questions can be answered, the professionals on the team will answer them. So far, the kind of analysis available to TIGHAR has not answered those questions. Nine new fire features were explored on Niku VI. Time will tell what the material collected from them can reveal about their age.
Was any type of organic matter, fruits/vegetables/leather/natural rubber, presumed carried on the flight that upon decomposing would have left a signature in the soil different enough from native materials that could be analyzed for?
No. That type of organic matter could have come from any of the first-world folks who worked on the island (http://tighar.org/TTracks/12_2/yr1.html#1).
-
Marty, Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful response; insightful as usual, much appreciated. Yep, Ric's book should be required reading; we're leaving for a week of camping this weekend, I'm packing it now - will very probably read it again...
-
Hmmm......it is all probably a bit different for me than for most. For I am somewhat still a fence-sitter...although I now lean more toward the Niku side of the equation by nearly each passing day. Which doesn't seem like much except for....at the start, and based solely upon what little bits of information that have been carried by the various news services since Tighar began into it all, I was an absolute and adamant non-believer.
Although I am an ex-professional pilot (when the industry took a powder in the early '80's, I gave it up and spent the following 25+ years with the FAA as a Controller) I never really looked at all below the surface of the matter until just recently. And on the surface of it all, I just didn't buy the Niku theory in any form.
So...what has caused me to change my mind?
I have several thousand hours flight time, many of which are in BE18's (not quite an L10 by any stretch, but very vaguely similar) and I have also had a certain amount of training in celestial navigation and some experience flying in unpopulated regions (although in my case it was Canada and Alaska instead of any tropical venues.)
After looking deeper into the matter, and actually seeing some of the area charts of that vintage and certain other navigational details pertinent to that particular day and time, it dawned upon me that....based upon those details I have seen, if I had been making that flight I probably would have wound up on Niku myself. (This of course assumes fuel enough to get there.) It just makes too much sense.
Add to this the overall history of the island, the skeletal findings and the associated sextant box, the timing and nature of the post-loss radio transmissions, and some (not all) of the smaller items that have been found in the neighbourhood since. In view of all of this...I drank the Kool-Aid.
While I still will not say that it absolutely positively has to be there, my opinion is that this is by far the best of the available theories to date and has much more to support it than any of the others....including lost-at-sea (which in itself is a null-feedback excuse anyway.)
Still....if it turns up on the ocean floor near Howland, I won't be too terribly surprised. But, were I a betting person...my money these days would go to Niku, hands down.
....tb
-
I, too have wondered about the possibility of analysis of the metal that was found. I know, for example, that gold and other precious metals can be identified even down to the mine from which it came in some instances.
I do NOT know however if the same would apply to aluminum.
Is it possible to compare the makeup of the discovered aluminum to another Lockheed that was under construction at a same/similar time for similar atomic signature? Does such a Lockheed exist? Would the materials have possibly come from the same "batch" so as to be relevant?
-
Somewhere out there in the category of potentially "most compelling" I keep coming back to an obscure little item from Ric's outstanding book.
Of course, the debate surrounding whether 15 yro Betty sitting in her St. Petersburg home in 1937 actually heard AE and the potential that "Betty's Notebook" reflects what AE was saying could be endless. The item that has been nagging at me is that apparently whoever Betty heard reporting to be AE kept saying over and over and over, "NYC, NYC, NYC, NYC, NYC..."
So, as Ric points out, what if Betty was hearing AE and what if AE was actually saying, "Norwich City, Norwich City, Norwich City..."?
If I were AE and on a deserted island and FN was disabled and I didn't really know where I was but I knew there was one big honking pile of man-made remains called the Norwich City I believe I would be squawking the name of the thing endlessly. Now, would anyone hearing me make the connection? Would the typical inhabitant of the South Pacific really know where the SS NC was? Who knows? However, I'd bet that if I were in AE's shoes I'd be convinced that if I could successfully communicate two single pieces of information that would guaranteed rescue it would be 1) My name & 2) The name of the shipwreck where I am.
Well, I don't know, but that odd little item keeps coming back as strange enough and out of the blue enough to just possibly be a meaningful piece of the puzzle.
-
I, too have wondered about the possibility of analysis of the metal that was found. I know, for example, that gold and other precious metals can be identified even down to the mine from which it came in some instances.
I do NOT know however if the same would apply to aluminum.
Me, neither.
Is it possible to compare the makeup of the discovered aluminum to another Lockheed that was under construction at a same/similar time for similar atomic signature? Does such a Lockheed exist? Would the materials have possibly come from the same "batch" so as to be relevant?
My Wildly Amateur Guess is essentially "no." You would have to make all kinds of assumptions about how the factory used its stores of materials, even if the technology exists to fingerprint batches. The "History Detectives Report" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/54_HistoryDetectives/%20%2054_HDreport.html) suggests that there is a piece from the wreckage of the Electra at Luke Field, but I personally doubt that it would be from the same batch of aluminum as other parts of the same aircraft, let alone from another airframe built at or near the same time. Lockheed didn't just dip into an aluminum bin and pull out structural members, sheeting, cowl parts, etc., all derived from the same batch of raw materials.
Such testing might be able to rule out samples ("We can tell that this alloy couldn't have come from a 1936 airframe") but I doubt very much that it could provide a fingerprint for NR16020 ("We know this piece of aluminum came from AE's airplane.").
I'd be happy to eat the recycled electrons that communicate this opinion if I'm proven wrong.
-
I, too have wondered about the possibility of analysis of the metal that was found. I know, for example, that gold and other precious metals can be identified even down to the mine from which it came in some instances.
I do NOT know however if the same would apply to aluminum.
Me, neither.
Is it possible to compare the makeup of the discovered aluminum to another Lockheed that was under construction at a same/similar time for similar atomic signature? Does such a Lockheed exist? Would the materials have possibly come from the same "batch" so as to be relevant?
My Wildly Amateur Guess is essentially "no." You would have to make all kinds of assumptions about how the factory used its stores of materials, even if the technology exists to fingerprint batches. The "History Detectives Report" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/54_HistoryDetectives/%20%2054_HDreport.html) suggests that there is a piece from the wreckage of the Electra at Luke Field, but I personally doubt that it would be from the same batch of aluminum as other parts of the same aircraft, let alone from another airframe built at or near the same time. Lockheed didn't just dip into an aluminum bin and pull out structural members, sheeting, cowl parts, etc., all derived from the same batch of raw materials.
Such testing might be able to rule out samples ("We can tell that this alloy couldn't have come from a 1936 airframe") but I doubt very much that it could provide a fingerprint for NR16020 ("We know this piece of aluminum came from AE's airplane.").
I'd be happy to eat the recycled electrons that communicate this opinion if I'm proven wrong.
that is my understanding as well. From my vague memory of metalurgy at that time, aluminum was still just being brought into it's own as far as a good strong alloy. It was referred to as duralumin I believe. it was the precurser to the "aircraft aluminim" we know today as 6061. i'm sure there is enough difference in the alloy to be able to tell a 1936 piece from a WWII piece.
-
Along the same lines, what is the most compelling evidence that the 7-site is the site of the castaway remains as mentioned by Gallagher?
What is the single biggest evidence or gut feel that points to the 7-site?
What is the compelling evidence that would suggest a site other than the 7-site for the castaway remains?
What unanswered questions remain about the 7-site (other than DNA evidence)?
-
Along the same lines, what is the most compelling evidence that the 7-site is the site of the castaway remains as mentioned by Gallagher?
What is the single biggest evidence or gut feel that points to the 7-site?
Tom King made a nice list of reasons for thinking TIGHAR has found the castaway's last camp (http://tighar.org/wiki/Seven_site#Was_the_Seven_Site_the_Site_of_the_Bones_Discovery.3F). That was before Niku VI, so the list may be longer now.
What is the compelling evidence that would suggest a site other than the 7-site for the castaway remains
TIGHAR's inability to find teeth and bones that almost certainly were missed by Gallagher's search.
What unanswered questions remain about the 7-site (other than DNA evidence)?
What happened to the contents of the sextant box? (http://tighar.org/wiki/Sextant)
-
Along the same lines, what is the most compelling evidence that the 7-site is the site of the castaway remains as mentioned by Gallagher?
What is the single biggest evidence or gut feel that points to the 7-site?
Tom King made a nice list of reasons for thinking TIGHAR has found the castaway's last camp (http://tighar.org/wiki/Seven_site#Was_the_Seven_Site_the_Site_of_the_Bones_Discovery.3F). That was before Niku VI, so the list may be longer now.
Thanks for the link Marty. That's a very nice writeup that will give me more to read :)
What is the compelling evidence that would suggest a site other than the 7-site for the castaway remains
TIGHAR's inability to find teeth and bones that almost certainly were missed by Gallagher's search.
Are there any plans to extensively map and raid crab burrows?
-
Are there any plans to extensively map and raid crab burrows?
