Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 51   Go Down

Author Topic: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund  (Read 626274 times)

richie conroy

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1412
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #315 on: August 31, 2013, 01:16:08 AM »

Wow i just clicked post and it sed error

I log back in and you's have replied already  :o
We are an echo of the past


Member# 416
 
Logged

richie conroy

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1412
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #316 on: August 31, 2013, 01:53:08 AM »

Hi Jeff

Before the 2012 expedition there was no sonar anomaly only the 2010 Rov video what we believed showed aircraft wreckage Every one else found a solution to what our objects were and how to analyze them.

Tighar had mounted 6 expeditions to Niku before any of us had even heard of Tim, Tighar's hypothesis for the last 25 years was plane went over edge after maybe 6 days, everyone has dismissed this theory as being no more than a story!!

Then in 2013 a sonar image showing an anomaly in a place were Tighar speculated there would be one. NOT THROUGH 2010 VIDEO But through the hypothesis they have maintained over the last 25 years

Bottom Line This is just a chapter in this epic story 

Richie
We are an echo of the past


Member# 416
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #317 on: August 31, 2013, 03:53:46 AM »

"Every one else found a solution to what our objects were and how to analyze them."

Richie, to be perfectly honest it was and, still is everyone else's opinion and, at this stage that's all it is, opinion. Nothing can be proven either from any video footage or sonar anomaly. The only option left is to bring something up.
IMHO
This must be the place
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5923
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #318 on: August 31, 2013, 08:45:02 AM »

Actually, Richie, I have been led to believe that John Balderston originally posted his findings prior to the Niku VII expedition, but was prevailed upon by "the authorities" to remove his post so as not to embarass Ric at a time of maximum PR coverage. I was unaware of this until January, 2013, so my comment of last November was made with incomplete data.

"The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious.  If so it was a grievous fault, and grievously hath Caesar answered it."

If such a thing as you describe actually happened I can see how you might be misled into thinking that TIGHAR was trying to hide something,
but that is not the case. The sequence of events is very clear and available for anyone to check.

John Balderston registered to post on the Forum on July 4, 2012 - the day AFTER the Niku VII expedition departed Honolulu.
Sometime before 4:30pm that day he apparently posted two or more annotated screen-captures in which he pointed out what he believed to be Electra components in the Wire & Rope video.  At that time Richie Conroy and Jeff Victor-Hayden were posting similar screen-captures and speculating about various shapes in the coral.

At 4:30pm and again at 5:27pm, Jeff Neville posted IMO excellent cautions about the of scale and depth perception in the video.

At 5:57pm John Balderston posted:

"Hi all,

I took down my previous posts and replaced with single image of Niku reef slope.  No colored circles, arrows and annotations.  And oh yeah, I guess I pasted an aircraft image adjacent to the coral formation.  Hmmm, maybe they are there for comparison purposes.  Compare an airplane with coral?  How weird, right?

Oh, and while I think of it, it’s a real shame that TIGHAR's AE search is baseless.  Just think of all that money being spent, and nothing to see but coral! 

Cheers, John"

At 6:34pm Jeff Neville took issue with John's comment that TIGHAR's search was "baseless."  He also wrote, in part:
"All the clambor for 'wanting' stuff to 'be Electra stuff' in this footage and by so much written over it now as 'record' can be unseemly if we're not careful.  It could almost make one wonder about folks wanting to be sure they are seen as calling it 'right' before anyone else should fruit eventually be found - a bit of a turn-off, I admit."

 At 7:12pm John Balderston replied:
"Jeff, well said and appreciate your articulating.  I get it - immediate change in tone."

Two days later, at 4:47pm on July 6, John Balderston replied to a query from Greg Daspit and re-posted an image:
"Greg, I'm putting the still image back up, but passing on what I believe this is.  I'm standing by for Niku VII team to explain what they've found.  I will offer opinions regarding interpretation of this image: 1) the configuration in the foreground is proportionate and recognizable, 2) the round object is neither a tailwheel or a pulley.  Cheers, John"

Nobody pressured John into doing anything and nobody suppressed anything.  There was a free and open discussion on the Forum. I have searched my emails and the Forum records and can find no communication with John Balderston in July 2012 other than what is publicly available on the Forum.  If John or anyone else has any correspondence that relates to this please make it public. 


I also had not read the long thread alluded to in my post wherin you, Jeff Victor Hayden, and others spotted many man-made objects in the 2010 video as early as January, 2012, but were too timid to press your case when confronted by Ric's assertion that the squigglie was too small to be anything but a piece of insulation.

