Amelia Earhart: Island bones 'likely' belonged to famed pilot

[Saul Goodman]

I think they found her. As in, solved the mystery (highly likely, not 100%):

Bones discovered on Nikumaroro, Kiribati Pacific island in 1940 are "likely" to be those of famed pilot Amelia Earhart, according to a US peer reviewed science journal.

The report claims they are a 99% match, despite an earlier conclusion.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43323944 

[carusoam]

The organization that publishes a story about Ms Earhart every six months, doesn’t seem to be mentioned in this article...

Best regards,

-a-

[Cyril Gibb]

43 minutes ago, Saul Goodman said:

I think they found her. As in, solved the mystery (highly likely, not 100%):

So it’s highly likely that 13 bones that were found 80 years ago and are (Unfortunately) now lost so they can’t be examined belong to Earhart?  

"Until definitive evidence is presented that the remains are not those of Amelia Earhart," Dr Jantz writes in the paper, "the most convincing argument is that they are hers”

I find it amazing and discouraging to read the twaddle that gets peer reviewed and published these days.

[steingar]

And in the mean time Geraldine "Jerry" Mock successfully flew her Cessna 180, the Spirit of Columbus, around the world.  Her airplane now hangs in the Udvar-Hazy Museum.

[mooniac15u]

10 hours ago, Cyril Gibb said:

So it’s highly likely that 13 bones that were found 80 years ago and are (Unfortunately) now lost so they can’t be examined belong to Earhart?  

"Until definitive evidence is presented that the remains are not those of Amelia Earhart," Dr Jantz writes in the paper, "the most convincing argument is that they are hers”

I find it amazing and discouraging to read the twaddle that gets peer reviewed and published these days.

Did you read the whole paper?  That's part of a larger discussion on the probability of the bones being those of Earhart.  Authors are often prone to overstating claims in the discussion section but overall the data presented in the paper is interesting.

[Hank]

2 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

Did you read the whole paper?  That's part of a larger discussion on the probability of the bones being those of Earhart.  Authors are often prone to overstating claims in the discussion section but overall the data presented in the paper is interesting.

I didn't read the paper, but I have a problem with someone reanalyzing the data from someone who saw the actual bones, and then coming up with a completely different interpretation which they ballyhoo from the rooftops. Had this new fellow examined the bones, and not just 80-year-old paperwork, his claims would be much more believable . . . .

[mooniac15u]

59 minutes ago, Hank said:

I didn't read the paper, but I have a problem with someone reanalyzing the data from someone who saw the actual bones, and then coming up with a completely different interpretation which they ballyhoo from the rooftops. Had this new fellow examined the bones, and not just 80-year-old paperwork, his claims would be much more believable . . . .

He used their measurements and compared them to a more comprehensive data set.  If you read the paper you will see that he discusses the various analyses done on the bones.

I'm not sure I understand criticizing someone else's methods without reading the full extent of what they did.

[Hank]

2 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

He used their measurements and compared them to a more comprehensive data set.  If you read the paper you will see that he discusses the various analyses done on the bones.

I'm not sure I understand criticizing someone else's methods without reading the full extent of what they did.

Measuring the bones yourself and analyzing the data, using modern instruments and data sets, is not the same thing as looking at an existing old data set generated by someone else with less capable equipment and "reinterpreting" their data to reach a differing conclusion. That's what the article said, and killed any interest in reading the justification for his new conclusions.

[Yooper Rocketman]

It’s a good thing the judicial system doesn’t use the same rationale Hank.  There’s been a lot of wrongfully convicted arsonists on death row from back before “new science” determined what “flashover” was that were freed.  One poor soul was not so lucky, executed months before the discovery.

Seems DNA Testing has proven old science was “not so accurate “ too.

Tom

[CaptRJM]

Last year TIGHAR published a picture claiming that it was Erhart and Noonan on a pier waiting to be loaded on a freighter. A week later others looked into it only to discover that the ship in the background wasn’t even launched until after their disappearance. 

I’ll wait on hard evidence. All this stuff out of TIGHAR is pure speculation. 

[Guest]

Can’t it just be left that they disappeared somewhere in the Pacific Ocean.  They have joined many thousands of other missing and never found.

Clarence

[Sabremech]

There's plenty of information available about TIGHAR online and they don't have their evidence peer reviewed. Google them and you'll find plenty of information that will lead you to believe these bones are not Earharts! Until someone finds a real piece of the aircraft, she and Noonan are still a mystery. 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Sabremech

[Hank]

4 hours ago, Yooper Rocketman said:

It’s a good thing the judicial system doesn’t use the same rationale Hank.  There’s been a lot of wrongfully convicted arsonists on death row from back before “new science” determined what “flashover” was that were freed.  One poor soul was not so lucky, executed months before the discovery.

Seems DNA Testing has proven old science was “not so accurate “ too.

Tom

DNA testing is great. Some innocents are released when old samples are tested using new science (how long is evidence kept after each trial / conviction / appeal?). No new science can be applied to the "Earhart" bones because they've been missing since the early 1940s . . . There's nothing to reexamine except 70 year old notes. Seems like it's all the opinion of the reviewer and his quest for publicity.