"Rolling Thunder" (the game plan for the Seven Site on Niku VI) did some exploratory work on crab burrows. They also collected more information from the taphonomy experiment (http://tighar.org/wiki/Taphonomy).
We'll get more news from TIGHAR Tracks and the team, I think, in the coming weeks.
-
The crab burrow thing seemed hair raising from the posts via Ric on the expedition. There's no way that i'd want to stick my hand down a crab burrow unless i knew the owner was off visiting freinds and neigbours.
-
The crab burrow thing seemed hair raising from the posts via Ric on the expedition. There's no way that i'd want to stick my hand down a crab burrow unless i knew the owner was off visiting freinds and neigbours.
A finger or two seems like such a small price to pay to advance history..... (so long as it's someone else's hand :) )
Seriously though, it would be interesting to see why Coconut crabs are interested in the small bones. Perhaps they grind up and consume the calcium which helps to develop their exoskeleton. If there are coconut crabs in a zoo, it seems like experiments that would help to answer these questions could be constructed and information gleaned without having to travel to Niku.
-
Tom King made a nice list of reasons for thinking TIGHAR has found the castaway's last camp (http://tighar.org/wiki/Seven_site#Was_the_Seven_Site_the_Site_of_the_Bones_Discovery.3F). That was before Niku VI, so the list may be longer now.
Marty, I've seen several Youtube videos clips which together represent about a twenty minute interview with Dr. Tom King. It appears to have been filmed while working on Niku and Dr. King is speaking about the search and likelyhood of finding more evidence. In the interview, Dr. King seems to say or imply a couple of times something to the effect of not being surprised if the plane is ultimately found elsewhere. As far as I recall, I casually noted the interview seemed to have been filmed about ten or twelve years ago. Question: Any idea of whether I had read Dr. King correctly? As far as you're aware was he initially a bit of a skeptic even while actively conducting work on the island? (What good scientist isn't a skeptic?) Would you guess that finds that have been made in the past few years have gone most of the way toward convincing him of the likely probability of the Niku hypothesis? Also, finally, any thoughts about Dr. King's fictional book about the lost flight? Does it simply lay-out "fictionally" what is presumed by educated guesses to have happened? Any thoughts appreciated, just wondering. Thanks!
-
Tom King made a nice list of reasons for thinking TIGHAR has found the castaway's last camp (http://tighar.org/wiki/Seven_site#Was_the_Seven_Site_the_Site_of_the_Bones_Discovery.3F). That was before Niku VI, so the list may be longer now.
Marty, I've seen several Youtube videos clips which together represent about a twenty minute interview with Dr. Tom King. It appears to have been filmed while working on Niku and Dr. King is speaking about the search and likelyhood of finding more evidence. In the interview, Dr. King seems to say or imply a couple of times something to the effect of not being surprised if the plane is ultimately found elsewhere. As far as I recall, I casually noted the interview seemed to have been filmed about ten or twelve years ago. Question: Any idea of whether I had read Dr. King correctly? As far as you're aware was he initially a bit of a skeptic even while actively conducting work on the island? (What good scientist isn't a skeptic?) Would you guess that finds that have been made in the past few years have gone most of the way toward convincing him of the likely probability of the Niku hypothesis? Also, finally, any thoughts about Dr. King's fictional book about the lost flight? Does it simply lay-out "fictionally" what is presumed by educated guesses to have happened? Any thoughts appreciated, just wondering. Thanks!
I am not Marty, but wanted to respond. I have viewed Dr King’s videos that were made in 2001 and what I get out of it is that he thinks they are on course and at the right place looking for Earhart, but that if she were to be found on some other island or at the bottom of the ocean, that would be fine with him. I think he was being diplomatic and saying the right things.
I have read Dr King’s writings and listened to his presentation and they are very convincing. I get the impression that he is a very competent individual. Just my opinion.
-
Marty, I've seen several Youtube videos clips which together represent about a twenty minute interview with Dr. Tom King. It appears to have been filmed while working on Niku and Dr. King is speaking about the search and likelyhood of finding more evidence. In the interview, Dr. King seems to say or imply a couple of times something to the effect of not being surprised if the plane is ultimately found elsewhere. As far as I recall, I casually noted the interview seemed to have been filmed about ten or twelve years ago. Question: Any idea of whether I had read Dr. King correctly?
I had the same impression as you.
As far as you're aware was he initially a bit of a skeptic even while actively conducting work on the island? (What good scientist isn't a skeptic?) Would you guess that finds that have been made in the past few years have gone most of the way toward convincing him of the likely probability of the Niku hypothesis?
Tom is like a good lawyer. He can argue for either the prosecution or the defense. He can see the various ways the evidence can be put together to support the Niku hypothesis or some alternative.
Also, finally, any thoughts about Dr. King's fictional book about the lost flight? Does it simply lay-out "fictionally" what is presumed by educated guesses to have happened? Any thoughts appreciated, just wondering. Thanks!
I've read Shoes (http://tighar.org/wiki/Shoes) twice. It's very revealing about how Tom's mind works. Although there are three other co-authors, Tom wrote the fictional conversation that weaves everything together and unifies the book. I haven't read Thirteen Bones (http://tighar.org/wiki/Thirteen_Bones). I would rather stick to expository prose so that I know what claims are being made seriously without having to weed out the fictional elements. (Don't get me started on Dan Brown's novels!)
Bottom line: Tom sees how the evidence gathered so far points to Niku, but also sees that it is not a knockdown case.
-
Thanks both for the thoughtful replies. Yes, sounds like you both really nailed it, sounds like Dr. King is the consummate professional, diplomatic and able to see different angles as if like a lawyer while still pursuing the best known hypothesis. Watching the interview with him I thought in whatever I was doing, "I'd want that guy on my team".
Sounds like "Shoes" is the book I'll want to read next. I've read Ric's book twice now, and actually read the more "human story" parts like "Betty's Notebook" more than that. I actually read the whole chapter "Betty's Notebook" out loud to my wife while on a camping trip and she was really caught up in it. Although I understand that in his book Ric was being strictly historically accurate and only presenting historically documented facts, I was thinking I'd really enjoy it if Ric wrote an addendum with couple more chapters giving his non-confirmed "ideas" of what might have transpired on Niku. So, would you say that "Shoes" presents the evidence for Niku with a bit more focus on the human storyline and with a bit more freedom in presumptions that should logically follow what is believed to be true? Sounds right?
-
Thanks both for the thoughtful replies. Yes, sounds like you both really nailed it, sounds like Dr. King is the consummate professional, diplomatic and able to see different angles as if like a lawyer while still pursuing the best known hypothesis. Watching the interview with him I thought in whatever I was doing, "I'd want that guy on my team".
Sounds like "Shoes" is the book I'll want to read next. I've read Ric's book twice now, and actually read the more "human story" parts like "Betty's Notebook" more than that. I actually read the whole chapter "Betty's Notebook" out loud to my wife while on a camping trip and she was really caught up in it. Although I understand that in his book Ric was being strictly historically accurate and only presenting historically documented facts, I was thinking I'd really enjoy it if Ric wrote an addendum with couple more chapters giving his non-confirmed "ideas" of what might have transpired on Niku. So, would you say that "Shoes" presents the evidence for Niku with a bit more focus on the human storyline and with a bit more freedom in presumptions that should logically follow what is believed to be true? Sounds right?
alan, I know it's great fun to postulate on the could haves, but for the team leader to be postulating his own thoughts in print would make him less credible IMO. We are dealing with a historical event that is riddled with wild presumption. Ric has done his best (IMO) to not follow that trend and follow logical, scientific methods during his "investigation". dogged professionalism in the search for amelia seems to have been as rare as clues to her disappearance. Ric's method only lends more credibility to him. Let others postulate on his findings.
-
Kevin, Yes, you're absolutely right, of course! Yes, I wholeheartedly agree. You know, there are several reviews for Ric's book where the reviewer had written something like, "...and finally, although the author clearly believes the flight terminated on Niku, he never clearly states such." Yep, Kevin, you're absolutely right, let Ric present the hardest facts possible and let others expand on that if they choose. Excellent point.....
...so, along these lines, we're still saying "Shoes" is another must-read?...
-
... I was thinking I'd really enjoy it if Ric wrote an addendum with couple more chapters giving his non-confirmed "ideas" of what might have transpired on Niku.
Cf. TIGHAR Tracks (http://tighar.org/wiki/Tracks) and the Forum highlights (http://tighar.org/wiki/AESF).
So, would you say that "Shoes" presents the evidence for Niku with a bit more focus on the human storyline and with a bit more freedom in presumptions that should logically follow what is believed to be true? Sounds right?
No. There is a fictional superstructure (a conversation between an archaeologist and a beautiful young woman) within which the story of AE and TIGHAR is narrated. No liberties are taken with the facts as they were understood when the book was published.