As I explained at the time, aboard KOK we were able to exactly match the "squiggle" in the video to an example of insulation that was in common use aboard KOK and many other vessels.  I held the example in my hand.  It was a no-brainer. Apparently you weren't in the room at the time.  If I had had any idea it would become a big issue I would have taken photos or, better yet, held on to a piece of the stuff.  I don't remember what it was called but I'll try to find out from the folks who were there.
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #319 on: August 31, 2013, 10:26:14 AM »

I would draw ever ones attention to the fact that the 2010 video footage thread went beyond the initial black squiggle, which was the object that invited further investigation of the footage. I believe that thread attracted 1721 replies and currently 110,547 views, not all focused on the black squiggly thing.
We learned much from that thread which we should really be applying to later 'debris field' discoveries and photographs, scale, armchair experts, be they of the aircraft wreckage or coral type, alternatives like the discarded fishing gear, junk tossed over the side of passing ships. Applying the same criteria to all videos and images gives us all a clearer understanding of what, if anything, is down there.
Of course there are a few other methods of identifying coral versus aircraft wreckage other than scale and possible alternatives. How about research into how aluminium actually deteriorates and looks like after 75 years submerged in seawater? e.g. Colour, appearance, separation, chemical breakdown/reactions.
Finally, and it's only my opinion but, I do think the environment around the Gardner seamount is quite unique and believe that this is hampering the search no end. Why didn't they put it into the lagoon, job done and dusted!!!  :-\
This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 10:29:51 AM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5923
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #320 on: August 31, 2013, 10:45:57 AM »

People have alleged seeing inflated tires and tail wheels without considering what water pressure at those depths would do to an inflated tire. 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #321 on: August 31, 2013, 01:45:13 PM »

It is difficult to tell whether a tyre is inflated or not unless whatever it was supporting still has it's weight pressing down on it. A sure sign that a tyre is deflated in that case would be the flat section of tyre where it is contact with the ground.  'objects' being coated in a veneer of coral accretion in one area of the reef slope but in a different area of the same reef slope they are definitely 'coral', mmm. I don't recall anyone suggesting that the wreckage of a complete Lockheed Electra had been found in one area either, just bits of 'aircraft wreckage' scattered about the reef slope. It would be nice if it was the Lockheed Electra, in a nice tidy pile, but it isn't and, no one would expect it to be, not in that location.
The main point to take on board is that, until something is brought up then, various 'debris fields' and sonar anomalies will remain open to interpretation and debate, all subjected to the same criteria, as in a controlled test exercise. IMHO of course.




This must be the place
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5923
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #322 on: August 31, 2013, 01:58:11 PM »

It is difficult to tell whether a tyre is inflated or not unless whatever it was supporting still has it's weight pressing down on it.

In sea water, the pressure is 0.485 psi per foot of depth.  At 850 feet, the pressure is 412.25 psi. What do you think is going to happen to a tire subjected to that kind of pressure?

Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #323 on: August 31, 2013, 02:34:30 PM »

It is difficult to tell whether a tyre is inflated or not unless whatever it was supporting still has it's weight pressing down on it.

In sea water, the pressure is 0.485 psi per foot of depth.  At 850 feet, the pressure is 412.25 psi. What do you think is going to happen to a tire subjected to that kind of pressure?

I would expect a deflated tyre to look exactly the same as an inflated tyre, round. As in when you take your vehicle in to have a tyre puncture repaired/tyre replaced. The guy takes a sharp intake of breath, tells you that you need a new tyre, and then charges you an arm and a leg for it. He takes the punctured one off your vehicle and puts it in the stack of previously removed punctured/worn tyres, all round, none with flat bits. All the ones removed from vehicles all look the same, round. It is only when you try to inflate them that you can tell they are useless. When he fits the new tyre to your wheel, it looks the same, round, even when deflated. When it is fully inflated it also looks the same, round. Exceptions to this general rule of ripping off customers maybe high speed blow outs and car crashes in which case the tyre suffers visible trauma, i.e. it's been shredded  :)
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #324 on: August 31, 2013, 03:02:11 PM »

"But what can we expect aircraft aluminum – specifically 24ST ALCLAD – to look like after 75 years in an active coral-growth environment? Douglas TBD-1 Devastator BuNo 1515 in Jaluit lagoon, Marshall Islands, (see To Save A Devastator) survives intact because it is in a benign lagoon, but it too has been in an active coral-growth environment for 70 years. The aluminum on that aircraft has accretions of coral growth over much of its surface."

So, why not in the 2010 video footage? It was dismissed as being definitely coral by our armchair coral experts (as opposed to our armchair aircraft wreckage experts  ;) )


"survives intact because it is in a benign lagoon"

Unlike the side of a seamount so, why would anyone expect to see all of an aircraft wreck in one small area? Not me that's for sure.
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #325 on: August 31, 2013, 03:24:59 PM »

And again...

