New show on history channel about Amelia Earhart

[Randy Jacobson]

I do have copies of the Koshu and Kamoi deck logs for July, 1937, but they are in Japanese.  The Kamoi was mentioned in various newpaper articles but it was journeying from the Mariannas to Japan.

I also have a 1951 report that documents the oceanographic water casts, dates, and locations that the Koshu performed during the first half of July, 1937.  Casts were made on July 3-5. Given the last position and assuming 8.6 knots (the average speed between cast locations), the ship would have to have arrived at Jaliut at 0700GMT July 9.  The first official message from the US requesting assistance was on July 11.  The Koshu resumed water casts on July 27, and would have left Jaliut about 1400 GMT July 24.

[Rob Seasock]

Looks like Samantha Adams cracked the case, image from book published in Oct 1935.

[Greg Daspit]

Just went though the book after seeing the link on Facebook. Lots of interesting pictures in it. I'm interested what the maps in it indicate as well as an accurate translation for all dates.

[Ted G Campbell]

All,

Amazing, how did the History Channel get a picture that they claim was taken in July 1937 + with the same cast and crew that were in a published book dated 1935 - ?

Take the above question out of the History's Channel presentation and let's see where one ins up:  The plane on the barge being towed can not be AE's plane, AE/FN stated presence in the photo is probably not correct (however, they may have taken an earlier Pan Am Clipper flight to the island - highly unlikely), I believe AE was puttsing around the Atlantic at the time , the face likeness of FN (reversed photo) shows he parted his hair on the right side but earlier pictures shows a left side part, etc.

However, the balance of the History Channel's presentation does, in my mind, bring up an interesting hypothesis, and that is; could both the TIGHAR and the HC theories be correct!  Think about it; a great deal of radio traffic in the area in July 1937 looking for AE, the Japanese listening in and finally the air waves go silent.  The Japanese see an opportunity and they start a search of their own and find AE on Gardner and the plane down slope on the reef, rescue both but by the time they get back to Japanese territory AE dies and a cover up begins.  Plus, in 1937 early plans by the Japanese were being developed for WWII and the AE issue became an insignificant matter.  There is no way of proving this but it is a great mind bender!

Ted Campbell

[Randy Jacobson]

Well done!

[Ric Gillespie]

A quick reminder to the many folks who have recently registered for the Forum:
We have to manually change your account settings before you can post to the Forum and, as you know, you have to be a dues-paying TIGHAR member before we can approve you to post - so, shoot me an email at ric@tighar.org to let me know you've joined TIGHAR so that I can confirm that and get you approved to post.

[Ric Gillespie]

the plane on the barge being towed can not be AE's plane, AE/FN stated presence in the photo is probably not correct (however, they may have taken an earlier Pan Am Clipper flight to the island - highly unlikely),

More than unlikley.  There were no Clipper flights to the Marshalls.

I believe AE was puttsing around the Atlantic at the time ,

In 1935 she was flying from Hawaii to California and from Los Angles to mexico City, then to New jersey.

the face likeness of FN (reversed photo) shows he parted his hair on the right side but earlier pictures shows a left side part, etc.

Fred always parted his hair on the left.

However, the balance of the History Channel's presentation does, in my mind, bring up an interesting hypothesis, and that is; could both the TIGHAR and the HC theories be correct!  Think about it; a great deal of radio traffic in the area in July 1937 looking for AE, the Japanese listening in and finally the air waves go silent.  The Japanese see an opportunity and they start a search of their own and find AE on Gardner and the plane down slope on the reef, rescue both but by the time they get back to Japanese territory AE dies and a cover up begins.

There is no evidence that anything like that happened.  If it did, who was the castaway?

  Plus, in 1937 early plans by the Japanese were being developed for WWII and the AE issue became an insignificant matter.

Japan was not planning WWII in 1937.

[Ric Gillespie]

Hot off the presses:

[Kevin Weeks]

Japan was not planning WWII in 1937.

Japan was signing treaties with germany as early as 1936 and was at war in china in 1937... the Rape of Nanking was towards the end of 1937... planning all out war with multiple parties probably not, but they were definitely looking to expand their territory in the pacific.

[Ric Gillespie]

planning all out war with multiple parties probably not, but they were definitely looking to expand their territory in the pacific.

Agreed, but the last thing they wanted at that time was war with the United States.

[Bruce Thomas]

National Geographic has a report this afternoon on the news of the photograph having been in existence for at least 2 years before Earhart and Noonan's disappearance.

The facial-recognition analyst seen in the History Channel program, quoted in that NatGeo report, seems to dance around the news about the real origin of the photo from 1935:

"I don't know what to say," says Kent Gibson, the facial-recognition expert that the History Channel hired to analyze the photograph for Amelia Earhart: The Lost Evidence. "I don't have an explanation for why [the photograph] would show up two years early."

In the documentary, Gibson said that based on the facial and body proportions of the two Caucasians, he said it was "very likely" that the photograph contained Earhart and Noonan.

In a phone interview with National Geographic, Gibson added that since the documentary filmed, he has acquired new facial-recognition software that signals a match between the photograph's Caucasian man and Fred Noonan. His previous software had indicated that there were too few pixels in the photograph to successfully perform the analysis. (In a follow-up email, Gibson declined additional comment.)

Newsweek's story about the find of the book containing the photograph ended with a paragraph reporting on the History Channel's response to the surprising find:

After Tuesday's break in the case, the History Channel told NPR it was "exploring the latest developments" about Earhart, noting that "ultimately, historical accuracy is most important to us and our viewers."

[Ric Gillespie]

The 1935 date slams the door.  Their refusal to accept it just makes them look desperate.

[Bruce Thomas]

If I were that facial-recognition "expert" the next time I went into court to testify, I'd sweat about how the questions of the opposing attorney would rip me a new one. It sounds to me (yes, I admit I watched the show on the History Channel) like this guy got his training from whoever compared Irene Bolam's picture to that of AE.  :D

[Jon Romig]

I think TIGHAR did a fantastic job responding to this. My term for this kind of thing is "crazy-making." But TIGHAR showed real class despite the temptations.
And it is all wrapped up and put in the garbage in just two days - how often does that happen?!
Congratulations, and thanks again, to Ric and the team.

Jon

[Diane James]

Now to hope... probably in vain... that the media will give the same amount of coverage to the rebuttal as they gave to the "discovery" of this pic and the whole silly story that went with it.

Diane