Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 09:45:29 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Heel & Sole Question Busy weekend I am sure. Nice work keeping everything together. I was looking at some of the 2000 archives and ran across an interesting discussion that seemed to be casting some doubt on the source of the sole and heel parts discovered on Niku. Did Tighar ever reach a reasonable conclusion on these artifacts? I did try a search of the archives, but didn't appear to find anything conclusive. Bob *********************************************************************** From Ric If things are together it's none of my doing. As for the shoe sole fragments and heels we found in 1991, my current opinion (which is shared by most, but not necessarily all, of my colleagues) is that they are not related to the Earhart disappearance. My reasons for thinking that are: - Photos seem to show that the heels of AE's blucher oxford shoes (two pair with her on the World Flight) featured an unusual two-tone color pattern (light colored on the inside half and dark colored on the outside half. Neither of the heels we found on Niku look like that. (see Research Bulletin #31 "Shoe Fetish - Artifact Analysis, Part 2" on the TIGHAR website) - There seems to be a size discrepancy between the reassembled sole and Earhart's shoes as measurable from photos - but because we can't be precise about the size of the reassembled sole we can't be sure that this criticism is valid. - The shoe parts we found were in the wrong place. They were on the other side of the island (Aukeraime) from where we now believe Gallagher found the bones and shoe parts in 1940 (at the Seven Site). So what was a woman's blucher oxford shoe with a 1930s vintage American Cat's Paw replacement heel doing on Niku? Dunno. We have to remember that the identification of the sole fragments as being from a woman's shoe was based only on the tightness of the stitching holes that are still visible. If the rubber sole shrunk over the years (as it may very well have) it could give the impression of a smaller shoe with tighter stitching. If it's not really a woman's shoe it could date from the USS Bushnell survey in 1939. Anyway, I don't think it's part of our puzzle. The area was the focus of intense search activity in 1997 and nothing more was found. The Seven Site has proved to be a far more fruitful field to till. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:42:49 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request Ric wrote: > We have a strange situation that needs research. I've sent off an email to my Mom who had some interest in the whole event as I've said before -- she met Amelia at Purdue shortly before here fateful trip. I'll let you know. Bob ***************************************************************** From Alan With all due respect to Betty I would be more inclined to believe that DURING the search someone may have thought AE could be in danger if information pinpointing her location was made PUBLIC. I cannot imagine that folks would have been told not to relay any information they had to the proper authorities. If that actually happened it would have been widely known and certainly printed in the papers. Pirate activity has always existed on the high seas just as it does today. AE and FN would have been sitting ducks for such people. It would not surprise me that caution might have been urged although I have never seen or heard of any such warning or even a comment along those lines. Absent any newspaper evidence in that regard I would have trouble putting any credence to this issue. More likely it was a misconstrued statement. Alan ********************************************************************* From Ric I would be in complete agreement were it not for the fact that two people with no connection to each other tell such similar stories. There were dozens of wire service newspaper article printed during the search covering every conceivable angle of the story but I've never seen one that could even be misconstrued as President Roosevelt asking the public not to come forward with information. I don't recall one that even mentioned FDR at all. Afterward there was, however, something of a political stink about how much money the Navy had spent sending all those ships and planes to search for Amelia. I wonder if FDR may have said something in the context of that wrangle in trying to put an end to the affair. **************************************************************************** From Bill Shea It might have been that "Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. ......was concerned that release of the official report would smear Amelia Earhart's reputation." (from Riley's article in Naval History) ************************************************************************* From Ric It's true that Morgenthau refused to release Warner Thompson's report to Paul Mantz but, as far as I know, the press and the public didn't know about any of that. ************************************************************************** From Dede There has to be a newspaper archive of what was printed at that time. Most of the larger newspapers like the New York Times have dated material available at central libraries. Usually when the President or his spokesperson makes any type of statement, it is repeated throughout the media. It may have not been a threat, but rather just a statement made on the basis of information that may or may not have turned out to be valid. Hope this helps, Dede ********************************************************************** From Ric Betty was in St. Pete. Mabel was in Amarillo. Whatever they saw obviously got national coverage and should be findable in any major newspaper archive. *********************************************************************** From Marty Joy Could Betty and Mabel have read the same newspaper article and misconstrued what President Roosevelt said? *********************************************************************** From Ric That's our working hypothesis. *********************************************************************** From Herman De Wulf Couldn't it be that FDR was fed up with confusing reports and a flood of hoaxes triggering off more hoaxes and had decided they confused the search and wanted to put an end to them? At least, that's what I understand when reading between the lines. LTM *********************************************************************** From Ric I've never seen anything to indicate that FDR was that engaged in the search. The highest government official who appears in any of the message traffic during the search is Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau. The White House is not even copied in. The more I think about it the more I suspect that if FDR got involved at all it was in the context of political damage-control when Republicans tried to make an issue of the cost of the search. *********************************************************************** From Paige Miller First, I have no knowledge one way or the other about such a request by FDR ... but it sure sounds to me like a pre-WWII urban myth. The reason I say so is that we allegedly have freedom of speech in this country, and it would be an unprecedented thing for a president of the United States to tell the population that they can't speak about a certain subject, especially a subject that was in the news. It is even more bizarre, in my opinion, for the President of the United States to threaten consequences if people kept talking about something that was in the news. What possible benefit to the USA would there be by having its people stop talking about AE, especially since there were virtually no facts known about what happened to her? Now whether my guess above is true or not, I certainly can believe that Mabel and Betty thought it was true. -- Paige Miller #2565 LTM ************************************************************************* From Ric Good point Paige. Americans have always responded to blatant assaults on their Constitutional rights with howls of outrage. If FDR had tried to pull something like this we'd know about it. It's my impression that urban legends are largely a by-product of mass communication and are more common now than they were then. It's hard for me to imagine how the same myth would reach both of Betty and Mabel in 1937. Radio brought people news and entertainment, but "talk radio" is a more recent phenomenon. If there's a culprit I suspect it's a wire service story that got picked up by many local papers and could be easily misconstrued. This is like chasing a ghost. Something seems to have been scaring people and we have a hunch that there may have been something out there that was making trouble, but we're quite sure that it couldn't have been what they thought it was. This is a tough one. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:46:22 EDT From: Eric Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request If this request was, in fact, made, it would seem to indicate that there was some sort of international race on to see who could find AE and FN first. (In the last chapter of his book, Fred Goerner, theorizes just such a scenario.) If this was the case, the U.S. Government certainly would not want some civilian short wave listener to give away AE's location and have it appear in the press. While I don't subscribe to Goerner's "Amelia was a spy" theory, it is possible that part of his reconstruction might be close to the truth. (I would like to think, however, that instead of Mili Atoll in the southeastern Marshalls, that AE and FN landed on and were recovered from Gardner Island.) LTM, Eric, NAS NORTH, San Diego, CA. ********************************************************************** From Ric As Paige Miller has pointed out, the real problem is that no American president could get away with such a public notice without declaring martial law. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:56:00 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: FDR's request On the face of it the two incidents sound out of place. For the president to specifically issue a "stop work" order, with implied penalties for violating that order, on the AE/FN search seems to me to be a case of ". . . he protesteth too much." I would think it would certainly raise a lot of questions in the news media and actually encourage some to be even more active in the search. Calling of the search is one thing, but suggesting punishment for those who continue is a whole different ball game. I can easily see the president announcing an official end of the AE search. Hedging his position with phrases such as " . . . thorough search . . . Naval vessels and aircraft . . . thousands of men . . . professional opinions . . . countless man-hours . . . scoured the sea . . . . etc." FDR could've painted a vivid portrait of a lengthy, comprehensive, and difficult search that came up empty. Therefore, in an effort to put this behind us and move on (something we'd say in the 90s and 00s) and to let the families grieve in private . . . But where the implied penalties for continuing the search came from is anyone's guess. LTM, who continues the search Dennis O. McGee #0149EC *********************************************************************** From Ric The heck of it is, the Earhart search was not important enough to merit presidential attention. It was a big news story for a week or so but before the search even officially ended it was gone from page one. So far, I can't find any mention of FDR in anything related to the Earhart search. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:57:23 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question For what it's worth, I'm one of the colleagues who disagrees with Ric's dismissal of the shoe parts. Although I think we got overly enthusiastic about the shoe at first, the fact remains that it very much appears to be a 1930s woman's shoe in a place where it shouldn't be. We still don't know how many shoes Earhart had with her, or what size they were. As for it being in the wrong place, I think it's silly to suppose that Earhart just hightailed it down to the Seven Site and died; there could be a number of intermediate campsites, and that's what the Aukaraime South site might be. Or might not, of course. I'd say the jury's still out. But I do agree with Ric that the Seven Site is a far more fruitful place to focus our attention. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 16:34:25 EDT From: Lynn Stancil Subject: No Subject I would be more inclined to believe that if such a warning was issued that rather than piracy, it would have been the Japanese that Roosevelt feared as they were near an area that was occupied by the Japs during that time. ******************************************************************** From Ric In July of 1937 the U.S. had no reason to assume that Americans who inadvertently ended up in Japanese controlled areas would be in danger. The U.S., in fact, officially asked the Japanese to help in the search. ********************************************************************* From Bob Lee I am not a FDR scholar by any measure, but I think he was rather a 'spy freak' in that he used a lot of friends and associates to gather information outside of the 'official government channels'. If this is true, this could be a reaction by someone who could claim some 'official' status to try and reduce the number of reports that were coming in from civilians. Why the lack of any broad coverage is a total mystery to me. Also, while the search may not have been important enough to warrant FDR's involvement -- I bet his wife would have had much more interest in the whole affair and she wielded a fair degree of influence. Bob ************************************************************************ From Ric Before we speculate about why FDR may have wanted to squash reports by people who thought they heard Amelia we need to figure out what, if anything, caused these two women to think that he did. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:44:25 EDT From: Daryll Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request Ric wrote; >It sounds absurd on the face of it. As far as I know, FDR was not >directly involved at all. He was certainly involved in the area trying to secure islands for Pan Am to land their Clippers at during this time period. The prize was Canton and Enderbury, which required a Presidential order. The "Canton Island Affair" between the USCG Avocet & British HMS Wellington occurred in June '37' during the eclipse expedition. Miller, working with the CG which was under Morgenthau and the Treasury dept. had already secured Howland, Baker and Jarvis using the Guano Act. Hawaiians were living on those islands to maintain a residential status to block the British moves to claim title. The British were busy laying claim to the Phoenix Group and had been to Canton in Jan '37' to plant the flag. The British were trying to do what they could on the part of British Imperial Airways. "Landing Rights" was what prevented Pan Am & Imperial Airways from going where ever they pleased. The British wanted "landing rights" in Hawaii which was against Pan Am's wishes. What does this have to do with Earhart?? Nothing if you insist on looking at Earhart's flight as an independent stunt flight by a middle aged woman looking for one last chance at glory. To maintain that point of view; you have to ignore her backing from Lockheed and other famous aviation technical companies of the time, the US in preparing Howland island which was essential to her Pacific crossing. Her navigator who was once head of Pan Am navigation and who had surveyed routes for Pan Am before. The total lack of support from anything British including any radio communications with Darwin, Nauru and the Gilberts. Daryll ************************************************************************* From Ric >her backing from Lockheed and other famous aviation technical companies >of the time Do you have documents from Lockheed or other companies showing that their support of Earhart was anything more than routine celebrity product endorsement? TIGHAR gets free metal detectors from White's Electronics and free shipping from FedEx but to the best of my knowledge the CIA has not ordered them to do that. >the US in preparing Howland island which was essential to her Pacific >crossing You have it backward. Commercial use of Howland was essential to U.S. claims of sovereignty under the American Guano Act of 1858. The Dept. of Interior expedited the construction of the runway so that Earhart could use it not so much as a favor to AE but as a favor to themselves. >Her navigator who was once head of Pan Am navigation and who >had surveyed routes for Pan Am before. Who would you have picked? >The total lack of support from anything British including any radio >communications with Darwin, Nauru and the Gilberts. Darwin tried to communicate but it was Earhart who had a blown fuse. Nauru provided information prior to departure, monitored her frequency and heard at least one transmission. Earhart never asked Nauru to do anything. She also never requested any communication with anyone in the Gilberts. If you have documents to the contrary I'd love to see them. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:27:32 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question Tom King wrote: > For what it's worth, I'm one of the colleagues who disagrees with Ric's > dismissal of the shoe parts. Tom, I am one who also does not completely dismiss the shoe parts and for the same reasons you have given. However, I think you made a more important point in reminding us that whatever happened on Niku, if anything, did not happen in one isolated spot. Niku is a small place and although it might not have been an easy playground to explore during the time our heroes may have been there they could have been all over the atoll. I certainly agree there would have been a few and possibly obvious sites they might have concentrated on but we should not limit our analysis too much. Alan *********************************************************************** From Ric Allow me to talk myself into agreeing with you guys. Let's remember what was found on Aukeraime. - a fragmented rubber shoe sole - a Cat's Paw replacement heel - another heel that is not a replacement heel - a small brass grommet that may be a shoelace eyelet We found two heels so it seems most likely that there were two shoes. Were they a pair? It's possible that someone would replace one heel and not the other but people usually replace both heels at the same time. Why two heels but only one sole? Rubber survives. Leather doesn't. It seems most likely that the sole we don't have was leather. So it appears that we found the remains of a rubber-soled shoe with a replaced heel and the original heel from a leather-soled shoe. That doesn't sound like a pair to me. How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? Oddly, we have a similar situation where Gallagher found the bones (which we think is the Seven site). He found "part of the sole" of a "woman's stoutish walking shoe or sandal" and also part of a man's shoe (we don't know what part). The part of a sole he found almost had to be rubber, as did the part of a man's shoe. You describe what we found on Aukeraime the same way. Remnants of two shoes, but not a pair. No other shoe parts found there by Gallagher or by us. Same question. How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? Same seemingly illogical phenomenon in two different places on the same island. The most obvious explanation is that there is only one person and that person is wearing a mismatched pair of shoes. Why would somebody do that? Because one foot was swollen from injury. A person with a swollen foot who started with a pair of thier own shoes and a larger pair belonging to a companion could wear one of each until they wore out, discard them, and wear the other two right up to the time the person died. That scenario, of course, only works if the person in question has smaller feet than the companion who, for some reason does not need those shoes. All of this sure fits the picture of Earhart surviving for a time as a castaway after Noonan's death. Things that still bother me: - Those two-tone heels in the photos. - If the above-described hypothesis is correct, there should have been a Cat's Paw heel with the shoe parts Gallagher found. Apparently there wasn't. It will be interesting to see if our future excavations at the Seven Site turn up a Cat's Paw heel just like the one we found over on Aukeraime. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:35:20 EDT From: Ron bright Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question Wasn't Paxton accompanied by a woman, never identified, in the early 50"s? She is the one that used the latrine. There were on Gardner for some time, and who knows what type of shoe she could or would wear. Maybe someone can fill us in on Paxton's visit. LTM, Ron B ************************************************************************* From Ric You mean Laxton. Lands Commissioner Paul B. Laxton who visited the island early in 1949. His 1951 article "Nikumaroro" in the Journal of the Polynesian Society makes passing reference to a story he was told about an American woman who had visited the island some time earlier and had a surprising experience with the sink in the government Rest House (which drained right onto the floor). We've never been able to figure out who the woman was, but as I explained in my recent posting, the shoe situation at the Aukeraime site is more complicated than just finding a source for a woman's shoe with an American replacement heel. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:41:47 EDT From: Ron Berry Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request Have you guys ever heard of "Yellow Journalism"? If your going to search the news papers, I would like to suggest looking in the Hearst papers they were always inventing something to sell papers. ************************************************************************* From Ric It's true that Hearst was the Fox Network of the Spanish-American War but there were no supermarket tabloids in 1937. There were magazines that carried sensational articles of highly dubious credibility (Police Gazette come to mind) but 15 year old girls and housewives didn't usually read them. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:46:24 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: FDR "request" As I understand it, the source of Betty's recollection that FDR wanted to cease and desist the search comes from the newspaper. The St Petersburg newspaper is available on microfishe and can be obtained thru interlibrary loan. I have checked the newspaper throughout July 37 about all of the stories contained in St Pete's paper as it was well covered there. (AE once landed there in the Spring of 37, I believe). Seems to me this can be easily resolved with a review of the newspaper from July-Oct 37. I presume the source or something inferring FDR's interest came from the local paper. I shall review the July-Aug clippings I made for something about an FDR interest, if any. FDR was interested to some extent after the disappearance as he finally agreed to see Vidal for a few minutes in late July 37. LTM, Ron Bright ************************************************************************* From Ric Checking the St. Pete papers is a good tactic. Betty's family subscribed to the now-defunct Evening Independent and sometimes bought the Sunday issue of the St. Petersburg Times. How do we know about Vidal's visit with the president and how much do we know about what they talked about? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:01:57 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: FDR "request" Concerning the "don't say anything more about AE" issue I would think a concentrated review of military orders would be a fruitful place to start. I would guess that during the height of the search there were many military personal offering guesses and clues that just tended to fog the search. It wouldn't be unusual for the military to try to put a lid on all the speculation and this was picked up by the press and it went on from there. Ted Campbell ********************************************************************** From Ric We do know that the rumor mill was rife with stories. Some time ago on this forum Rollin Reineck told of a letter or memo by a Col. Richards, as I recall, who claimed that Earhart had been heard to say far more than the Itasca reported, and in the spring of 1938 there was an article in the New York Times in which Earhart's voice was described as "broken and choked" prompting speculation that there were chlorine fumes in the cockpit from the battery. And so on... As far as I know, there is no way to do a "concentrated review of military orders". I don't think routine orders are archived and if they are there would be thousands every day. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:03:29 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request One explanation maybe that both parties having some interest in radio might have been subscribers to a newsletter that may have printed a piece of boilerplate about the Radio Act of 1912 (and others) that reminded amateur radio operators about the law regarding making false reports. Some of the twisted legal jargon could have given some the impression that reporting incidents was, in fact, illegal. A long stretch and pure speculation -- but it does help explain why something like this would not be widely reported. It may have simply served to "fill up" a newsletter and it could have easily carried an importation policy makers byline. Now, does anyone know if in 1937 there were newsletter type publication that amateur radio listeners nationwide might receive? Bob ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:05:46 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: FDR's Request Ric, I would like to amend my last sentence. The corrected version is below. First, I have no knowledge one way or the other about such a request by FDR ... but it sure sounds to me like a pre-WWII urban myth. The reason I say so is that we allegedly have freedom of speech in this country, and it would be an unprecedented thing for a president of the United States to tell the population that they can't speak about a certain subject, especially a subject that was in the news. It is even more bizarre, in my opinion, for the President of the United States to threaten consequences if people kept talking about something that was in the news. What possible benefit to the USA would there be by having its people stop talking about AE, especially since there were virtually no facts known about what happened to her? Now whether my guess above is true or not, I certainly can believe that Mabel and Betty thought FDR said it. -- Paige Miller #2565 LTM ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:10:18 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: FDR's Request Ric says >It's my impression that urban legends are >largely a by-product of mass communication and are more common now than they >were then. It's hard for me to imagine how the same myth would reach both of >Betty and Mabel in 1937. Please read the following article which details the creation of a similar urban myth in 1944. A single mis-statement by one newspaper reporter gets spread in other media and people believe it. "The Mad Gasser of Mattoon; How The Press Created an Imaginary Chemical Weapons Attack", Ladendorf, B. and Bartholomew, R., Skeptical Inquirer, July/August 2002, Vol. 26, Number 4, pp 50-54, 58. (FYI -- Mattoon is a small city in Eastern Illinois) Paige Miller, #2565 LTM *********************************************************************** From Ric Is the article available on line? I don't mean to suggest that urban myths don't pre-date the internet - just that they proliferate faster these days. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:35:42 EDT From: Herman De Wulf Subject: AE commemoration Look what I find in my e-mail today. The New York Times commemorates the disappearance of Amelia Earhart on 2 July 1937 and makes available copies of its front page on 3 July. When you click on the page you get an enlargement. Perhaps this is worth mentioning to the forum as some might be interested of having their copy. LTM Herman ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:42:05 EDT From: John Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question The shoe scenario, for what it's worth, makes sense to a point. However, I would sooner believe that AE, with an injured foot, would have simply used one of her shoes and one of FN's until she too died. I can't see her having recovered from her foot injury and then going back to get the other pair of mismatched shoes when the first wore out. I realize that the climate at Niku is rough on clothing and footwear, but would the shoes have worn out that fast? I think, in this scenario, she probably injured her foot while staying at the Aukeraime site with FN, and used one of his shoes on the injured foot after he no longer needed it. She later made her way to the seven site where she later died. I think this hypothesis fits with what's been found. I can't see her, or anyone else, surviving long enough to wear out two pair of shoes without leaving more behind to show they were there. Granted, there is a lot of area there that hasn't been searched yet. Again, all of this is conjecture since the proof that AE and FN were there hasn't been found as yet. Hopefully that will occur soon. LTM, who wishes this expedition all the best John ************************************************************************** From Ric For what it's worth, my estimate for how long a pair of "street" shoes would last on Niku, constantly wet from going out on the reef and into the lagoon for fish, on the abrasive coral and coral rubble, in the relentless heat and damp, is maybe a month. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:54:08 EDT From: Ric Gillespie Subject: Expedition update Happy Earhart Disappearance Day everybody! Today we are waiting for word from the FAA whether the runway at Pago Pago has been approved for resumption of service by Hawaiian Air and, if so, whether the airline will make its scheduled Thursday flight from Honolulu. At this point, the earliest we can hope to get all our people to MOLLIE waiting at Pago Pago is Monday July 7. If Hawaiian does not resume service it will be at least July 11 before the trip can depart for Nikumaroro. We're determined to make this trip happen and we're dealing with the curveballs as they're pitched. Stay tuned. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:04:04 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Shoe parts Ric said: "A person with a swollen foot who started with a pair of their own shoes and a larger pair belonging to a companion could wear one of each until they wore out, discard them, and wear the other two right up to the time the person died." Ain't gonna work, chief. Assume the injured foot is the left foot. Survivor uses larger left show and smaller (their own) right shoe. No problem. Left shoe wears out. The big right shoe would work only if it is sufficiently larger than the survivor's foot allowing it to be worn the wrong side. For example, you may put my size 13 right shoe on your injured size 10 right foot, but the size 13 left shoe on your size 10 injured right foot would be mighty uncomfortable. Your hypothesis works only if the injured foot heals enough to wear the opposite footed shoe. If you have any documentation to the contrary, I'd like to see it. :-) LTM, Who's a sure-footed bugger Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ************************************************************************ From Ric Point taken...but a person would be highly motivated to make it work even if you had to cut away part of the shoes. Going barefoot on the coral rubble is not an option. ************************************************************************** From Tom King Thanks, Ric; it's nice to be on the same wavelength. Remember too that there were the hygrometer and the top of the tummy medicine bottle at Aukaraime South. I don't know what to do with these, and I understand the rationale for not ascribing the hygrometer to Earhart, but there are just still a lot of loose ends about that site to tie up. Recall too Kent Spading's insistence that there are topographic features there that match Maude's recollection of what he and Bevington saw there in '37. And for that matter, there's the odd coincidence of the Aukaraime South site with Bevington's "bivouac." >Things that still bother me: > >- Those two-tone heels in the photos. Yes, and of course, the size problem. But we don't know whether AE carried other shoes, perhaps larger ones to accommodate thicker socks while flying at altitude, and perhaps without two-toned heels. There's an interesting photo at the AE Birthplace in Atchison, KS that shows her climbing out of the Electra with her foot in a position that should make it possible to get another measurement of shoe size. I hope to get a digital image of it shortly. >- If the above-described hypothesis is correct, there should have been a >Cat's Paw heel with the shoe parts Gallagher found. Apparently there wasn't. Well, that's assuming that Gallagher and/or Steenson would have reported it as such. That seems likely in Gallagher's case, since his descriptions are pretty detailed, but Steenson's is pretty thin, and if the heel were found during the intensive search that followed the breakdown of Gallagher's wireless, Gallagher wouldn't have had too much opportunity to report it. It's also assuming that the crabs didn't chew up the heel to the point at which its manufacturing marks couldn't be detected. I know, if they did, why didn't they do the same to the Aukaraime heel? Because the latter was left untenanted, while the former had something to eat in it? I don't know, but I don't think the negative evidence of no reported Cats Paw heel at the Seven Site means much. >It will be interesting to see if our future excavations at the Seven Site >turn up a Cat's Paw heel just like the one we found over on Aukeraime. Oh yes..... ************************************************************************** From Ric The hygrometer and the bottle cap were about 50 meters from the shoe parts (closer to the lagoon) and you'll that there was also some heavy metal hardware and remnants of 55 gallon drums in that area. The Bushnell survey map shows that observations from the towers were made to a point on the lagoon shore right near there. Seems easier to ascribe that stuff to the Bushnell Boys. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:08:24 EDT From: Dan Postellon Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question Ric wrote: >So it appears that we found the remains of a rubber-soled shoe with a >replaced heel and the original heel from a leather-soled shoe. That doesn't >sound like a pair to me. How do two people each lose one shoe in the same >place? Two people go swimming, leave their shoes on the beach. Crabs get one shoe each? Dan Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ************************************************************************ From Ric But these shoes were 50 meters inland through dense vegetation from the lagoon beach and about a quarter mile from the ocean beach. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:31:21 EDT From: Randy Jacobson Subject: Vidal's vist with FDR Vidal's visit with FDR was on behalf of GP Putnam, primarily to get the British to search the Gilbert and Ellice Islands for AE. In particular, GPP believed a report that there was an unidentified island off the Gilberts, and eventually he got someone (geez, Tom King and I wrote a paper on this, but I can't remember his name!) to take a yacht out and search the area. *********************************************************************** From Ric Oh, okay. You're talking about Capt. Handley and the search for the fabled island of Katagateman. The manuscript you and Tom prepared on that fascinating story was never completed but only needs some citations completed. It does not, however, make any mention of a meeting between Vidal and FDR. I'll send you and Tom copies of the manuscript if you no longer have it. It's a great story and I'd love to make it available. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:40:11 EDT From: Christian D. Subject: Re: Cliffhanger Re comms with Xmas island: I just got (yesterday July 1st) my first email from the island in a little while -no comment as to whether there was an outage, and how long... Concerning clearing Customs on entering Kiribati, if push comes to shove, Kanton is a port of entry, and if the Xmas official couldn't make it to Apia, the expedition could go to Kanton to enter; of course that would cost some transit days, but it is not that far. Christian D ***************************************************************** From Ric The lines to Kiritimati (Christmas) are back up and we have re-established communications. Yes, we could go to Kanton to clear customs and it would take at least a two-day chunk out of the seven days we hope to have at Niku, but Kiribati requires that a government representative of their choosing accompany any visit to Nikumaroro and they have designated a Wildlife Conservation Officer from Kiritimati to accompany this expedition. He will be deputized to perform customs and immigration duties so we don't have to go to Kanton, but he does have to go on the trip. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:43:18 EDT From: Phil Tanner Subject: Re: Expedition update Radio Australia or Radio New Zealand International reported yesterday (Monday 1st July) that an inspection team was awaited but the earliest it could get to Pago Pago was Thursday. ltm, Phil Tanner 2276 ***************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Phil. That would explain the word I just got that Hawaiian has now cancelled Thursday's flight but has not said anything either way about Monday. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:45:14 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question > How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? Playing kickball? Ric, I think most of us have difficulty with the time difference. By that I mean we tend to think 2003 rather than 1937. Today you would be hard pressed to find anyone who could, without looking, describe their own shoe soles and heels. they just come with the shoes and then we buy new shoes that also come with soles and heels. In 1937 my grandfather had a last with different sizes and repaired the families shoes. We all knew what soles and heels were on the shoes. I think when Gallagher made his comments about the shoe parts we can almost take his descriptions to the bank. Today we could go through a pile of shoes and they would not be all that meaningful as we pay little or no attention to such things. In 1937 little differences would stand out like a sore thumb. When Gallagher looked at the shoe parts it would have been obvious to him what they were. I'll buy what he said. Alan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:48:10 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: FDR "request" > I don't think routine orders are archived and if they are there would > be thousands every day. They are in the Air Force and are stored in St. Louis. I have reason to search through them for the early 50s and 60s and have spoken to the person in charge in the St. Louis facility. I don't know about the army or how far back anything has been kept. In any case I think that might be a fruitless search. Alan ******************************************************************** From Ric Must be quite an archive. But I agree. Whatever Betty and Mabel saw (if anything) was in the press in some form. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:51:00 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: More shoes . . . Ric said: " How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place?" Dan Postellon said: "Two people go swimming, leave their shoes on the beach. Crabs get one shoe each?" But crabs don't wear shoes, right? And while we're talking about shoes, today is Imelda Marcos's birthday; she's 74. LTM, Who's a tad giddy today Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ***************************************************************** From Ric Crabs steal socks - we know that much. Happy Birthday Imelda! (talk about synchronicity....) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:07:16 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question The two tone heel; have you been able to determine if Cat Paw made a two tone heel replacement or is it possible that the "white" section was an add on e.g. height adjustment correction for some physical abnormality or some stylish embellishment installed by the repair shop? Could be the "white" part disintegrated like leather. Ted Campbell ***************************************************************** From Ric We discussed this at some length on the forum a year or two ago (how time flies). Cat's Paw never made a two-tone heel but some people on the forum remembered shoe heels from back in the '30s that had a special harder, longer-wearing rubber on the outside corner where most heels wear down first (check your own). Cat's Paw used "traction plugs" - circular plugs of white rubber set into the heel. I think they still do that. Other companies apparently used a two-piece heel but we've never been able to identify a particular example. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:13:54 EDT From: Ted Campbell Subject: Re: Shoe parts Dennis brings up an interesting point re right and left shoe sizes. Can you (Ric) determine the side of the shoe sole you found and can you see any wear on the cats paw heel that may indicated which side? Ted Campbell *************************************************** From Ric The Cat's Paw heel is for a right shoe. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:17:50 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: Heel & Sole How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? I am certain that I'm missing something here. Ric, there are millions of ways two people can lose one shoe in the same place, and this is BEFORE we consider that perhaps one or both of the found shoes was/were lost elsewhere and brought to where they were found. (I've been reading through Forum archives, and I'm wondering if Janet Whitney is still out there and could help us out a bit. , followed by look of sheer terror. :-P . . . .) LTM, who was barefoot and pregnant most of the time, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 *************************************************** From Ric We don't need a million ways. Just a couple will do. Enlighten me as to how two people each lose one shoe in the same place on an island where you really, really need your shoes. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:28:00 EDT From: Subject: Re: Vidal's vist with FDR From Ron Bright, Ric, I will check the Vidal request and visit with FDR for a "few minutes". Also I note in the Itasca deck log, written by Hines, on 15 July, he writes that the senior Commisioner at Tarawa (Courterys?) "stated no information [was found] on Earhart in spite British organized Gilbert Island search". I was unaware any "organized" search took place in and around the Gilberts by the British. Nothing was found, presumably. Are there any "official" reports by the British they anyone is aware of? LTM, Ron Bright ************************************************************ From Ric We have the British file. No search of the Gilberts by the British was requested or conducted. The U.S. State Dept. requested and received permission for Lexington's planes to search British waters and for Itasca and Swan to search any uninhabited islands and establish contact with inhabitants of other islands. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:29:12 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Shoe parts Ric wrote: >Point taken...but a person would be highly motivated to make it work even if >you had to cut away part of the shoes. Going barefoot on the coral rubble is >not an option.> Two personal observations: 1. Last time on Niku, before leaving Samoa I realized I'd forgotten to bring reef-walking shoes. The only tennies I could find in Pago Pago were ladies' (with red flowers). They were far too narrow for me, so I simply cut out their sides to give my toes room. Worked fine, but were goners by the end of the expedition. 2. Mah Confed'rate pro-gen-itors fought a hull WAR wearin' rags on thur feet, and I'll bet they went through a buncha mismatched shoes, too. TK ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:33:55 EDT From: Mark Subject: FDR Should we expect Oliver Stone on the forum soon ? Mark 1214C ********************************************************* From Ric Bah! Stone is an amateur. At least our mysteries are real. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:26:52 EDT From: Mike Muenich Subject: Heel and Sole The current heel and shoe issue has gotten me interested enough to again post to the forum. Do I understand that you have recovered two heels, both rubber? I know one heel was submitted to Cats Paw for analysis and found that it was generally the correct time frame. Has the other been examined; comparatively with the Cats Paw? I seem to recall that there are forensic experts who can deduce substantial information from wear patterns. Shouldn't you be able to tell upon comparative exam if they are the same size? Same wear pattern? worn equally? Are they both lefts or rights or left and right? the web site I have attached was a police symposium with several days of "shoe" and footprint analysis. this was one of about 81 "hits" for the inquiry shoe, expert, and "wear pattern", several of which were reports about various of these above questions. ************************************************************************** From Ric >Do I understand that you have recovered two heels, both >rubber? I know one heel was submitted to Cats Paw for analysis and found >that it was generally the correct time frame. Has the other been examined; >comparatively with the Cats Paw? That is correct. Cat's Paw is owned by the Biltrite Corporation and when the shoe parts were first found back in 1991 (good lord, 12 years ago) we sent them the artifacts and they gave us their opinions. They weren't forensic experts. They were simply people who had been with the company a long time and knew the business well. We talked about wear patterns but both heels seemed to exhibit very similar and very normal patterns - and both are very worn. The Cat's Paw is a right heel and the other one appears to be a left. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:48:58 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: We each lost a shoe No fair, Ric, you're changing the rules here! The original question was: >How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? Now, it's: > how two people each lose one shoe in the same place on an island > where you really, really need your shoes. (Seriously, I was under the impression that shoes were sort of impractical or undesirable on Niku, as evidenced by the fact that none of the native islanders wore them. Or did they not wear them because they could not get them?) I still think there is a basic premise that I'm missing. When I learn what it is, I'm gonna feel dumb! Here's a list, which I can add to if you'd like. Pick any two. Thanks for relieving me of the burden of providing a million. That would have taken me a while. 1) They did not each lose one shoe. They each abandoned BOTH shoes. The others are there and have not been found yet. 2) They were laying around in despair, and they heard a plane. They dashed off to signal the plane, and, in their haste, each lost a shoe. 3) Someone suggested playing kick ball. I submit playing hackey sack. Or four square. Or backgammon. 4) They were hungry, and began to eat their shoes, alternating each person's shoes. (It's been done on polar expeditions. Heck, even Charlie Chaplin did it.) 5) They set the shoes down and went to sleep. In the night, the coconut crabs made off with one of each. (Why one of each? Fairness, perhaps.) 6) They buried them to keep them safe from the coconut crabs, and on returning, only found one each. 7) The shoes were wearing out, and were abandoned as they became useless. A single good shoe would be kept as a water dipper or a future meal? Some of these are ridiculous, I know, but it seems to me there many possibilities. LTM, who wants me to go back to the beginning of this thread, re-read, and dispel the notion that I've missed something. Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ************************************************************************* From Ric Hey, I don't make the rules. The island does. Pacific islanders generally do not wear shoes but they also stay away from places where the ground is covered with coral rubble. Coral rubble is broken chunks of coral. It's like walking on rough, hot stones and it goes goes clink-clink when you walk on it. Large areas of many atolls are covered in coral rubble. They're the areas that are not conducive to agriculture and there is no particular reason to go there, so people don't. When they do they wear shoes. All of your suggested scenarios require that the same unusual event happen to two different indiviuals at the same time. That can happen. You and I can both bend over to pick up a dime and split the seat out of our pants on the same day, but I submit that any hypothesis that requires such unrelated synchronicity is weaker than one that doesn't. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:49:38 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Vidal's vist with FDR >No search of the Gilberts by the British was >requested or conducted. Foua Tofiga, who was a student on Tarawa in July of '37, told us that he and his colleagues were called out to search the reefs for Earhart - or something; he said the object of the search was never entirely clear. My impression was that there'd been a search of sorts, but not one involving ships in the water (except Capt. Handley's boat) or planes in the air (which the Brits didn't have). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:10:32 EDT From: Eric Subject: Re: FDR and Constitutional Rights Ric wrote: > Americans have always responded to blatant assaults on > their Constitutional rights with howls of outrage. I once read an account by a man who was present when FDR spoke from the rear platform of a train. A polio victim, FDR was bought out in his wheelchair, man-handled into a standing position and then strapped to the lectern from which he spoke. While this was going on, Secret Service agents moved through the crowd and opened the movie cameras of private citizens to ensure there was no action footage of FDR having to be thus assisted. Had they wanted to complain, who could those citizens have gone to? The news media? Hardly! (They'd been operating under similar rules for years.) The FBI or the police? Ha! So, yes, I believe that it was possible for FDR or his staff to have used the power of the Federal Government to suppress any information on AE distress calls that might have been picked up by a few private short wave listeners. Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, Ca ********************************************************************** From Ric Yes, but the question here is not whether the government suppressed information in violation of the Constitution. Such acts were and are sadly common. The question is whether the government put out a public notice that it was going to do something in violation of the Constitution. When that happens somebody usually hollers. Suppose the Secret Service had put a notice in the newspaper the day before the incident you describe above saying: "During the President's appearance tomorrow it will be forbidden for anyone to take motion pictures of him until he is ready to begin his speech." Many people would probably comply but others would raise questions. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:13:52 EDT From: Ron Berry Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request In 1937 the super market and its tabloid had not been invented yet. Although his business was on the decline Hearst still owned seventeen daily news papers and five magazines. They loved to get unsuspecting people to make a claim so that they could enlarge on it. ***************************************************** From Ric Regardless of whether it was an accurate wire service story that was misconstrued or a distorted product of the Hearst empire, it should be findable. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:31:23 EDT From: Karen Hoy Subject: FDR's Request Could FDR's request have been a slick political move? By expressing concern for FN and AE's "safety," he may have been creating subtle propaganda--i.e "they're alive, but the Republicans won't authorize enough money for a proper search." Or leading the public to believe that they "could have been captured." Was the whole Japanese Capture Hypothesis just a paranoid embellishment of what someone thought Roosevelt had said? LTM (who is about to join TIGHAR) Karen ********************************************************** From Ric So far we have no hard evidence that Roosevelt ever made such a request. The whole Japanese Capture Hypothesis was a classic case of life imitating art. The 1943 Hollywood film Flight For Freedom popularized the idea and "supporting evidence" quickly began to emerge. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:41:10 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: FDR interest in AE's fate Presidential aide M. H. MacIntyre sent a memo to FDR dated 20 July 37 reporting that Gene Vidal had been in touch with GP and that Vidal "has some very interesting sidelights and some speculations, which are probably true, as to WHAT REALLY HAPPENED." [ my emphasis ] What could that be? FDR noted on the memo "I would like to see him for 5 or 10 minutes". These kind of statements of "what really happened" continue to fuel the Earhart mystery. The implication is that the government "knew" the real story, but wanted it kept secret. Although FDR consented to see Vidal on or about 26 July 37, ten minutes doesn't seem to reflect a whole lot of interest in the results of the search or her fate! I have never seen the results of this meeting IF it took place at the White House. I think Dustymiss is checking out some of this material this summer. Vidal's report might tell us researchers what did happen after 0843, 2 July 37 somewhere over the Pacific. The other source would be MacIntyre as he thought they were "probably true". LTM, Ron Bright [Source: White House memo, reproduced on illustration #13 of Brinks book "Lost Star". Brinks cites the source as the FDR Library, Hyde Park, N.Y.] *********************************************************************** From Ric But if "the government" knew what "really happened" the information - in the form of "sidelights and some speculations" - came from Gene Vidal who seems to have gotten it from George Putnam and yet "the government" (the Treasury Department) refused to release Thompson's report to Mantz who was acting on behalf of Putnam. It doesn't make sense. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:52:25 EDT From: Christian D. Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question > How do two people each lose one shoe in the same place? Who says that 2 people lost one shoe in the same place? I'm still surprised that everybody tries to read so much into whatever is found on Niku: the island was not mothballed for 2 generations, in the wait for the Tighars to finally arrive! For a quarter of a century people lived there full time, and with lots of kids! So what if shoe parts are now found at the same place? Personally I'd rather always assume that nothing found now is where it was left initially -unless we can find a good reason to think otherwise, and with accurate dating. Christian D ********************************************************************* From Ric That's an argument that I'm sure archaeologists frequently face and I'll let a real live archaeologist answer it. Dr. King? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 14:24:03 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Urban Myth Ric wrote: >Is the article available on line? (Referring to "The Mad Gasser of Mattoon; >How The Press Created an Imaginary Chemical Weapons Attack", Ladendorf, B. and >Bartholomew, R., Skeptical Inquirer, July/August 2002, Vol. 26, Number 4, pp >50-54, 58.) No, it does not appear to be online. The same subject matter is also covered, along with a whole lot more, in a recently published book: "Hoaxes, Myths, and Manias: Why We Need Critical Thinking" by Robert Bartholomew and Benjamin Radford, Prometheus Books, 2003 (available at amazon.com and bn.com). Seems to me that this particular topic might be of interest in explaining why sooooo many residents of Saipan have similar but mismatched stories about seeing an American woman pilot. The FDR story seems to match a typical urban myth in many respects. >I don't mean to suggest that urban myths don't pre-date the internet - just >that they proliferate faster these days. Agreed. No doubt the speed of spread has increased today. But let us also not forget Orson Welles had a large number of people convinced that Martians had landed. I'm not saying the FDR rumor, if it is true, was a deliberate hoax, but it certainly could have been a poorly written or mis-read news announcement. By the way, many years ago in this forum, you reported TWO women had heard similar messages, Mabel and one other woman who's name I can't recall. Both messages contained statements that were something like: "My navigator is badly hurt and needs medical attention". Is it possible to contact this other woman about the FDR rumor? Another point is: you have catalogued a large number of reports of post-loss messages, did some of them (other than Mabel and Betty) take months and years to be reported? If so, this would again argue against FDR's request not to talk about AE. Paige Miller #2565 LTM ************************************************************************* From Ric There are no fewer than four "haunted women" who told of hearing distress calls from Amelia Earhart and their stories will be dealt with at length in the Post-Loss Radio Study. In brief: Nina Paxton of Ashland, KY is the only one who came forward during the search. She first appears in a local newspaper article on July 9, 1937 and carried on a lifelong campaign to get someone (Walter Winchell, the U.S. Navy, Fred Goerner, the general public) to believe her. She never said anything about a government request to refrain from telling her story. Mabel Duncklee of Corinth, VT came forward in 1990 and told of hearing AE's distress calls in 1937 when she was Mabel Larrimore of Amarillo, TX. She said she didn't try harder to get someone to believe her then because "Our President had asked that no one give out any information if they heard anything because it might endanger her (AE's) life." Thelma Lovelace of Carelton Place, Ontario, Canada came forward in 1991 to say that she had heard Amelia's call for help when she was living in St. Stephen, New Brunswick, Canada. That same day she went to the Customs and Immigration officers at the International Bridge that spans the St. Croix River to Calais, Maine. "The officers almost laughed in my face." She later spoke to several other people but no one believed her. No mention of any U.S. government request. Betty Klenck, of course, came forward more recently and, like Mabel, remembers a government request. All four women tell remarkably similar stories and each one said that Noonan was injured. Betty is now the only one of the four who is still living. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 14:25:05 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: NYT commemoration I'd like to see the New York Times Commemoration you refer to. Was that an e-mail you received from the New York Times? Care to forward it to me? I can't find it, or anything like it, on the NYT website. Thanks and LTM, Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 14:29:34 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Radio Relay League A few days ago I posted musings on whether the directive that Betty remembers about reporting AE/FN incidents might have come from a newsletter for amateur radio buffs. The American Radio Relay League was founded in 1914 and produced a newsletter, apparently starting in 1915. There is an index of all issues (1915-present) on their website (www.arrl.org), but is only accessible by being a member of ARRL. If anyone is a member, perhaps they could take a look. Bob ******************************************************************* From Ric Hold the phone! The infamous Walter McMenamy and several other HAMs who reported hearing post-loss signals from Earhart were members of the Radio Relay League. I had no idea it still exists. We need to get access to those newsletters. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 14:31:28 EDT From: Art Carty Subject: Shoes and Occams Razor I think that this has gotten way too complicated. A really simple scenario goes like this: 1. Noonan dead, Earhart has injured foot. 2. Earhart puts Noonan shoe on injured foot. 3. Earhart, not being a survival expert and not knowing how quickly shoes will wear out, leaves campsite and winds up at 7 site, leaving mismatched shoes. 