Ever heard of a conviction being overturned because a modern expert reviewed old exam notes without having the evidence itself to test with more modern methods? I'm not a lawyer, so I can easily answer "No".

[Yooper Rocketman]

7 minutes ago, Hank said:

 

Ever heard of a conviction being overturned because a modern expert reviewed old exam notes without having the evidence itself to test with more modern methods? I'm not a lawyer, so I can easily answer "No".

Ah, Hank...... that’s EXACTLY what happened on the flash over cases.  There was no current evidence other than the notes from the original cases.  No homes or fire scenes to reinvestigate.  Just photos in the file.  Sadly, closed minds in that situation cost an innocent man his life.  

Tom

[Marauder]

Now that we have this solved (NOT!) ... let’s move on to “who killed JFK?”
And did Hitler really commit suicide or did he go to South America?
Where is Noah’s ark?
And ... where is the ark of the covenant? 
Where is Malaysian Air 370? Was it captured by terroritsts?
who built the pyramids ... was it designed by Aliens?
And ... is there a spaceship and deceased aliens in Roswell, NM? 
What is the government doing in Area 51 now?
Was Marilyn Monroe’s death really as it seems?
who killed Tupac Shukar?
Is there a group of Elites in a secret society secretly controlling the world’s currencies and banks?
why did it take Hawaii several years to release a birth certificate? 
Where is Solomon’s gold? 
What happened to the Mayans who once occupied dozens of complex cities? 
Is there really a Lost Dutchman’s Gold Mine in the Superstition Mountains? 
 

And don’t forget about the treasure on Oak Island.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jeff_S]

5 hours ago, CaptRJM said:

Last year TIGHAR published a picture claiming that it was Erhart and Noonan on a pier waiting to be loaded on a freighter. A week later others looked into it only to discover that the ship in the background wasn’t even launched until after their disappearance. 

I’ll wait on hard evidence. All this stuff out of TIGHAR is pure speculation. 

It was NOT TIGHAR that made the claim about the photograph from that island. It was a new group that had a full show on Discovery (I think that was the channel). TIGHAR is still pushing for more vid nice that they force landed at Nikumaroro. That photo was discredited by an independent researcher who found evidence that pre-dated it before the crash.

[Hank]

36 minutes ago, David Herman said:

Now that we have this solved (NOT!) ... let’s move on to “who killed JFK?”

And did Hitler really commit suicide or did he go to South America?

Where is Noah’s ark?

And ... where is the ark of the covenant? 

Where is Malaysian Air 370? Was it captured by terroritsts?

who built the pyramids ... was it designed by Aliens?

And ... is there a spaceship and deceased aliens in Roswell, NM? 

What is the government doing in Area 51 now?

Was Marilyn Monroe’s death really as it seems?

who killed Tupac Shukar?

Is there a group of Elites in a secret society secretly controlling the world’s currencies and banks?

why did it take Hawaii several years to release a birth certificate? 

Where is Solomon’s gold? 

What happened to the Mayans who once occupied dozens of complex cities? 

Is there really a Lost Dutchman’s Gold Mine in the Superstition Mountains? 

 

Sounds like you need a whole website just for these (plus Oak island, whuch has it's own TV "reality" show).

P.S.--no new evidence allowed, only discussion of other people's examinations of evidence . . . . . to keep the discussions interesting . . . .  

Edited March 10, 2018 by Hank

[Cyril Gibb]

22 minutes ago, David Herman said:

.. how did Maruader get those girls of his through the dooreay of a Mooney? 

Probably slathered the doorframe with Vaseline and threw in a big bag of brownies.

[Piloto]

What puzzle me is that no parts of the plane like the engines has not been found on the island. Engines are heavy and more durable than bones and harder to be moved by the sea currents. Unless she ditched far away from the island and drifted on a raft to the island.

José 

[Piloto]

2 minutes ago, David Herman said:

Is Osama bin Laden really dead? Why did we supposedly dispose of his body at sea?

No one wanted to pay for his funeral services.

[Piloto]

6 minutes ago, David Herman said:

Did we really land on the moon or was it fabricated by the government?

The moon rocks was the evidence of the landing.

[Marauder]

The moon rocks was the evidence of the landing.

They look like rocks I found in my backyard.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Marauder]

Probably slathered the doorframe with Vaseline and threw in a big bag of brownies.

Too expensive.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Marauder]

Add to add to the list ... how does Santa Claus get down a chimney and how did Maruader get those girls of his through the doorway of a Mooney? 

Easy, think amoeba flexibility


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Piloto]

7 hours ago, David Herman said:

How did Amelia Earhardt pee on those long flights? The Travel John with “Lady J Adaptor” is evidence she actually survived and became a successful entrepreneur.

;-)

Amelia and Lindbergh were actually sitting on toilet chairs. So they must have being flying with their pants down because there was no autopilot.

https://www.npr.org/sections/waitwait/2012/03/02/147812749/on-transatlantic-bathroom-breaks

So Lindbergh explained that in his airplane his chair was made of wicker and there was a hole in it. And there was a funnel below that hole. And his waste, whenever nature called, would go down through there into sort of an aluminum can. And so he explained that and said that rather than show up with it in Le Bourget, the airport that he landed in, that he just dropped it over France.

 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Piloto