Print

[Malcolm McKay]

No Malcolm,  I did not forget that.
I think you should read what Tighar's hypothesis is. It seems you forgot or don't know alot of what is in the hypothesis.
I think you should read Marty's post to point you in the right direction of what Tighar's hypothesis is.
This link is what I find informative
http://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Overview/AEhypothesis.html

I have read the hypothesis - however the simple truth is that the "Betty" notebook and the outer reef landing need each other to work. Simply because if "Betty" is correct then the engines must be functioning and they cannot have been functioning if the aircraft was somehow parked in a clear spot on land because there is no wreck on the actual island itself. The only other clear spot albeit at low tide is the outer reef. As I said it is a circular argument.

[Greg Daspit]

4 different sources in about a 25 minute period. 2 logged by professionals, one of which got a bearing to Gardner. A 3rd logged by newspaper account at the time.
Again we are talking about Tighar's hypothesis of a landing on a reef. It does not need Betty's notebook.

Looking at the plots in the map in Marty's post #98 above very few seem to actually point to Nikumaroro. I'd say that at present to work the hypothesis needs "Betty" and all it can get including artifacts with clear provenance. A wreck would be useful.

Maclolm, once again, It's a hypothesis. We are on a forum set  up to talk about a hypothesis. You were dismissing all other parts of their landing on a reef hypothesis by saying the landing on the reef aspect of their hypothesis can't exist without Betty. When in fact their landing on a reef hypothesis existed before Betty was even included.

 

[Greg Daspit]

Maclolm, once again, It's a hypothesis. We are on a forum set  up to talk about a hypothesis. You were dismissing all other parts of their landing on a reef hypothesis by saying the landing on the reef aspect of their hypothesis can't exist without Betty. When in fact their landing on a reef hypothesis existed before Betty was even included.

Yep a hypothesis and the fourth so far. We wait to see what this trip turns up.

This article is from 1989. The base hypothesis seems to be the same today.
http://tighar.org/Publications/TTracks/1989Vol_5/testing.pdf

[Gary LaPook]

Gary

have u never flicked through the bands/stations looking for songs u like ?

i have on my dads steeple tone radio, and happened on the neighbour over the road talking to her lover on a cordless house phone, yes really

also i have some old newspapers from 1939, radio times to be exact, and they show programe guides for shortwave radio stations  all over world 

Please scan them and share them with us.

gl

[Chris Johnson]

Maclolm, once again, It's a hypothesis. We are on a forum set  up to talk about a hypothesis. You were dismissing all other parts of their landing on a reef hypothesis by saying the landing on the reef aspect of their hypothesis can't exist without Betty. When in fact their landing on a reef hypothesis existed before Betty was even included.

Yep a hypothesis and the fourth so far. We wait to see what this trip turns up.

Malcolm,

isn't that what Archaeology is about?

Dig a site, see some stuff, different colours in soil, items on or near such as burnt area and bone.  Come up with hypothysis, such as food prep area.  Another dig, another digger spots ceramics, hypothysis food prep area.  More ceramics come up or match with urn similar to one found site 'X'.  Site X suggested cremation/burial site, change hypothysis.

Seems to me digs from the 19th C were interpreted differently than digs now because of changes in understanding of what is happening at site.

Seems the same for TIGHAR but in less time scale.

Just an arm chair observation 

[richie conroy]

here is a couple scans

[richie conroy]

an couple more

[richie conroy]

some more

[richie conroy]

will get in loft an dig some more out 

[richie conroy]

doc

you Malcolm's clone or side kick by any chance ?

[Malcolm McKay]

Malcolm,

isn't that what Archaeology is about?

Dig a site, see some stuff, different colours in soil, items on or near such as burnt area and bone.  Come up with hypothysis, such as food prep area.  Another dig, another digger spots ceramics, hypothysis food prep area.  More ceramics come up or match with urn similar to one found site 'X'.  Site X suggested cremation/burial site, change hypothysis.

Seems to me digs from the 19th C were interpreted differently than digs now because of changes in understanding of what is happening at site.

Seems the same for TIGHAR but in less time scale.

Just an arm chair observation 

Whatever this is it isn't archaeology any more. I note that, after this discussion, people who before thought "Betty's" notebook to be the most revealing source of data for Earhart and Noonan's post landing behaviour on the island,  are now backtracking to pretend that it really isn't all that important.

I note that the actual archaeology on Nikumaroro failed to produce any artifacts with clear provenance to Earhart or Noonan, and now when anyone questions these there is also an immediate backtrack with former partisans saying well it's not that artifact it's the accumulation etc. etc. As if a pile of artifacts of uncertain provenance can somehow by a process of metamorphosis acquire provenance. I note that Marty made a spirited, but ultimately failed, defence of the use of circumstantial evidence - something I assume he equates with this metamorphosis, but while it might be a spirited use of the philosopher's stone it isn't archaeological method.

The only shot left in the locker is the finding the Electra somewhere on the side of the reef. If that doesn't occur then what is Plan B?

[john a delsing]

The only shot left in the locker is the finding the Electra somewhere on the side of the reef. If that doesn't occur then what is Plan B?

Malcolm,
   You surprise me. Surely you can read between the lines. For the past many weeks the momentum has been building to return to the camp zero site for a real through search. Altho I hope we find something this month, I'm afraid that it is going to be similar to past expeditions, many interesting things, but no smoking gun. I think the electra is there, but because of equipment problems, wrong equipment, weather, or . . . . . it will be just wait till next year.
    I also believe that as we speak there are some members making plans for what we, TIGHAR, should be doing to celabrate Amelia's 100 year aniversity that is coming up on us, like what kind of expedition, and to what part of the island, etc.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

William, only a moderator can move a post. However, down in the lower right corner of your post you will see a little "Report to moderator" link.

If you click on it you will see a box to enter a comment. Just request the post be moved and specify to where. That should do it.

If you move quickly enough, you can also:

• Click "modify" on the misplaced post.
• Select all.
• Copy the selection.
• Close the "modify" window.
• Remove the misplaced post.
• Go to the correct topic (or start a new topic).
• Start a reply or a first post.
• Paste the contents of the misplaced post in the edit window.
• Save the post.

It sounds harder than it is.  This is just a more detailed description of how to accomplish what Gary already suggested above.

[Tom Swearengen]

Breaking news: I actually agree with malcolm on the bettys notebook dating thing. If we were using it as a major factor in our search, I would say it would be logical to have the pages time dated to 1937. Makes logical sense to me, to remove any doubt that it could have been faked, say in 1966.
But---even though its an important peice in the overall puzzle, its content doesnt give me enough specifics to warrant a search of Niku. But-----if she had stated something like, "one a island with a shipwreck on the western shoreline", or something more geographically specific, I would be all over it.
just saying. Good point Malcolm.

Good God Tom - nearly gave me a heart attack  . Next time you agree could you sort of gently lead into it? 

NAAAA this is more fun

[Mark Pearce]

FAA search results for

Betty Klenck Brown
Elizabeth Klenck Brown

"No records found based on search criteria provided above."