-
Not to belabor the issue, just a couple more thoughts
....I guess what I'm trying to say is that it would be good if another book existed that told the story of the Niku hypothesis more casually for a less technically inclined reader. Many times I've talked about the AE/FN story and the work TIGHAR has done with my wife and together we've watched the lead video and the slide show w/audio track, and she is very interested but couldn't possibly get through Ric's book. I thoroughly appreciated Ric's book in which he often makes technical points regarding something like, for example, the performance of shortwave radio on different frequencies at different times of the day, yet I know my wife with zero technical background couldn't get through it.
One the compelling elements in the search to unravel this mystery is how one keeps learning more. Frequently Marty will post a link to something in the TIGHAR archives that will lead to a whole new discovery for me. What if a book existed that was not fictional, but presented the Niku hypothesis, combined and synthesized the biggest/most important pieces of the puzzle, and in addition to known fact gave compelling/scientific "what if?" arguments, and did so in really good "story telling" fashion? I'm convinced it would be a huge success/top seller.
-
... I thoroughly appreciated Ric's book in which he often makes technical points regarding something like, for example, the performance of shortwave radio on different frequencies at different times of the day, yet I know my wife with zero technical background couldn't get through it.
So you want a book for non-technical readers.
... What if a book existed that was not fictional, but presented the Niku hypothesis, combined and synthesized the biggest/most important pieces of the puzzle, and in addition to known fact gave compelling/scientific "what if?" arguments
And a book for scientists.
... and did so in really good "story telling" fashion?
And a dramatic narrative.
I'm convinced it would be a huge success/top seller.
I personally wouldn't sign a contract to deliver that book. I believe in miracles, but I don't think I can produce them on demand.
YMMV. ;)
-
Hey, hey, Marty - now you know you put words in my mouth there. :D Nope, I was consistent and didn't say it should be a book for scientists. I simply believe there is a fascinating/captivating story to be told based upon and following from Ric's brilliant work and I'm saying the story of people like you and other TIGHAR members working ingeniously and tirelessly to unravel the mystery and the story of the Niku effort/discoveries would indeed make a riveting book for the general non-technical reader. (Speaking of which, I would enjoy reading the diaries of your investigation into the mystery of the bones in Fiji.) And, the more I've thought about it, I believe you would be the one to write it.
Just imagine the service you would be doing for the whole effort if you wrote a technically/scientifically accurate work that presented the TIGHAR Niku hypothesis in a compelling "story telling" fashion. Wouldn't such a book be not unlike a two hour television special that, again, "told the story"? And, I wouldn't say one wouldn't have to stretch to tell the story of the odyssey of the evolution and pursuit of the Niku hypothesis as a "dramatic narrative". It simply already is a dramatic narrative.
Who knows, maybe in a year or two I'll be in an airport or at a bus stop and see multiple copies of your book proudly displayed as the most popular book in the nation. Just think of the additional new TIGHAR members and additional funding that would come from such a "popular" book. :o
-
Hm. ...and just imagine... what if on the next expedition the "smoking gun" is discovered, and a book such as I've described was already written and available on the shelf? Now don't get me wrong. As I've written Ric's book is brilliant, but clearly Ric's book doesn't and wasn't intended to describe the Niku odyssey. Ric's book brilliantly sets the known historical record straight and the book I'm describing would be based on and be the follow up to Ric's book.
What if after the discovery of the "smoking gun" is realized, already on the shelf is a well written "dramatic narrative" about the ingenious/tireless detective/mystery solving work done by TIGHAR? Think about it. Every book club in the nation would pick it up, it would go to the #1 best seller, it would be a just reward for over two decades of little-known work.
-
What if after the discovery of the "smoking gun" is realized, already on the shelf is a well written "dramatic narrative" about the ingenious/tireless detective/mystery solving work done by TIGHAR? Think about it. Every book club in the nation would pick it up, it would go to the #1 best seller, it would be a just reward for over two decades of little-known work.
I agree that the detective work done by TIGHAR is an interesting story in and of itself. I'm getting a kick reading all of the information on ameliapedia, this forum and the TIGHAR website. My interest in the AE story is 99% based on the lost flight and the detective work going on in trying to find the smoking gun. In my mind this is like a CSI episode only better. Even if a smoking gun isn't found, the detective work that has been done to date is still very interesting and it's clear that TIGHAR has greatly added to the information that we know about the disappearance. The castaway skeleton and the new information about the post loss radio transmissions are themselves very interesting developments that we can attribute to the tireless work of TIGHAR. The problem is that the project itself is very dynamic and new information is popping up all the time (like the Nessie photo). So writing a book now will probably be obsolete before the smoking gun is found. I have little doubts that a book after the smoking gun has been found would be a best seller though.
-
I'm sorry guys I just can't keep it a secret any longer. My book about the disappearance that chronicles the efforts of TIGHAR is completed and will be hitting the book stands soon. James Cameron has bought the movie rights and plans to Direct and Produce a $400M 3-D epic about the lost flight and disappearance. My personal Gulfstream G650 is due to arrive any day. Thanks guys! :)
-
Yeah you go! --- :D ;) ;D
-
Hey, hey, Marty - now you know you put words in my mouth there.
Just trying to help you clarify what you were saying. :P
I simply believe there is a fascinating/captivating story to be told based upon and following from Ric's brilliant work and I'm saying the story of people like you and other TIGHAR members working ingeniously and tirelessly to unravel the mystery and the story of the Niku effort/discoveries would indeed make a riveting book for the general non-technical reader.
" ... and then Fr. Moleski sat down for another four-hour session at the keyboard. With each keystroke, the conviction grew stronger until he was crying aloud, 'The gidgies! The gidgies! Who can decode the meaning of the gidgies?'
(Speaking of which, I would enjoy reading the diaries of your investigation into the mystery of the bones in Fiji.)
I've read and re-read them many times. The findings are in "Bones II" (http://tighar.org/wiki/Bones_II) and "WPHC Archives" (http://tighar.org/wiki/WPHC_Archives) (just expanded last week--see the big table at the bottom of the page).
A "compelling narrative" they're not. It's a shaggy dog story. Roger and I eliminated some places from consideration but (so far as we can tell) didn't crack the case. Now, if you're the kind of person who likes decoding filing systems, then "WPHC Archives" (http://tighar.org/wiki/WPHC_Archives) was written with you in mind. :D
And, the more I've thought about it, I believe you would be the one to write it.
I'm a believer, but I don't believe everything I hear.
I believe Ric is the master storyteller for TIGHAR; I'm not worthy to replace the cartridge in his printer.
Just imagine the service you would be doing for the whole effort if you wrote a technically/scientifically accurate work that presented the TIGHAR Niku hypothesis in a compelling "story telling" fashion. Wouldn't such a book be not unlike a two hour television special that, again, "told the story"? And, I wouldn't say one wouldn't have to stretch to tell the story of the odyssey of the evolution and pursuit of the Niku hypothesis as a "dramatic narrative". It simply already is a dramatic narrative.
There may actually be several books in TIGHAR's system from those who have paid their dues and shed their blood on Niku--especially if the court of public opinion becomes persuaded that TIGHAR has found Amelia's last resting place.
Who knows, maybe in a year or two I'll be in an airport or at a bus stop and see multiple copies of your book proudly displayed as the most popular book in the nation. Just think of the additional new TIGHAR members and additional funding that would come from such a "popular" book. :o
Strange things do happen: "The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong--but that's the way to bet." I'm betting on Ric and the other full-blooded TIGHARs myself. I see myself as sitting in the grandstands, watching them play the game.
-
Hey, Marty --- I've recognized from day-one that you were a key player that kept the AE/FN/Niku story information archived and flowing. Although Ric is the undisputed Merlin-in-a-cape behind the black curtains, little ultimately happens without organizing information for the public and presenting it in a public forum. Hey, let's write the Grand Unified TIGHAR/Niku Odyssey together :o !
-
The findings are in "Bones II" and "WPHC Archives" (just expanded last week--see the big table at the bottom of the pageA "compelling narrative" they're not. It's a shaggy dog story. Roger and I eliminated some places from consideration but (so far as we can tell) didn't crack the case. Now, if you're the kind of person who likes decoding filing systems, then "WPHC Archives" was written with you in mind.[ /quote]
JUst my 2 cents seeing as I just read both a couple of days ago ......all of them..... every word ,,,,They are well compiled and well written. Thankyou for making them very interesting reading. Hilary
-
I've recognized from day-one that you were a key player that kept the AE/FN/Niku story information archived and flowing.
I'm like the guard at the gate of the Emerald City, except not as handsome, articulate, or well-dressed.
Although Ric is the undisputed Merlin-in-a-cape behind the black curtains ...
He da man. No Ric, no TIGHAR.
Pat Thrasher--she da woman. She built the website and produced TIGHAR Tracks (http://tighar.org/wiki/Tracks)--among many other things.
... little ultimately happens without organizing information for the public and presenting it in a public forum. Hey, let's write the Grand Unified TIGHAR/Niku Odyssey together :o !