"Is the object in the debris field that seems to resemble a fender from the Electra landing gear merely a slab of coral or are we looking at aluminum with a veneer of coral accretion? On the edge of the object facing the camera there are two places where the color is lighter than the surrounding material. One small area, marked A, is quite bright. The other area, marked B, is larger but not as bright. Are these light-colored accretions on top of the coral or are they chips that expose the aluminum beneath the coral veneer?"

Just pointing out the discrepancies in how the latest debris fields are viewed in comparison to the 2010 video footage. A number of images were posted showing exactly the same phenomenon but, were simply dismissed. Again, the mention of a coral veneer in one debris field but, not another in which it was described as being definately coral. Not that we should go over old ground again as it would not be very productive as a totally different approach to analysing what was seen in the footage is needed.
Now, I am not a supporter of one camp or another in the legal wrangling which is ongoing as I feel the main objective should be to find out just what it is that is stuck to to the side of this seamount. However, I do feel that the same criteria should be applied to all potential leads, no matter who originated them. That's why I have a lot of confidence in Richies sonar anomaly, he's not an expert in sonar imaging but, he spotted it and, good for him, it looks very promising indeed.
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #326 on: August 31, 2013, 03:45:20 PM »

"The one I am still trying to track down is any mention of Earhart taking her banjo along on the trip - I know she was a fan and played one, but so far no mention, no pictures of a banjo with other goods around the plane, and every evidence that she discarded everything possible of any weight before leaving Lae.  Another daunting problem with a banjo under water for 76 years is that a natural drum-head, as used in the day, may not have survived; likewise, the other organic stuff like wood might not either.  But what the hey... what even makes us credibly believe that a banjo was ever aboard..."

Now,you see Jeff I missed out on the latter stages of the 2010 video footage thread as I was involved in the setting up of a young persons project over here. When we retire our CV's are sent out to various organisations, charities etc... to see if they would be interested in utilising our experience and expertise to help them in any way. I was offered this position in setting up a project for homeless 16 to 25 year olds who come from troubled backgrounds and, their lives are basically tragic to say the least. So I missed quite a few months of the final stages of the thread while I was otherwise occupied. So, imagine my surprise when I get back to forum to discover that AE was a keen banjo player? and so on.

The thing I have about coral encrustation, coral veneers etc... is that, we all know so little about marine biology. I for one will be first to put my hand up and say 'help'. Which is why I put forward the suggestion that we really need people who are experts in marine biology/coral taxonomy on board to give their opinion on all video footages/images, it's common sense really given the location and environment we are dealing with. Who knows, they might take one look at a video footage/image and say 'you really do have something here guys'.
IMHO of course.
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #327 on: August 31, 2013, 04:00:00 PM »

"I think your point about the area of 'wreckage' is apt - if the airplane was as demolished as has been suggested, how in the world would it all be gathered to such a small area?  See my post above regarding 'Japanese capture and disassemble Electra and dump remains of same on calm day'."

Agreed Jeff. My best estimate for the 2010 footage was 30% of wreckage at the most. Which would leave 70% of it still to be located either further up or lower down the seamount.
The Japanese connection has always intrigued me but, knowing how well diciplined and efficient the Japanese were and, still are, I find it remarkable that they didn't record anything at all, anywhere, at any time about a captured plane/aviators. Not like them at all. You would expect at least one report at the least.
This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #328 on: August 31, 2013, 04:21:58 PM »

Another point to note in favour of there being something down there is the fact that locations of debris fields and sonar images are in close proximity to each other, a matter of tens of metres not hundreds. 2013- 227 metres, 2010- 265 metres, about 38 metres, not bad for a coincidence and, both "right off the 'nessie' location". Very promising indeed for a complete debris field spread.

2010
"Aboard VvS1, the ROV found the first underwater man-made objects seen on this trip. On the ledge right off the “Nessie” location at about 265 meters they spotted a length of rope or line, and a semi-circular piece of wire. The wire is two to three millimeters in diameter, and light enough that the ROV’s thrusters made it stir. But this is very exciting: the reef slope and ledge are not littered with debris and to find something right off the location where we have a photograph of something is huge. They are planning to retrieve the wire today."

2013
"It wasn’t until March 7, 2013 that Richard Conroy, a member of TIGHAR’s on-line Amelia Earhart Search Forum, spotted the anomaly in a sonar map that was included in the Niku VII report in TIGHAR Tracks. Richie has no training in interpreting sonar images but that was probably his biggest advantage. Once you know what to look for, the anomaly is painfully obvious. It gives the impression of being an object that struck the slope at the base of the second cliff at a depth of 187 meters (613 feet), then skidded in a southerly direction for about 40 meters (131 feet) before coming to rest.
This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 04:23:54 PM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #329 on: August 31, 2013, 04:27:05 PM »

Which is the correct spelling of metres/meters? I have always used metres as I usually associate meters with gas or water. :-\
This must be the place
 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 51   Go Up
 

Copyright 2021 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP