Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 51   Go Down

Author Topic: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund  (Read 617428 times)

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #630 on: July 05, 2014, 01:18:16 PM »

Let me try to clear up what we know and don't know about what was seen where in 2010.  Tim is correct that the Standard Definition video recorded the depth as 255m (836 ft) at the time the ROV was observing the rope and wire on June 7, 2010.  It is also true that, because the tether was 300m long, the ship had to be more or less directly over the ROV at that time. Therefore, if we knew the location of the ship we would have a pretty good handle on the location of the wire and rope - but we don't.  Attached are two critiques I sent to the ROV operator in November 2010 when I noticed significant discrepancies in his reports.  As you'll see, neither the GPS for the ROV tracking system nor the GPS for the ship was reliable. 
Bottom line: we can be fairly sure that the wire and rope were roughly 255m down but we have no reliable information about where the ship was at that time.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #631 on: July 06, 2014, 06:58:43 AM »

Well, with all due respect Tim, I've often pointed out my own excitement over these same things of past explorations - never did and never would deny it.

But an open mind also must embrace new realizations - and that includes that these things that once excited us just didn't bear out to be what so many of us had hoped for.  In that vein and in fairness of open mind, one also might also consider this post, reply #1602 of November 13, 2012, as one that came after I had learned a great deal more and came to look at the sea bottom more critically.  What had once been suggested as 'gear' became a clear pile of 'rocks', at least as best I could discern (and I think my read of it is reliable, but others may judge for themselves, of course).

That's nothing against you at all - just that we each have to realize the limits of this search as best we can understand them.  And I really don't mean to discourage you from your own conclusions - but the 'proof' doesn't seem to have panned out at all by all we can see now.

I hope you will at some point come to peace over these things too.  I really appreciate what you did to make the 2012 expedtion happen, but never will fully understand this action you're in, although I can share in the disappointment of certain things no doubt.

All the best to you, no hard feelings.

Jeff, I don't know what could have convinced you that the "squiggly" was just a pile of rocks. IMHO, it is not a pile of rocks nor a landing gear. Everyone has waited years for Jeff Glickman's opinion, but all we hear is ... silence. Ric thinks it's a piece of insulation, and quite small at that. Others think that it is the audio cord of a headset. If only we had a scale by which to compare.

But wait! It turns out that scale was available in 2010: according to Mr. Rodocker, the Seabotix ROV could have been equipped with parallel laser beams, 50 mm apart, at no extra cost to TIGHAR! Furthermore, as John Jarrell has shown, the claw on the ROV can be used to determine scale if it is in close proximity to an object. You and I talked about the parallel laser method some time ago, before I learned it actually could have been used.

The same scaling tools could have been used in 2012, but apparently the lessons that should have been learned from 2010 were not. Did no one at TIGHAR take Archeology 101?

I never said or believed 'the squiggly' was rocks, Tim; if you look at my posts as they developed on the topic you can readily see that I believe it was likely a material like the shipboard gasket stuff Ric was shown.

As to the shape suggesting 'landing gear fork' - as I showed in the post I bothered to link above that it came to be clear that it was really a collection of rocks on the ocean floor.  The shadowing and highlights are most clever - and the apparent hand of nature.  Lesson well learned and I accept that reality and can't use further time considering what I'd like it to be.

And now I realize more fully how pointless a forum like this can be for trying to have any real academic progress on a pursuit such as many try to have.  Too often those who wade in here to 'argue' such points just won't focus on information already discussed or consider it objectively; for one, taking my meaning of 'the squiggly' as being 'rocks' completely look past the explanation I took pains to give, so what is the point?  I think Tom King got it right when he dropped out of this open 'discussion' - no workable boundaries here to gain any hard truth, just mental thumb twiddling all too often.

Have a nice day.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #632 on: July 06, 2014, 11:17:48 AM »

And now I realize more fully how pointless a forum like this can be for trying to have any real academic progress on a pursuit such as many try to have.  Too often those who wade in here to 'argue' such points just won't focus on information already discussed or consider it objectively; for one, taking my meaning of 'the squiggly' as being 'rocks' completely look past the explanation I took pains to give, so what is the point?  I think Tom King got it right when he dropped out of this open 'discussion' - no workable boundaries here to gain any hard truth, just mental thumb twiddling all too often.

Take heart Jeff.  Yes, there are many drawbacks to an open forum and, by and large, the serious work gets done elsewhere.  A lot of time gets waisted educating and re-educating people who don't do their homework and occasionally we have to call a halt to a thread that has degenerated into utter nonsense.   Had we not had an open forum we would't now need a Legal Defense Fund.  So why do we continue to maintain such an expensive and inefficient research tool?  Because we're not a private foundation.  We're a public charity. The whole point of the Earhart Project is to share the experience of science-based investigation with anyone who wants to play (as long as they play nice).  People learn things here and I probably learn more than anybody.  We have some very good researchers who participate in the forum, some are TIGHAR members, some aren't.  Some think our hypothesis is correct and some are bound and determined to prove us wrong. Even the dumb questions force us to think.
So summon up your patience, thicken your hide to the abuse, and as the old British wartime saying goes - Keep Calm and Carry On.
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #633 on: July 06, 2014, 02:02:39 PM »

This is an image that shows the sonar anomaly location and the 2010 ROV footage depths. The minimum depth that can be found for the footage in various tighar reports is at 200 metres "Other than some wreckage from the SS Norwich City, the only man-made objects found were two lengths of small diameter rope at about 200 meters (660 feet). An object that at first seemed to be a circle of wire was later judged to be more likely of natural origin"
The maximum depth recorded by the ROV on 7 June 2010 on the Standard Definition Video was 255 metres.
Obviously the ROV was present at much deeper and much shallower depths although no deeper than 300 metres. The maximum and minimum depths refer to recorded and reported depths of the 'debris field', not the excursion up and down the reef face.
Also note that during the 2010 ROV footage the majority of the ROV movement was along the Y Axis, that is up and down the reef face. Only a tiny percentage covered movement along the X Axis so the depth varied considerably from start to finish.

This must be the place
 
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #634 on: July 06, 2014, 05:39:20 PM »

Another point to take into consideration is the fact that in the 2010 ROV footage the ROV manages to set down on a number of occasions to get close ups. Is that possible on a 70-80 degree slope? The odds are in favour of it setting down on a slope a lot less than 70-80 degrees, or something else. Take a look at the image I posted earlier and draw your own conclusions.
This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 05:41:33 PM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #635 on: July 06, 2014, 06:18:07 PM »

So let's concede that wheras the longitude of the "rope" is known (using the 255 meter contour as a surrogate) it is the latitude (North-South) position that remains in question.

Even if one were to start searching along that contour from just abeam the Norwich City moving Northward, at say five meters per minute, it could not take more than several hours to cover the entire contour all the way past the end of the reef at the Northern end of the island.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: July 07, 2014, 01:12:24 AM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Jeff Victor Hayden

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #636 on: July 06, 2014, 06:27:49 PM »

The depth is fairly conclusive. The actual North/South location can be worked out mathematically + or - a few tens of metres. I'm working that one through at the moment as there is quite a lot of information and clues to collate.
Example:
"The hypothesis to be tested was that the plane had gone over the reef edge at a point about 400 meters north of the Norwich City shipwreck. The plan was for Jesse Rodocker of SeaBotix, Inc. to use the company’s LBV compact Remote Operated Vehicles (ROVs) equipped with high definition video to search the reef slope down to 300 meters (984 feet) which, we reasoned, should cover the area in which large, heavy pieces of wreckage might come to rest."

Of course logically that would be the area in which you would put the ROV in then, given that you have stood on the reef with your GPS positioning kit...

"Ric, Gary, and Mark went to look at the “Nessie” location, which involves a slogging hike around the end of the island, and then out onto the reef. Using GPS and the spot marked by our forensic imaging specialist, they arrived at the correct area at dead low tide."
This must be the place
 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 06:52:00 PM by Jeff Victor Hayden »
Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #637 on: July 06, 2014, 06:39:17 PM »

The irony of all of this leave me torn between laughter and tears and times. This is one of those times.

How much more bottom time for the subs would TIGHAR be able to buy if it wasn't being forced to funnel scarce resources into defending itself against a groundless lawsuit? Two hours? Three? Half a day? Maybe enough to give us the edge needed to finally give Amelia and Fred the end to their story that they deserve.

But ... people have their priorities. God knows I cannot discern what that priority might be in this case, although I do know why this is being done and the hoped-for outcome of the chief instigator. Thankfully, I will not be the one who has to explain that "why" at the final reckoning.

LTM,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 ECSP
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #638 on: July 06, 2014, 11:58:20 PM »

The depth is fairly conclusive. The actual North/South location can be worked out mathematically + or - a few tens of metres. I'm working that one through at the moment as there is quite a lot of information and clues to collate.
Example:
"The hypothesis to be tested was that the plane had gone over the reef edge at a point about 400 meters north of the Norwich City shipwreck. The plan was for Jesse Rodocker of SeaBotix, Inc. to use the company’s LBV compact Remote Operated Vehicles (ROVs) equipped with high definition video to search the reef slope down to 300 meters (984 feet) which, we reasoned, should cover the area in which large, heavy pieces of wreckage might come to rest."

Of course logically that would be the area in which you would put the ROV in then, given that you have stood on the reef with your GPS positioning kit...

"Ric, Gary, and Mark went to look at the “Nessie” location, which involves a slogging hike around the end of the island, and then out onto the reef. Using GPS and the spot marked by our forensic imaging specialist, they arrived at the correct area at dead low tide."

The answer is S04o39'25.62" (see Table 1 from Niku VII, where GPS positions were more reliable than in 2010).
Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: July 07, 2014, 12:12:37 AM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #639 on: July 07, 2014, 04:28:21 AM »

So let's concede that wheras the longitude of the "rope" is known (using the 255 meter contour as a surrogate) it is the latitude (North-South) position that remains in question.

Even if one were to start searching along that contour from just abeam the Norwich City moving Northward, at say five meters per minute, it could not take more than several hours to cover the entire contour all the way past the end of the reef at the Northern end of the island.

Great idea, Tim - so, accordingly, would you like to be part of the solution to go out and look smartly, or continue down this legal path that will gain nothing for anyone?
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Andrew M McKenna

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 677
  • Here I am during the Maid of Harlech Survey.
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #640 on: July 07, 2014, 01:55:27 PM »

Sorry Tim, but it is hard to leave your inconsistencies unchallenged.

Statement #1, Tim says:
"The same scaling tools could have been used in 2012, but apparently the lessons that should have been learned from 2010 were not. Did no one at TIGHAR take Archeology 101?"

Statement #2, Tim says:
"I suggested lasers as a possible means of establishing scale, on 12 November, 2012, after folks started sniping about lack of scale when analyzing underwater video."

In statement #1, you denigrate TIGHAR and imply that you would have done a better job of planning, but....

Statement #2 puts the lie to Statement #1 as you admit that only after the 2012 expedition did you think of lasers, so you did just as bad a job of planning as TIGHAR (and the professional subcontractors TIGHAR employed).  Didn't you take Archaeology 101?

Based upon your own statements, if you sued yourself for Fraud and Negligence, you'd stand a better chance of winning the case than the current lawsuit you are engaged in.

With all due respect.
Andrew
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #641 on: July 07, 2014, 02:17:19 PM »

Plaintiff's responses to our dispositive motions are due July 9.  They will be public and I will post them here. 
There is a hearing scheduled for July 17 in Casper at which the judge will hear oral arguments on the dispositive motions.  He might "rule from the bench" and give us his decision then and there or he might want to do some research and think before issuing his ruling.  If he asks questions of the attorneys it may give us some indication of how he's leaning.
I'll be there.
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #642 on: July 07, 2014, 02:18:07 PM »

Sorry Tim, but it is hard to leave your inconsistencies unchallenged.

Statement #1, Tim says:
"The same scaling tools could have been used in 2012, but apparently the lessons that should have been learned from 2010 were not. Did no one at TIGHAR take Archeology 101?"

Statement #2, Tim says:
"I suggested lasers as a possible means of establishing scale, on 12 November, 2012, after folks started sniping about lack of scale when analyzing underwater video."

In statement #1, you denigrate TIGHAR and imply that you would have done a better job of planning, but....

Statement #2 puts the lie to Statement #1 as you admit that only after the 2012 expedition did you think of lasers, so you did just as bad a job of planning as TIGHAR (and the professional subcontractors TIGHAR employed).  Didn't you take Archaeology 101?

Based upon your own statements, if you sued yourself for Fraud and Negligence, you'd stand a better chance of winning the case than the current lawsuit you are engaged in.

With all due respect.
Andrew

Well summed, Andrew.

Tim - "sniping" about lack of scale?  I don't recall any "sniping" - I thought it was more like a direct shot at close range - clearly, no objective scale, no dice.  And now that we've learned more, lack of scale seems to add somehow to the prospect of "vanishingly small", at that.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #643 on: July 07, 2014, 02:18:37 PM »

Plaintiff's responses to our dispositive motions are due July 9.  They will be public and I will post them here. 
There is a hearing scheduled for July 17 in Casper at which the judge will hear oral arguments on the dispositive motions.  He might "rule from the bench" and give us his decision then and there or he might want to do some research and think before issuing his ruling.  If he asks questions of the attorneys it may give us some indication of how he's leaning.
I'll be there.

Sounds like progress.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #644 on: July 07, 2014, 02:36:04 PM »


In statement #1, you denigrate TIGHAR and imply that you would have done a better job of planning, but....

Statement #2 puts the lie to Statement #1 as you admit that only after the 2012 expedition did you think of lasers, so you did just as bad a job of planning as TIGHAR (and the professional subcontractors TIGHAR employed).  Didn't you take Archaeology 101?


Andrew, Andrew...

You seem to be confusing me, a mere layman before my participation, with TIGHAR the self-proclaimed experts in all matters relative to the loss of, and search for, Amelia Earhart. I certainly have learned many things from my experiences, but to suggest that I could have in any manner been able to contribute to the planning of either expedition is pure poppy-cock (or "banjo", as Ric now enjoys saying).

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: July 07, 2014, 02:37:36 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 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