We're living the odyssey here, one post at a time. :)
-
Along the same lines, what is the most compelling evidence that the 7-site is the site of the castaway remains as mentioned by Gallagher?
The Seven Site was clearly a castaway camp but, for me, the most compelling evidence that it was the LAST castaway camp (the place where Gallagher found the bones) is the presence of what we have come to call "The Skull Hole" - a depression in the ground which, when excavated, was found to be two holes. There was a small original hole within a much larger later hole. That is consistent with the historical record that says the skull was initially buried by the islander work party that found it and later exhumed by Gallagher. It's easy to imagine Gallagher asking, "Now where was it that Koata buried the skull?" and one of the workers saying, "It was right around here someplace."
Another factor that argues for the Seven Site being the final camp is the fact that the artifacts we're finding there appear to be essential items and not the sort of thing one would leave behind when moving to a new camp.
What is the single biggest evidence or gut feel that points to the 7-site?
There is no one big piece of evidence. It's the preponderance of many big and varied pieces of evidence that make the site so compelling.
What is the compelling evidence that would suggest a site other than the 7-site for the castaway remains?
None that I can think of.
What unanswered questions remain about the 7-site (other than DNA evidence)?
I'd say the biggest question is whether Fred was there too.
-
The Seven Site was clearly a castaway camp but, for me, the most compelling evidence that it was the LAST castaway camp (the place where Gallagher found the bones) is the presence of what we have come to call "The Skull Hole" - a depression in the ground which, when excavated, was found to be two holes. There was a small original hole within a much larger later hole. That is consistent with the historical record that says the skull was initially buried by the islander work party that found it and later exhumed by Gallagher. It's easy to imagine Gallagher asking, "Now where was it that Koata buried the skull?" and one of the workers saying, "It was right around here someplace."
Another factor that argues for the Seven Site being the final camp is the fact that the artifacts we're finding there appear to be essential items and not the sort of thing one would leave behind when moving to a new camp.
Ric thanks for chiming in, you've spent more time on Niku than anyone (post PISS colony that is) and you've also invested the time to become the most familiar with the history, artifacts, theories, etc. so in my mind you're the person with the most complete perspective. So it's good to hear your viewpoints on these questions.
I agree that the presence of Skull Hole is pretty compelling. If I recall the first Niku expeditions did a full excavation of the hole and found nothing worthy of burial. Which is what makes it so easy for me to believe that it is location of the skull. After all who would go through the trouble to dig two holes in 100 degree heat and then leave them empty.
Essential artifacts, especially the knife are the clinchers. I know that a lot of work must have gone into the knife to tie it to directly to AE or FN and I assume that the connection is too tangential to have become logged in the historical record. Has any work gone on that would preclude the knife as having come from the coasties?
There is no one big piece of evidence. It's the preponderance of many big and varied pieces of evidence that make the site so compelling.
Do you have any plans to do a recap of all of the evidence from all of the Niku expeditions up through the Niku 6? I think a lot of newbies like myself would be interested in getting the bigger picture.
I'd say the biggest question is whether Fred was there too.
Definitely an intriguing, but sobering thought. If we were to conjecture for a moment that both had lived in the camp and Fred expired first while AE was still in a reasonable state of health. It would make logical sense to bury FN somewhere fairly close (he was a fairly big guy), but not too close. If that were the case, you would think that AE would have marked the grave with a pile of coral rocks or something. With that in mind would it be useful to perform a fairly detailed surface survey of the area surrounding the campsite? It sounds like a lot of hard work clearing brush, but it might yield even more than a smoking gun.
-
Essential artifacts, especially the knife are the clinchers. I know that a lot of work must have gone into the knife to tie it to directly to AE or FN and I assume that the connection is too tangential to have become logged in the historical record. Has any work gone on that would preclude the knife as having come from the coasties?
That particular type of knife - an Imperial Cutlery Easy-Open two-bladed, bone handled jack knife - was made from 1930 to 1945 so we can't preclude it from having come from one of the Coasties. What argues for the kniofe being attributable to the castaway is that it appears to have been deliberately and crudely bashed apart to extract the blades. I can think of reasons for a castaway to do something like that (i.e. use the blades to make spears for catching fish) but I can't think why a Coasties would do something like that.
Do you have any plans to do a recap of all of the evidence from all of the Niku expeditions up through the Niku 6? I think a lot of newbies like myself would be interested in getting the bigger picture.
I plan to write a follow-up to Finding Amelia that will do exactly that. It will be a big project.
If we were to conjecture for a moment that both had lived in the camp and Fred expired first while AE was still in a reasonable state of health. It would make logical sense to bury FN somewhere fairly close (he was a fairly big guy), but not too close. If that were the case, you would think that AE would have marked the grave with a pile of coral rocks or something. With that in mind would it be useful to perform a fairly detailed surface survey of the area surrounding the campsite? It sounds like a lot of hard work clearing brush, but it might yield even more than a smoking gun.
First you'd need to define the campsite - which we pretty much did on this last trip.
Then you'd need to clear the bush from the surrounding area - but how much of the surrounding area? Ten meters? Twenty meters? A hundred meters?
We've done a lot of scouting around in the local area and have found nothing that looks like it might be a grave marker - except - come to think of it - the "G" feature I found in 2001. It's shown and described on the last page of TIGHAR Tracks Vol. 17 No. 8 (http://tighar.org/TTracks/2001Vol_17/1708.pdf). It wasn't a pile of coral rocks but it WAS a marker on the surface of the ground that somebody spent a lot of time making and for which we've never come up with a plausible explanation. We call it the "G" feature but it's not a G. It just looks sort of like a G but we have no idea what it's really supposed to be. It sure doesn't look like an F or an N or an FN .. but still .. it's an unexplained mark on the ground. It never crossed my mind that it might mark the spot where something was buried. Now that that bell has been rung I feel pretty stupid. The feature was gone in 2007, apparently obliterated when scaevola growth churned the ground, but i know I could re-locate the spot again.
Why is it that these forehead-slapping moments always happen AFTER we get back? If I could rewind time back one month it would be easy to excavate the spot to confirm or deny the hypothesis that it marks the spot where something was buried. Aaaargh! Anyway, thank you Mark for starting the chain of thought that led to this little revelation. It's definitely something to put on the list of things to check out on the NEXT trip.
-
First look at the pdf and the feature seems flat. Somehow i think a western person marking a grave would use a cairn or cross marker from wood. Would it not be harder work for a casterway to fashion a 'g' symbol from collected white coral?
That saying its based upon western beliefs at my PC in 15C evening temps.
-
You're right. The feature was flat. There are very few large slabs of coral on that part of the island with which to build a cairn. It's all coral rubble. If she made a marker of wood it would rot away within just a few years. In 2007 Tom King dropped a pencil at the Seven Site. I found it on this trip with a metal detector. The metal eraser band and the graphite were there. The wood was completely gone.
But here's another thought. Would AE, an atheist, mark a grave with a cross? Maybe, out of respect for Fred's nominal Catholicism. Then again, Earhart was into astrology and the paranormal (very fashionable at that time). Any chance that the shape we call the G has some sort of significance in that world?
Conversely, might the shape have significance in traditional Gilbertese culture, in which case the feature would be most likely attributable to the later colonists.
-
"G" for grave? "G" for George?
-
Rather than thinking of grave markers maybe we should be thinking of how much effort it would take to dig a grave and mark it when you are possibly short on food, water and health?
Would it be more likely that AE? would place FN? in some form of depression and cover the body with coral, wood, vegitation or other handy items?
-
Possibly an Astrological Glyph or symbol indicating birth or death month? Interesting Just saw also that the letter G is highly regarded in Free Mason teachings also
-
That particular type of knife - an Imperial Cutlery Easy-Open two-bladed, bone handled jack knife - was made from 1930 to 1945 so we can't preclude it from having come from one of the Coasties. What argues for the kniofe being attributable to the castaway is that it appears to have been deliberately and crudely bashed apart to extract the blades. I can think of reasons for a castaway to do something like that (i.e. use the blades to make spears for catching fish) but I can't think why a Coasties would do something like that.
Yes a spear seems essential and the most logical way to catch fish, especially in the lagoon.
I plan to write a follow-up to Finding Amelia that will do exactly that. It will be a big project.
I look forward to reading it. If I recall, Finding Amelia ended with the discovery of the skeleton on Niku and it would make for very interesting reading to read a recap of the detective work that has followed.
First you'd need to define the campsite - which we pretty much did on this last trip.
Then you'd need to clear the bush from the surrounding area - but how much of the surrounding area? Ten meters? Twenty meters? A hundred meters?
We've done a lot of scouting around in the local area and have found nothing that looks like it might be a grave marker - except - come to think of it - the "G" feature I found in 2001. It's shown and described on the last page of TIGHAR Tracks Vol. 17 No. 8 (http://tighar.org/TTracks/2001Vol_17/1708.pdf). It wasn't a pile of coral rocks but it WAS a marker on the surface of the ground that somebody spent a lot of time making and for which we've never come up with a plausible explanation. We call it the "G" feature but it's not a G. It just looks sort of like a G but we have no idea what it's really supposed to be. It sure doesn't look like an F or an N or an FN .. but still .. it's an unexplained mark on the ground. It never crossed my mind that it might mark the spot where something was buried. Now that that bell has been rung I feel pretty stupid. The feature was gone in 2007, apparently obliterated when scaevola growth churned the ground, but i know I could re-locate the spot again.
The "G spot" is very intriguing (no pun intended). It reminds me of the movie National Treasure (who will be the first among us to figure out the meaning?). I agree with others that the most logical burial site would be a depression (probably shallow) which could then be filled in with coral rubble or other debris. If the G was meant as a grave marker, it might not mark the exact spot but instead a reference spot in a neighboring clearing that can easily be seen so that the grave could be relocated.
Even if the marking was not left by AE and was instead left by the colonists it may have meaning relevant to this project. Perhaps it was a symbol left by the early colonists marking something relevant like the bones of a white man? :)
Why is it that these forehead-slapping moments always happen AFTER we get back? If I could rewind time back one month it would be easy to excavate the spot to confirm or deny the hypothesis that it marks the spot where something was buried. Aaaargh! Anyway, thank you Mark for starting the chain of thought that led to this little revelation. It's definitely something to put on the list of things to check out on the NEXT trip.
Glad to help :) One question though, for it to be relevant it had to be a feature from 1937 or the early colony days that remained intact until you rediscovered it in 2001, a roughly 60 year time span. If the scaevola is active enough to churn the site and remove the feature by 2007 (6 years) it seems as though it probably would have removed it during the first 60 years before you first came across it.
-
Do you have any plans to do a recap of all of the evidence from all of the Niku expeditions up through the Niku 6? I think a lot of newbies like myself would be interested in getting the bigger picture.
I plan to write a follow-up to Finding Amelia that will do exactly that. It will be a big project.
When the search planes did not see Earhart, Noonan or the Electra on Gardner on July 9, 1937, it does not necessarily prove that Earhart was not there but unless persuasive evidence such as DNA or identifiable airplane parts are produced, then Lambrchts’ report may withstand the test of time. Thus far the sum of the evidence that you are proffering is circumstantial and hearsay and would not be persuasive in a legal setting or the court of public opinion. Even DNA evidence would be circumstantial and subject to challenge. The nearest thing to direct evidence that you could possibility find would be the airplane itself.
Black’s Law Dictionary provides numerous definitions of evidence along with case citations and evidence codes from various states. In a nutshell the most concise definition is “all the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is established or disproved.”
It appears that you have listed supporting evidence on many pages of the web site and a summary of evidence in a narrative form in the Jan 2004 TIGHAR Tracks. The most recent is a paper published online in October 2009, “What happened to Amelia Earhart, The Case for Nikumaroro” that lists seventeen reasons supporting the Niku hypothesis. It would be beneficial to see a single complete specific list of the items that you have determined to be relative evidence, pursuant to the rules of evidence and civil procedure, listed as exhibits A thru Z, that you would submit if you were asking for a declaratory judgment or ruling that confirms your hypothesis. You have stated that you plan to write a follow up to Finding Amelia that will recap all of the evidence thus far. This is a very good plan if you do a good job and present your case in a convincing manner with a complete understanding of the rules of evidence.
In general, the rules allow for the admission of relative evidence only. For example, you list as supporting evidence, the statement that “What Lt. Lambrecht couldn’t know was that there should have been no signs of “recent habitation”. The real item of evidence that would be admissible is the report itself not your spin on it. The report is documentary evidence that the search planes saw no signs of Amelia Earhart on July 9, 1937. What you would need to document and submit is evidence to support your statement “should have been no signs of recent habitation.”
A possible summation of your evidence that would be somewhat persuasive is the radio logs of the Itasca where Earhart relates that she is flying on the 157/337 line and documentary evidence that there was sufficient fuel to reach Gardner. These two items would be persuasive in indicating that Earhart was headed in the direction of the Phoenix Islands seeking an alternate landing point. The submission of the Pan American papers indicating the reception and intersection of bearings from the Phoenix Islands would be supporting evidence. From that point forward there is nothing further that is persuasive that the Electra landed on Gardner or any other Island other than the testimony that for the radio on the Electra to transmit, it must not be in the water.
To prove your case and you have the burden of proof, you must have much more and much stronger evidence and it just may be impossible to do due to the lapse of time and the environment that you working in. As Dr. Tom King has stated, there could be a point of diminishing returns.
-
How about the "G" being for Gallagher? That parcel of land was set aside for the "Komitia" or "Karaka". (Shoes, p.338)
-
First you'd need to define the campsite - which we pretty much did on this last trip.
Then you'd need to clear the bush from the surrounding area - but how much of the surrounding area? Ten meters? Twenty meters? A hundred meters?
This is a really good question. My guess to the answer would be as much as possible with the resources at hand. Perhaps have two brush clearing crews working on alternating days so brush can be removed during the full duration of the expedition without completely taxing the those who are doing this hard work. Even if the grave site of FN is not found, other items might be found that could prove very useful. On the other-hand, if the remaining bones of the castaway (presumably AE) can not be found, because they were ground up and eaten by crabs (or carried off and lost for good), it may be that locating the remains of FN may be the only smoking gun that remains above water.
Either way, clearing away as much brush as possible seems like an important step. The reminds me of a TV documentary that I watched (I think it was battlefield detectives). It described the archeology work that was done in the area around Custer's last stand after a brush fire in 1983 had cleared out the dense growth. The fire allowed archeologists unfettered access for the first time to the complete battlefield and they were able to piece together the details of the battle as it unfolded, skirmish line by skirmish line. A google search doesn't turn up a DVD, but it looks like it's available in 5 parts on youtube. Here is the link to the first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frrGhGgMj9I
Here is also a discussion of the archeology work:
http://www.amerisurv.com/content/view/6641/153/
-
If the scaevola is active enough to churn the site and remove the feature by 2007 (6 years) it seems as though it probably would have removed it during the first 60 years before you first came across it.
I agree but, as far as we know, the last people to be anywhere near that part of the island prior to when I first discovered the G feature in 2001 was when I was there with five other people in 1996. I can guarantee that none of us made the feature. Before that, the last visit to that part of the island was almost certainly before the island was evacuated in 1963. So the G feature seems to have survived a minimum of 38 years.
-
I'm sorry guys I just can't keep it a secret any longer. My book about the disappearance that chronicles the efforts of TIGHAR is completed and will be hitting the book stands soon. James Cameron has bought the movie rights and plans to Direct and Produce a $400M 3-D epic about the lost flight and disappearance. My personal Gulfstream G650 is due to arrive any day. Thanks guys! :)
Ooh, awesome! Let us know how it all works out, Mark! ;D
-
If the scaevola is active enough to churn the site and remove the feature by 2007 (6 years) it seems as though it probably would have removed it during the first 60 years before you first came across it.
I agree but, as far as we know, the last people to be anywhere near that part of the island prior to when I first discovered the G feature in 2001 was when I was there with five other people in 1996. I can guarantee that none of us made the feature. Before that, the last visit to that part of the island was almost certainly before the island was evacuated in 1963. So the G feature seems to have survived a minimum of 38 years.
Good point, perhaps the effects of global warming that are so bad for coral are good for scaevola.
Ooh, awesome! Let us know how it all works out, Mark! ;D
;D
-
I plan to write a follow-up to Finding Amelia that will do exactly that. It will be a big project.
Ric, Absolutely outstanding to hear you'd have time to do a follow up book. Any preliminary ideas for title or rough chapter layout? Can I pre-order my hardbound copy today? :)
-
Any preliminary ideas for title or rough chapter layout?
Since you're the first to ask, you can be the first to know. The working title is "Finding Amelia - the castaway of Gardner Island." The rough chapter layout is still in my head.
Can I pre-order my hardbound copy today? :)
Wow, that puts me on the spot. When I wrote "Finding Amelia - the true story of the Earhart disappearance" we pre-sold signed copies for $100 each to help fund the writing. We could do that again. It would be good to know how many others who follow this forum might be interested in something like that.
-
Can I pre-order my hardbound copy today? :)
Wow, that puts me on the spot. When I wrote "Finding Amelia - the true story of the Earhart disappearance" we pre-sold signed copies for $100 each to help fund the writing. We could do that again. It would be good to know how many others who follow this forum might be interested in something like that.
Whenever you're prepared to make the offering I'll be ready to order.
Ric, you might have seen my earlier post where I mentioned having that follow up book already on the shelves at the moment the "smoking gun" moment arrives - could be invaluable, could sell countless copies, be picked up by book clubs across the nation, go to #1. Imagine the additional members and contributions to TIGHAR for future research that could result from such higher profile exposure.
-
Count me in for the pre-order as well. It sounds like it's going to come out well after my book though, but the good news is that Cameron called and said that he was able to get Harrison Ford to play the part of Ric Gillespie ;D
-
the good news is that Cameron called and said that he was able to get Harrison Ford to play the part of Ric Gillespie ;D
Darn. Now I'm sorry I turned down the lead in the next Indiana Jones flick.
-
Graves!!!
What do we know about native graves, how would a casterways grave differ from a native grave?
How long did it take TIGHAR to excavate gaves on NIKU and how can we then compare that to the effort needed to bury someone if we have 2 casterways?
-
Ric, you might have seen my earlier post where I mentioned having that follow up book already on the shelves at the moment the "smoking gun" moment arrives - could be invaluable, .........
Wonderful idea, Alan !!!!!
By the way....you wouldn't happen to know when that will be, would you?
Kidding aside..... Ric, I would probably be interested in a copy too. (offered with the companion DVD as before, right? :) )
....tb
-
Wonderful idea, Alan !!!!!
By the way....you wouldn't happen to know when that will be, would you?
...hm ...something tells me Indy ...ahem ...I mean Ric is close...
(Hey, Ric, I've noticed you're apparently a hat collector - very cool. In the images I've seen of Niku you're wearing one of several eclectic and functional hats. Hm, maybe it's time for the classic fedora? ...you know, not for Niku but for the press interviews...)
-
You mean you want him to forgo the Regiment of Foot Zulu Standard?? Perish the thought!
He's worked too hard on making that a trademark!
....tb
-
the good news is that Cameron called and said that he was able to get Harrison Ford to play the part of Ric Gillespie ;D
Darn. Now I'm sorry I turned down the lead in the next Indiana Jones flick.
All you need is the bull whip. Seriously though the analogy is pretty close. Talk about living the dream.
Getting back to the matter at hand though, has there been any thought given to examining the tree trunks to see if any markings were made? If a castaway is lacking in paper or a writing instrument and surrounded by coral rubble (useless for leaving a marker), it seems as though putting marks on a tree might be a logical thing to do. I think it was also more common to do that back in those days. I know that many trees were probably removed by the colonists but it still may be worth searching those that remain for an "AE + FN were here" or a "where the heck is the Itasca!" scrawl or something similar.
-
I would probably be interested in a copy too. (offered with the companion DVD as before, right? :) )
Thanks Thom. Yes, I think a companion DVD would be a must.
-
I dunno ... if the chapter outlines are still in Ric's head, that can be a very *cough* interesting place to go.
Ahhhh what the heck, I too will be willing to spring for a prepublication arrangement, same as for Finding Amelia. You only live once, but as Mae West said, if you do it right, once is enough. ;D
-
Ooh, awesome! Let us know how it all works out, Mark! ;D
;D
By the way, Mark, how did you plan all of this out (the 3-D adventure)? It sounds so interesting!
-
Ooh, awesome! Let us know how it all works out, Mark! ;D
;D
By the way, Mark, how did you plan all of this out (the 3-D adventure)? It sounds so interesting!
It looks like Marty Scorcese is interested in the book rights as well so now I have to decide If I want to sell the rights to him or Cameron.
Seriously though, this is all in jest. I would never consider stealing Tighar's thunder. Well not unless the price was right..... ;D (just kidding Ric)
-
It looks like Marty Scorcese is interested in the book rights as well so now I have to decide If I want to sell the rights to him or Cameron.
Seriously though, this is all in jest. I would never consider stealing Tighar's thunder. Well not unless the price was right..... ;D (just kidding Ric)
Ahhh, I see!
-
the "G" feature I found in 2001. It's shown and described on the last page of TIGHAR Tracks Vol. 17 No. 8 (http://tighar.org/TTracks/2001Vol_17/1708.pdf). It wasn't a pile of coral rocks but it WAS a marker on the surface of the ground that somebody spent a lot of time making and for which we've never come up with a plausible explanation. We call it the "G" feature but it's not a G. It just looks sort of like a G but we have no idea what it's really supposed to be. It sure doesn't look like an F or an N or an FN .. but still .. it's an unexplained mark on the ground. It never crossed my mind that it might mark the spot where something was buried.
For what it's worth, the G feature is also mentioned and prominently captured in the Helicopter video tour of Niku. The first few times that I watched the video I wasn't sure what it meant but this thread fills in the gaps. Unlike the TIGHAR Tracks photo, the helicopter tour is in color and does a good job of conveying how well that feature stands out. Maybe it's just the time killing doodles of a castaway or perhaps much more...
-
For what it's worth, the G feature is also mentioned and prominently captured in the Helicopter video tour of Niku. The first few times that I watched the video I wasn't sure what it meant but this thread fills in the gaps. Unlike the TIGHAR Tracks photo, the helicopter tour is in color and does a good job of conveying how well that feature stands out. Maybe it's just the time killing doodles of a castaway or perhaps much more...
I'm going to vote for a G made by workers who were not terribly literate. It's "close enough for gummint work."
-
If the navigational logic is the "foundational" rationale for finding AE and FN on Gardner, then certainly the most compelling clues are Gallagher's reports and letters about finding the castaway site. These two are what have me believing that TIGHAR is on to something big.
Having said that, there's something odd with the story as it is currently presented...it just doesn't seem like normal human behavior for someone to land on the N/NW side of the island-with all of its associated landmarks-and trek down to the SE side, without any real ROI. Where's the utility?
If I can somehow put myself in their shoes, I think I would stay on the N side (after a quick recon loop of the island). There are a lot of landmarks that make this side pyschologically appealing.
A)First of all, that's where I landed. My plane-that I've spent so much time in-is there, even if it is submerged and being slowly torn apart by the tides.
B)The Norwich City is there...the primary symbol of civilization anywhere in my new world.
C)There are at least a few remains of the short-lived coconut plantation there; these signs of life might give me some comfort.
D) It's the "front-door" to the island: the primary entrance to the lagoon is here, the fringe reef is far enough away from the shore that I have a nice buffer of a comfort zone, and this whole side of the island is blunted distinctly from the rest of the island.
So I think I have some emotive reasons to stick around that side of the island.
And there are practical reasons for staying there as well:
A)Aside from the initial recon tour, why make the physical effort to go to the completely opposite end of the island, the furthest distance away from my plane?
B)Don't I want to try and "raid" the Norwich City for supplies? And if crabs and centipedes are such a problem, wouldn't I try and stay on the ship, if there was any way possible?
C)Wouldn't I try to raid the plantation for supplies as well, and what about the prevalence of coconuts on this side of the island?
D) Since the Norwich City is such a standout feature, wouldn't I expect other fliers-or anyone else coming near the island-to immediately focus on it? It seems the eye would naturally be drawn toward it; well then again why would I then walk as far away as possible from the first thing any search party or any other human would see?
As for the 7 Site itself, I don't really see what it gives me that I can't find in any other number of places on the island. It's on an incline, but so are whole stretches of Gardner. Yes, it's a narrow point between the lagoon and the ocean itself, but again there are several areas which don't seem to be that much larger. In fact, these things can be had, just a little further to the S, which is where the Coast Guard station was sited, after all. And I guess the reason the Guard station was located there was because it was on a point, and you could see a wide expanse of water, from two of the three sides of the island.
Isn't that odd? To be marooned, march not just five minutes, but several kilometers away from the built-in amenities of the N side, only to stop shy of a new position that would give you the best possible sweep of a search party in the surrounding seas and skies?
And all the bird/fish/turtle bones show that our castaway was quite ambulatory; it's not as if they were making a trek of the island, had an ankle injury and had to make-do on the spot.
Is there any possibility that they could have landed near the Seven Site? I'm not really proposing that, but I'm just trying to make sense of why someone would land on the N/NW side, and choose to camp at the Seven Site...
-
These are good questions Zach. We, of course, can't know the castaway's motivations for choosing the Seven Site and we have no way of knowing how long the castaway had been in the island before taking up residence at the Seven Site. We do, however, know a few things about the pluses and minuses of various parts of the island having spent considerable time there ourselves.
A)First of all, that's where I landed. My plane-that I've spent so much time in-is there, even if it is submerged and being slowly torn apart by the tides.
If the plane is gone, the plane is gone. Survival trumps nostalgia.
B)The Norwich City is there...the primary symbol of civilization anywhere in my new world.
A good reason for landing there. Not a good reason for staying there if there are other factors motivating you to move.
C)There are at least a few remains of the short-lived coconut plantation there; these signs of life might give me some comfort.
That part of the island is sheltered from the prevailing easterly trade winds. It's hot and miserable. The few surviving coconut trees might be an attraction until you figured out that you couldn't get to the coconuts (ever try to climb a coconut palm?) and, if you did get a coconut you can't get the thing open without loosing the liquid inside (try it sometime without a sharp bush knife).
D) It's the "front-door" to the island: the primary entrance to the lagoon is here, the fringe reef is far enough away from the shore that I have a nice buffer of a comfort zone, and this whole side of the island is blunted distinctly from the rest of the island.
This is actually the side of the island most effected by storms which tend to come out of the west. we see much more stprm damage to this shoreline than any other.
So I think I have some emotive reasons to stick around that side of the island.
Survival trumps emotion.
And there are practical reasons for staying there as well:
A)Aside from the initial recon tour, why make the physical effort to go to the completely opposite end of the island, the furthest distance away from my plane?
The plane is of no use. You need to explore the island to find the best place to survive.
B)Don't I want to try and "raid" the Norwich City for supplies? And if crabs and centipedes are such a problem, wouldn't I try and stay on the ship, if there was any way possible?
Norwich City burned after it went aground. That's why the men abandoned ship during the storm. Eight years later it was a rusty, burned out hulk.
C)Wouldn't I try to raid the plantation for supplies as well, and what about the prevalence of coconuts on this side of the island?
There's nothing to raid. There's no "plantation." Just a few coconut palms.
D) Since the Norwich City is such a standout feature, wouldn't I expect other fliers-or anyone else coming near the island-to immediately focus on it? It seems the eye would naturally be drawn toward it; well then again why would I then walk as far away as possible from the first thing any search party or any other human would see?
My concern would be to find a spot where I could get what I needed to survive and where I could get the best view of the horizons to watch for a ship.
As for the 7 Site itself, I don't really see what it gives me that I can't find in any other number of places on the island. It's on an incline, but so are whole stretches of Gardner. Yes, it's a narrow point between the lagoon and the ocean itself, but again there are several areas which don't seem to be that much larger. In fact, these things can be had, just a little further to the S, which is where the Coast Guard station was sited, after all. And I guess the reason the Guard station was located there was because it was on a point, and you could see a wide expanse of water, from two of the three sides of the island.
The Coast Guard station was sited there because there was a large area they could bulldoze and set up the antenna array for Loran. As a castaway, I would want to be somewhere where I could stay as cool as possible. That means the "windward" side of the island. I want an open forest for shade and trees I can climb to watch for ships. I want easy access to both the lagoon shore and the ocean reef for fishing and clam collecting.
Isn't that odd? To be marooned, march not just five minutes, but several kilometers away from the built-in amenities of the N side, only to stop shy of a new position that would give you the best possible sweep of a search party in the surrounding seas and skies?
I can see why it might appear that way from looking at a map and we thought it was odd until we understood the place better. "You had to be there."
And all the bird/fish/turtle bones show that our castaway was quite ambulatory; it's not as if they were making a trek of the island, had an ankle injury and had to make-do on the spot.
Is there any possibility that they could have landed near the Seven Site? I'm not really proposing that, but I'm just trying to make sense of why someone would land on the N/NW side, and choose to camp at the Seven Site...
Until we find the plane, anything is a possibility but the wind and reef surface are wrong and there's no evidence that anything like that happened there.
I hope that helps.
-
Thanks for the reply Ric!
A quick clarification: I was just trying to sketch out what might be the castaway's "mental map" of the island, which will naturally be influenced and distorted by reference points such as prominent landmarks (the entry to the lagoon) or the familiar (a shipwreck or one's own plane). And it just seems like the N/NW of the island is loaded down with these reference points.
To use a loose analogy, we have a neighborhood here in metro Seattle that is hardly top of mind for people in the region, because it is not served by any highway or major boulevard. However, new commuter rail service now actually makes it just minutes away and seemingly "closer in" to downtown than some of the highly congested neighborhoods in the urban core itself. Our "mental map" of the region is different, in this case depending on which mode of transportation we predominantly use. Likewise, the Norwich City is little more than a speck compared to the rest of the island, but I bet if you showed 100 people an aerial view of Gardner, each and every one of them would focus on the ship, and it would feature prominently in a written summary of the picture.
But I guess the point that you're making is that the mental map we might get from pictures is different than the one we form when on the ground, facing the realities of survival. I can certainly respect that.
I really like your point about the trade winds acting as heat relief for the S/SE side of the island; hopefully you or someone else can educate me (a non-aviator) on how these winds would also make landing difficult.
May I also ask: was the Norwich really damaged that bad? AE or FN couldn't scrounge for a nail or a screwdriver (for the coconut eyes) or some kind of canvass/tarp to shield from the sun? Perhaps it wasn't even accessible unless by boat...if it is beached on the reef, and the reef is dry at low tide, does that mean one could have simply walked up to the vessel at low tide via a sort of "landbridge" where the reef comes closer to the island on the northern tip? I envy those who don't have to rely on Google Earth, LOL.
Sorry for all the questions; I've been lurking here too long before deciding to jump in...
-
I really like your point about the trade winds acting as heat relief for the S/SE side of the island; hopefully you or someone else can educate me (a non-aviator) on how these winds would also make landing difficult.
As I'm sure you know, it's always best to land into the wind. At the Seven Site, the wind is always blowing almost directly onshore so landing into the wind on the reef would mean approaching from the lagoon side, clearing the trees and getting down and stopped before you reached the ocean. On the other hand, that wouldn't be a problem because the reef surface there is deeply pockmarked with big depressions that would wipe out the landing gear.
The alternative would be to make a tricky cross-wind landing lengthwise along the reef but, again, the reef surface there is too rough.
May I also ask: was the Norwich really damaged that bad? AE or FN couldn't scrounge for a nail or a screwdriver (for the coconut eyes) or some kind of canvass/tarp to shield from the sun? Perhaps it wasn't even accessible unless by boat...if it is beached on the reef, and the reef is dry at low tide, does that mean one could have simply walked up to the vessel at low tide via a sort of "landbridge" where the reef comes closer to the island on the northern tip? I envy those who don't have to rely on Google Earth, LOL.
The ship's massive triple-expansion steam engine (still standing on the reef) was fueled by oil. The grounding appears to have dislodged one of the lines that led from the fuel storage tanks to the boiler. The ship was half on, half off the reef and the pounding of the surf caused the hull to "wag it's tail." Seams failed and she began taking water. The leaking oil floated on the water rising in the hull until it reached the boiler and KA BOOM. From the later accounts of the men who were aboard it was pretty bad. They tried to launch the boats but one was smashed in the davits and the other capsized as soon as it hit the water. The ship was an inferno. 35 men went into the water, tossed by the storm waves onto the sharp coral of the reef. The sharks had a field day. 24 men reached the beach alive. The ship continued to burn until there was nothing left to burn (the entire superstructure was wood).
At low tide you could, and still can, just walk up to the wreck. It's hard to imagine that there would be any surviving canvass. A screwdriver? Maybe, if you could find it in the debris.
Sorry for all the questions; I've been lurking here too long before deciding to jump in...
[/quote]
-
Regarding the logic of the seven site's logical significance...
One argument that I have not seen mentioned about the advantage of this area of the island is its celestial significance.
Has this been pondered...
The area from the seven site southward, is the only location on the island where one would have a clear unobstructed view of BOTH the eastern and southern sky simultaneously. Since they were obviously lost, one of the first items on the agenda would be to find out where you were. Having a clear view of the southern celestial objects just before dawn would give you a nearly perfect timing of the eastern horizon at sunrise.
Has this theory been explored? I could see the first thing they would do would be to scout the island for the most beneficial vantage point in which one could most accurately determine position. Would not the 'SE' portion of the island be perfect for that? It would also fit nicely with the obivious fact that a sextant would have been needed for this type of operation.
Once this site was discovered for celestial significance. It would only make sense to stay put given all the other reasons.
Thoughts.....
-
Ric-terrific stuff! Thank you sir.
-
Interesting. I've never heard that suggested before. I wonder how important it would be to have a clear view of the southern and eastern horizons.
-
Interesting. I've never heard that suggested before. I wonder how important it would be to have a clear view of the southern and eastern horizons.
In the northern latitudes, the ecliptic (the plane in which the sun, moon, and planets travel, more or less) is to the south. If you're looking for planets, you have to look south from the north.
I don't think that is so critical near the equator. Does the Seven Site have a better view of the south and east than any other part of the island? I should think that Ameriki would be better in that regard.
In my imaginative reconstruction, the effort to identify their location would take place near the plane while they were still able to transmit. I can't imagine them heading off to the Seven Site to do star gazing with the intention of returning to the plane to transmit their findings. I think the sextant would have been ditched near the plane and the box packed with survival gear (and AE's diary) for the island walkabout.
Would the Benedictine bottle have fit into the sextant box?
-
I think the sextant would have been ditched near the plane and the box packed with survival gear (and AE's diary) for the island walkabout.
Never having seen or indeed held any sextant box i can only quess that they are bulky and heavy. Why would you lugg (man handle) one down from the north western shore to the south eastern shore unless you had the time and energy to take many journeys from the landing site.
My thought is that AE/FN had time over a few days to empty the plane of everything or anything of use. After going around the island they may have decided on the 7 site as the best place to be and moved accumulated survivial gear to it. Firstly light stuff such as bags and other hand held stuff and eventualy the box and other heavier stuff.
