Print

[C.W. Herndon]

Well, 36 inches is better than 8 -10 inches for a squirrel fish.  I'm no ichthyologist, heaven knows,  but this guy doesn't look much like Lujanus bohar to me.  Proportions look wrong and his eyes are too big.

Ric, I guess I misunderstood what everyone was looking for in the way of fish on Niku. This fish, Myripristis berndti, or another of the same Genus, looks like it could be the one in the Cook photo.

Max length- 30cm ~ 12in
Common length- 22cm ~ 8.8in

Hope this helps.

[Tim Mellon]

The similarity of the object in the Cook Photo to an airplane engine cowling is what got Tom King's attention when he saw the photo during an Explorers Club slideshow in September 2011.  I, too, noted the similarity when I first saw the photo in April 2012 but within days one of the marine biologists at the New England Aquarium had estimated the size of the "squirrel-fish looking thing" as "probably 8-10 inches total length."  If the estimate is even close to correct, the object is way too small to be an Electra engine cowling.

This is the first Ive heard that Jeff Glickman thought that the fish might be a red snapper.  Jeff didn't talk to the New England Aquarium folks.  To my knowledge there are no red snapper in the South Central Pacific.

The other thing that bothers me about the hypothesis that the object in the photo is an engine and cowling is that Craig couldn't re-locate it in 2012.  It seems like an engine and aluminum cowling sitting there without the obscuring halmeda growth we see in the 2009 photo would be easy to spot.

My opinion about the object now is about the same as it was a year ago.  It might be man-made but I can't connect it to anything on the Electra.

Ric, why do you assume there would be less halmeda obscuring the object in 2012 than in 2009?

[Ric Gillespie]

Ric, why do you assume there would be less halmeda obscuring the object in 2012 than in 2009?

I'm not assuming anything.  As I clearly said in a posting earlier in this thread, "Craig reports that during the 2012 expedition they found halmeda growth at Nikumaroro to be greatly reduced since the 2009 trip, probably due to an increase in water temperature."

[Ted G Campbell]

Ric,
I would like to know the rules re the Cook Photo.

Can we mark up the picture and re post it on this site?

I think what we have here is a clutch mechanism.

Ted Campbell

[Ric Gillespie]

Ric,
I would like to know the rules re the Cook Photo.

Can we mark up the picture and re post it on this site?

No. You can not download the photo.

[Alex Fox]

At first I was convinced it was coral.  But the more I look at it, the more it looks like it could be part of an airplane!  heh.  What a maddening thing it must be to comb through miles of coral footage... 

I'm glad there are thousands of eyes online to look at this.  Strength in numbers.  Imagine trying to do this in the 40s-70s.

[Ted G Campbell]

Ric,
Thanks for the info.
Ted Campbell

[Ted G Campbell]

Rotate the upper left corner of D4 toward the lower right coner of C3 and you might see a male/female cog coming together if they are engaged.
Ted Campbell

[Tim Mellon]

Ric, why do you assume there would be less halmeda obscuring the object in 2012 than in 2009?

I'm not assuming anything.  As I clearly said in a posting earlier in this thread, "Craig reports that during the 2012 expedition they found halmeda growth at Nikumaroro to be greatly reduced since the 2009 trip, probably due to an increase in water temperature."

Yes, Ric, I assumed that to be a generalized statement.

But we don't know specifically if it holds true for the location of this object, or whether the object could have itself still been covered with halmeda, or covered with something else by 2012, or whether the object might have been pushed elsewhere by 2012.

[Rob Seasock]

Ric any chance of breaking down the entire Cook photo into grid squares, thanks Rob. Tim Collins excellent idea by the way.

[Ric Gillespie]

But we don't know specifically if it holds true for the location of this object, or whether the object could have itself still been covered with halmeda, or covered with something else by 2012, or whether the object might have been pushed elsewhere by 2012.

..or salvaged by space aliens.  What's your point? 

[Ric Gillespie]

Ric any chance of breaking down the entire Cook photo into grid squares, thanks Rob. Tim Collins excellent idea by the way.

Why?  Do you think you see something in a different part of the photo?

[Tim Collins]

Ric,
I would like to know the rules re the Cook Photo.

Can we mark up the picture and re post it on this site?

No. You can not download the photo.

But you can? (read inquisitive tone NOT accusatory!) Perhaps you would bring together for comparason photos of the most promising possibilities like you did with the yoke?

[John Ousterhout]

In the original photo, Ric's reply #8, directly to the left of the object, near the left edge of the frame, appears (to me) to be another circular object.  It brings to my mind the vertically upright end of an open barrel, other than the unknown scale.
What do others make of it?

[Ric Gillespie]

But you can? (read inquisitive tone NOT accusatory!)

Yes.  As I explained in my posting of June 30, Dr. Cook stipulated that:
"The previous confidentiality agreement is no longer in effect and you can use the photo as you deem necessary. I retain ownership and the photo cannot be used for sale or given to third parties for usage unless I am informed and agree to that use."

I am the "you" he references.  You guys are "third parties."  Not my idea but I understand his concern.

Perhaps you would bring together for comparason photos of the most promising possibilities like you did with the yoke?

I'd be happy to do that if I knew of any promising possibilities but right now I don't know of any.