Does this point to the pair surviving together longer than is often beleived??
-
Nice summary and discussion. Somewhere on this site, I recall it being mentioned that the crabs were less active on one part of the island than the others. My guess is that there would be more of them on the northern end where there were more coconut trees, but I might be wrong. Can someone shed some light on this?
If it is the case that the SE part of the island has less coconut crabs while still offering some shade, then this may have also been a factor. Why? Because I'm guessing that if I'm a female castaway and used to living in relatively well-off circumstances and suddenly find myself on a deserted island with the world's largest land crabs then I would have a serious case of the heebie-jeebies. I doubt that the castaway had ever heard of a coconut crab, and the first face-to-face encounter with one must have been pretty jaw dropping. The castaway likely had no idea that coconut crabs are not man-eaters, and they would be even more mortified to find out that these "monsters" are active at night. The net result is that our castaway may have wanted to go someplace like the 7 site where there were less of them around.
As far as the sextant box goes, would it have been useful for food storage as well? I realize that the tropical heat wouldn't allow anything to be stored for long, but being able to keep food away from the crabs for a few hours or even a day at most would allow the castaway more time to search for water.
-
Regarding Crabs i seem to remember that there were a lot of burrows in the guano (sp) mud/silt on the lagon shore of the northern end.
I'd want to be away from larger amounts of crabs if i could.
Food storage - my quess is that food caught is cooked and eaten as they hunter gather. The box would store other items such as 'diary' or medecins.
-
Thanks for the info Chris. So the crabs burrow into mud along the shoreline as well? <shudder>
I'm guessing that if I had just caught something big like a turtle and had gone through the trouble of preparing and cooking it, that I'd like to find some way to store the excess for a day or so. This might prove fruitless in the tropics for our castaway though. This reminds me of the book, "Into the Wild" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_the_Wild), the sad, true-life story of Christopher McCandless. McCandless ended up stranded in Alaska and because he lacked the knowledge to prepare and smoke the meat from a Moose that he had killed, most of it rotted even while he was dying from starvation.
-
Ric,
What happens if ya'll manage to find pieces of the Electra one day? Are you guys going to put all the objects you've found over the years on exhibit, or are you going to keep it with the group?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In my opinion, the biggest missing piece is definitely the Electra. It's gotta be somewhere out in that ocean. Whether it'd be 100 miles out, 1,000 miles out, and so on. I think it's rather interesting with the multiple fires, also. I was thinking that maybe if one fire were to burn out, then the castaway(s) would go on and build another one. Then again, how could a fire burn out so quickly? Certainly, I would build fires for either A) Keep the crabs away, B) For warmth, or C) To alert rescue (if one was able to see smoke from so far away). I guess an argument could be those post-lost radio messages. Some of them were frauds, but others... Quite unexplainable, maybe. I guess it would also depend (since AE was running out of fuel) if she'd have enough "life" on the plane to transmit the messages. Then again, I guess the battery would have enough "life" left.
Now, if I remember correctly, she didn't have the radio-direction finder on the plane of the morning of July 2nd? Or did she? If so, wouldn't that be lying around somewhere in the ocean near Gardner (Niku)?
-
What happens if ya'll manage to find pieces of the Electra one day? Are you guys going to put all the objects you've found over the years on exhibit, or are you going to keep it with the group?
Decisions about what whether and how to recover and conserve aircraft wreckage will be made if and when we know where it is, how deep it is, and what condition it's in - but "keeping it within the group" is not an option.
-
Regarding the logic of the seven site's logical significance...
One argument that I have not seen mentioned about the advantage of this area of the island is its celestial significance.
Has this been pondered...
The area from the seven site southward, is the only location on the island where one would have a clear unobstructed view of BOTH the eastern and southern sky simultaneously. Since they were obviously lost, one of the first items on the agenda would be to find out where you were. Having a clear view of the southern celestial objects just before dawn would give you a nearly perfect timing of the eastern horizon at sunrise.....................
While all the above is true, I doubt that it would enter in to a decision to set up permanent camp at the Seven Site. At least I cannot think of a reason it should sway such a decision.
Once you have taken your sightings and found yourself (or nearly found yourself), the value of it is spent I should think. Unless the island moves (you didn't find any Dharma Initiative signage, did you?) once you know where you are....or know where you are near...that information isn't going to change much. Lingering about to take repeated sightings after the matter has been settled would seem pointless.
Unless one had reason to think that rescue was significantly more likely to come from the South or East, I should think food, water, shade, ease of transit beach-to-lagoon, and etc. would far outweigh celestial sightings as a basis for choosing a campsite. I suspect the ease of celestial sightings would be little more than a happy coincidence.
(Of course....the Castaway might have come for the stars and stayed for the food! Who's to say? At this level it's all just idle conjecture, I fear.)
Perhaps there is some related aspect of all of this that I have missed?
....tb
-
Decisions about what whether and how to recover and conserve aircraft wreckage will be made if and when we know where it is, how deep it is, and what condition it's in - but "keeping it within the group" is not an option.
Okay, I see. Thanks, Ric. :)
-
By far, the most compelling thing is the post loss messages. looking at the data amassed by Tighar is the study of the messages in relation to the tides on Niku, and the plots of the five or so directions from Wake, Midway, Hawaii. Itaska that point to Gardner Island. If we never find anything else, I am convinced of the Tighar Hypothesis, and so is Mother. Mike Piner
-
I will have so say, post-loss transmissions are for me the most compelling evidence of the TIGHAR hypothesis. I had started a new thread related to such, however it didn't find popular appeal.
Here is the thing, the big thing: There WEREN'T "fake" transmissions, generally speaking, there were non-corroborated/some known some possibly false reports of questionable RECEPTIONS. That is a big, big, big difference. That to me is the key, false transmissions vs questionable reports of receptions.
Post-loss transmissions, as documented in Ric's brilliant book, are to me the key... Ric and TIGHAR are on the right track...
-
For me its the one that got away -TWOF (the wheel of fortune) quite possibly a smoking gun.
Did it get destroyed by the pacific storms or is it washed up somewhere waiting to be found?
-
For me its the one that got away -TWOF (the wheel of fortune) quite possibly a smoking gun.
For those who need help understanding what Chris is talking about, see "The Wheel of Fortune" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/41_Wheel.html) and Niku VP (WOF--2003). (http://tighar.org/wiki/Niku_VP_%28WOF--2003%29)
Did it get destroyed by the pacific storms or is it washed up somewhere waiting to be found?
Who knows? Your guess is as good as anybody's. The lagoon got surveyed again on Niku VI. I suppose that if that survey had sufficient resolution and completeness, it might be possible to say that the WOF is not to be seen there. But that doesn't mean that it isn't in there somewhere, under the sand--or still in the passage somewhere, also covered with sand again.
-
For me its the one that got away -TWOF (the wheel of fortune) quite possibly a smoking gun.
For those who need help understanding what Chris is talking about, see "The Wheel of Fortune" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/41_Wheel.html) and Niku VP (WOF--2003). (http://tighar.org/wiki/Niku_VP_%28WOF--2003%29)
Did it get destroyed by the pacific storms or is it washed up somewhere waiting to be found?
Thanks Marty, very bad form not putting in the links for those readers who may not have come accross the WOF before.
Like a needle in a hay stack it could be anywere on or off the island now. In Dr Kings updated shoes it mentions that recent storms could have pulverised any items like the WOF to dust.
The 7 site and possible DNA evidence seems to be the key to additional investment for the off reef search.
Who knows? Your guess is as good as anybody's. The lagoon got surveyed again on Niku VI. I suppose that if that survey had sufficient resolution and completeness, it might be possible to say that the WOF is not to be seen there. But that doesn't mean that it isn't in there somewhere, under the sand--or still in the passage somewhere, also covered with sand again.
-
For those who need help understanding what Chris is talking about, see "The Wheel of Fortune" (http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Research/Bulletins/41_WheelofFortune/41_Wheel.html) and Niku VP (WOF--2003). (http://tighar.org/wiki/Niku_VP_%28WOF--2003%29)
Wow, the "Wheel of Fortune" seems interesting (and promising evidence)! Let's hope it can be found again in future expeditions! :) What about the aluminum pieces found on the island by TIGHAR? Has anyone figured out of what those were probably a part of?
-
Wow, the "Wheel of Fortune" seems interesting (and promising evidence)! Let's hope it can be found again in future expeditions! :) What about the aluminum pieces found on the island by TIGHAR? Has anyone figured out of what those were probably a part of?
Nothing definitive to date. 2-2-V-1 (http://tighar.org/wiki/2-2-V-1) is fascinating, but the holes haven't matched up for sure with any known Electra.
-
Nothing definitive to date. 2-2-V-1 (http://tighar.org/wiki/2-2-V-1) is fascinating, but the holes haven't matched up for sure with any known Electra.
Awh, that's a bummer. :( Thanks for the link, Marty; you're always very helpful!