4. Earhart dies, sooner (which is why she doesn't go back to get other shoes), or later (she doesn't need other shoes, can't find them, etc). LTM Art Carty ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:19:13 EDT From: Alfred Hendrickson Subject: Noonan's Injury >All four women tell remarkably similar stories and each one said that >Noonan was injured. I'm sure this has been discussed before, but Noonan-with-head-injury is a common denominator to virtually all post-loss messages and sightings. It does not seem to matter what hypothesis you subscribe to, ours (the correct one), or captured by Japanese; Noonan hurt his head no matter where he was. I'm going to re-read Long's tome; I know he believed that AE smacked her head on an instrument while ditching, but I'll bet he also had Noonan swimming around with a head injury for a while. (This is sort of eerie, actually.) LTM, who liked ghost stories, . Alfred Hendrickson #2583 ************************************************************************ From Ric Actually, although some kind of injury to Noonan is mentioned or implied in 4 of the 184 post-loss events we know of, none of them specifically mentions a head injury. Betty comes closest with an obviously irrational Noonan and Betty's own impression that he had a head injury. I don't think there is any mention of a Noonan injury in any of the post-loss messages that were made public in 1937. Paxton's was the first public allegation of a Noonan injury, but not a head injury, in her 1943 letter to Walter Winchell. In later years she spoke of Noonan's knee injuries . Larremore and Lovelace both mention some kind of unspecified injury to Noonan but they didn't come forward until the 1990s. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:23:31 EDT From: Gene Dangelo Subject: Re: Radio Relay League I am an ARRL member too! I'll see what I can find! Dr. Gene Dangelo, N3XKS, #2211 ******************************************** From Mike Everette Hold on, Ric. Don't get excited, don't get alarmed; we got the whole thing by the arm.... Been there, done that, got the shirt... already checked this. NOTHING. The American Radio Relay League (ARRL) is still very much around. It is headquartered in Newington, CT. ( I'm an ARRL member.) The ARRL is the US national ham radio organization. The "newsletter" is the ARRL's official magazine, QST. I have access to complete files of QST in hard copy, starting from 1924, in the NC State University Library. In 2000-2001 I spent many hours going through the volumes for 1935, 1936, 1937 and 1938, page by page, looking for any mention of AE. There is NOTHING to be found. I even e-mailed (more than once) the League's "historical staff." (Actually, whoever happens to get such requests foisted upon them). They referred me back to QST. However, one of the "researchers" who communicated with me was Zack Lau, who happens to be the grandson of Harry Lau, the Hawaiian ham operator and US Army Signal Corps rep on Howland at or near the time of AE's disappearance (!!). But even Zack had no new insight. Why is there nothing to be found? Well, this is my view.... The League, at that time (1930s), was very concerned with keeping its focus "Purely Amateur," and anything that smacked of involvement with the commercial side of radio -- including alleged ham involvement with AE -- just wasn't in keeping with that focus. I have also combed several other radio magazines of the era, that had a broader editorial outlook. These include "Radio News" and "Radio-Craft." Didn't find anything there either, unfortunately. 73 Mike E. ************************************************************* From Ric I shoulda known (and probably once did know) that you had this covered. "Never mind." - Gilda Radnor as Emily Litella on Saturday Night Live. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:40:05 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Heel & Sole Question Oh yeah, Ric, give me all the hard ones. Christian, you say: >For a quarter of a century people lived there full time, and with lots >of kids! So what if shoe parts are now found at the same place? > >Personally I'd rather always assume that nothing found now is where it >was left initially -unless we can find a good reason to think otherwise, >and with accurate dating." You're certainly right that we can't assume that anything is where it started out being on the island, or anywhere else. However, stuff that people leave around does tend to be patterned in its distribution -- if it weren't, archeologists wouldn't have much to do. If you look around your own office or backyard or bedroom, you'll probably note patterns. Just the same in an archeological site, which is basically what Niku is. So we expect, and find, patterning, and the patterning is that domestic stuff like shoes is concentrated in the village -- except that shoes aren't. We haven't found shoes in the village, or anyplace else except at Aukaraime South. So we naturally ask ourselves why that is. And that, of course, is the question we're debating. It's always possible that kids brought them in from someplace else, or that crabs dragged them in, or that birds dropped them from trees; but usually when you find stuff that somebody or something brought in from elsewhere, you eventually also find the elsewhere from which the stuff was brought, and we haven't found any shoe lode on Niku. *********************************************************************** From Ric Well, to be strictly accurate (always our wont) there were the many rubber sandals we found washed up on the shoreline in 1989 which we hypothesized were flotsam from The Wreck of the Flip-Flop Maru (sung to the tune of the Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald). And there's a humongous boot sole - gotta be at least a size 13 - found near the remains of Gallagher's house the same year. But no, shoes are real scarce on Niku. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:43:42 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: We each lost a shoe Alfred wrote: >Seriously, I was under the impression that shoes were sort of >impractical or undesirable on Niku, as evidenced by the fact that >none of the native islanders wore them. THEY don't particularly need to wear them, both because they're smart enough to stay away from the nasty areas, as Ric says, and because they've grown up not wearing them and have developed REALLY tough soles (of the feet). A wonderful old man I used to know in Chuuk referred to himself as having "feet like ko," by which he meant cow. It was true. ******************************************************* From Ric And when they do wear shoes they run into another problem. Because they have mostly gone barefoot all their lives they need shoes with width EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:45:45 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Shoes and Occams Razor I wouldn't be surprised if, in the end, we find that on Niku life imitated Art. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:49:32 EDT From: Denise Subject: Two Shoes! Ric says: "Enlighten me as to how two people each lose one shoe in the same place on an island where you really, really need your shoes." How about this? She's got an infected foot which begins to seriously swell. She is carrying Fred's boots (which she wears to wade over the reef) at the time, so takes the shoe off her injured foot, puts on Fred's boot instead, then either leaves the two unused shoes wear she can find them later or tosses the two she isn't wearing off into the scavola? Works for me! Denise ************************************************************* From Ric That's a variation on the same theme we've been talking about. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:53:06 EDT From: Kerry Tiller Subject: Re: Radio Relay League Ric, the American Radio Relay League publishes QST (monthly), and are headquartered in Newington Connecticut. Their HQ amateur station (W1AW) is the only amateur station authorized by the FCC to broadcast one way comms on the ham bands (bulletins, propagation reports, practice code transmissions for novices to gain proficiency, etc.). I have not been a member for some years (since I let my last license expire), but I would be surprised if the active TIGHAR members who are hams are not ARRL members. But even as a non-ARRL member, I'm sure if you approached the ARRL as one non-profit organization to another, they would be happy to open their archives to you. It has never been a secret organization. Kerry Tiller (ex WN2IVM and WB7SIQ) ****************************************************************** From Jon Watson I recently (like last month or so) sent an email to the head of the LA chapter of the Radio Relay League. I didn't receive a reply, and subsequently sent a second email with the same result. I will try to pursue this through other avenues. The Radio Relay League is a huge organization, with numerous chapters in California alone. ltm jon ******************************************************* From Ric Thanks guys, but Mike Everette has already been down this yellow brick road and there's no wizard at the end of it. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:59:50 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Shoe parts Ric wrote: > Point taken...but a person would be highly motivated to make it work even if > you had to cut away part of the shoes. Going barefoot on the coral rubble is > not an option. Just curious, why would going barefoot on the coral rubble be "not an option"? I'm just about to spend another weekend barefoot on coral rubble. I find it far preferable to destroying shoes in salt water, having my feet chafed raw by damp shoes and putting up with bits of shell and rubble in my shoes. I've been experimenting with this castaway stuff since I got my yacht back in the water last year. Lots of things we speculated about on the forum are absolute rubbish when actually tested. I did the underpants experiment, the barefoot experiments and a few others in tropical conditions. I have also been experimenting with living for a week (well, ten days) at a time washing only in salt water, and washing my clothes in salt water, living on a litre and a half of water a day and around 300 grammes of food a day. It's not as tough as we all think. Due to commitments I'm not able to push these experiments further than ten days at a time for now. I found a very easy way to get into fallen coconuts in a couple of minutes, to access around 200ml of water per nut. If I could beat the crabs and rats to say 20 fallen coconuts a day, and develop a taste for Bigass Latro, I'm sure I could gold out for quite a while on Niku. Another point we discussed. The drinking only coconut juice for four days in a row (all I had with me) did not give me the runs or a tummy ache. Eating too much flesh from the coconuts on another trip did. The coral rubble seems to make it easy to sprain an ankle if one is foolish enough to run on the stuff, as it goes down several feet on most of the islands here. For the most part though it is fairly rounded by the action of the waves that placed it there originally. On the other hand, most of the sand we have is made of tiny fragments of broken shell washed in from the reefs. THAT is hard on the feet. Cuts the undersides of big toes to ribbons. Obviously, the fact that I live in the tropics and spend a lot of time walking on coarse sand beaches means my feet are a bit tougher than some, but it doesn't take a lot of time for the soles to harden up. I looked at the close ups of the coral on Niku and compared it with our coral beaches. Seems very similar to me. Th' WOMBAT **************************************************************** From Ric You may be right. We're horrified at the prospects of being cast away on an island like Niku but if we were we might make out better than we imagine. The will to survive is a powerful force and the human animal is can adapt to all sorts of conditions. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:04:58 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: FDR interest in AE's fate So that means the "memo" was Vidal to GP to MacIntyre to FDR to FDR Library to Brinks to Ron to forum. I could never get that admitted into evidence. Even if it was a photocopy and it could be authenticated there is no way to know what Vidal or GP actually said. I'd have to pass on this. Alan *********************************************** From Ric I understood Ron to say that the memo was from MacIntyre to FDR with a handwritten response on it from the President. Sounds to me like pretty good evidence that FDR agreed to see Vidal for "5 or 10 minutes". It is NOT evidence that such a meeting took place. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:06:26 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: FDR's Request Eric writes: >I once read an account by a man who was present when FDR spoke from the rear >platform of a train. A polio victim, FDR was bought out in his wheelchair, >man-handled into a standing position and then strapped to the lectern from >which he spoke. While this was going on, Secret Service agents moved through the >crowd and opened the movie cameras of private citizens to ensure there was no >action footage of FDR having to be thus assisted. Seems to me there is a huge difference between the Secret Service effectively restricting a very obvious activity in a crowd in a contained area, and the "government" monitoring conversations anywhere in the country. I submit that the latter was not possible in 1937. >So, >yes, I believe that it was possible for FDR or his staff to have used the power >of the Federal Government to suppress any information on AE distress calls >that might have been picked up by a few private short wave listeners. Which raises the question, why would the government care to suppress such information, especially since it was at the same time spending huge amounts of money on a search? Paige Miller #2565 LTM ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:13:32 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: What really happened Ron Bright writes: >Presidential aide M. H. MacIntrye sent a memo to FDR dated 20 July 37 >reporting that Gene Vidal had been in touch with GP and that Vidal "has some >very >interesting sidelights and some speculations, which are probably true, as to >WHAT REALLY HAPPENED." [ my emphais ] What could that be? I don't understand the phrase "some speculations, which are probably true". Seems to me an oxymoron ... a speculation is a guess or conclusion unsupported by facts, how could Vidal, GP or MacIntyre know they are probably true? Where did GP get this information from? Why didn't GP just tell the world as soon as he found out: "I KNOW WHERE AMELIA IS, PLEASE GO SAVE HER"? Or is the implication that MacIntyre knew from other sources (not Vidal or GP) what really happened, and yet somehow failed to inform Itasca and Colorado where to look, leaving FDR open to criticism that huge amounts of money were spent on this search and nothing was found? >These kind of statements of "what really happened" continue to fuel the >Earhart mystery. The implication is that the government "knew" the real >story, but wanted it kept secret. Where did this evidence come from, such that the government "knew" the real story? Not Itasca, not Colorado. And why did the government want it secret? Please tell us, inquiring minds want to know. Paige Miller #2565 LTM (who was always making speculations) ********************************************************************** From Ric This does not seem mysterious to me. I think MacIntyre is saying, "Vidal, after talking to GP, thinks he knows what went wrong and it sounds reasonable to me." That's all. I don't know where anybody gets the idea that somebody is claiming to know where Earhart is. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:24:08 EDT From: Eric Subject: Noonan's Head injury Ric wrote: >All four women tell remarkably similar stories and each one said that >Noonan was injured. Many of the witnesses that Fred Goerner interviewed on Saipan remembered that FN had a head injury. Coincidence? LTM Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND San Diego, CA ******************************************************************** From Ric Some of the people Goerner interviewed on Saipan described a man with a head injury. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my recollection that none of them identified the man as Frederick J. Noonan. There may have been a man with a head injury who was seen by several people, or there may have been a story about a man with a head injury that was heard by several people and in either case it would not be unusual to hear several stories about a man with a head injury. But it's a long way from your statement that, "Many of the witnesses that Fred Goerner interviewed on Saipan remembered that FN had a head injury." As we've also seen, there are no multiple accounts of a Noonan head injury in the post-loss radio signals. There is no coincidence to worry about. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 11:34:12 EDT From: Ron Berry Subject: Amelia's injuries If most of us agree that Fred had an injury that was reported by Amelia, then we have to assume that if she had been injured that she would have reported this at the same time. She made no suggestion that she had been hurt, so she would not need Fred's shoe to tramp around in and lose. Also I have a question or two about the crabs: When the crabs steal something where do they take, do they have a nest or do they head for the water with their prize? Second question what kind of crabs are these? ********************************************************************* From Ric Mabel Larremore, "She also had some injuries but not as serious as Mr.Noonan." Thelma Lovelace, "We are in need of medical care and must have help." Betty's notebook gives the impression that Earhart was in pain, "Oh, oh, ouch" We don't know for sure where the crabs go with stuff they steal but we've never found anything in an excavated crab hole. There are at least five species of crabs on Niku. The biggest and most aggressive is Birgus latro - the Coconut or Robber crab. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:52:03 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: FDR interest in AE's fate Ric wrote: > I understood Ron to say that the memo was from MacIntyre to FDR with a > handwritten response on it from the President. Sounds to me like pretty good > evidence that FDR agreed to see Vidal for "5 or 10 minutes". It is NOT evidence > that such a meeting took place. I agree but the point is that it is NOT evidence of anything else. Certainly not what Vidal or GP may or may not have said and is therefore, in my opinion, of no value at all. Alan *************************************************************** From Ric I think it's evidence that FDR offered to give Vidal 5 or 10 minutes, but it doesn't mean that FDR had 5 or 10 minutes worth of interest in Amelia Earhart. Vidal was a political figure and there could have been all kinds of reasons that FDR thought it best not to refuse to see him. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:55:41 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Noonan's Injury Did Noonan have a head injury in the old movie? Alan ********************************************** From Ric No. In the movie the Fred Noonan character (who was not named Fred Noonan) was not even on the fatal flight. The AE character "Toni Carter" (Rosalynn Russell) takes the airplane up by herself and intentionally dives it into the ocean. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:57:33 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Amelia's injuries Ric says -- >we've >never found anything in an excavated crab hole. Well, maybe we have. In excavating the hole at the Seven Site, where we thought the skull might have been buried, Gary Quigg and Kar Burns found fish and bird bones falling out of the excavation sidewall at about 50 cm, which seems to be the typical depth of a Birgus latro burrow. It wasn't possible to observe a borrow in the coral rubble, but it's hard to see how the stuff would have gotten there except down a crab hole. Interestingly, the fish bones were not of the same species as those in the burn features we excavated, perhaps suggesting (a) that they came from a different feature (There's an unexcavated one upslope of the hole) or (b) that crabs bring fish home for dinner. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 11:53:55 EDT From: Marty Moleski Subject: Re: Amelia's injuries > ... crabs bring fish home for dinner. Are crabs fussy eaters? Wouldn't they eat bones and all? I remember that they skin rats before eating them. But do they distinguish--can they distinguish?--between flesh and bone? Marty *********************************************************************** From Ric Can they distinguish between flesh and bone? You betcha. Offer a big crab your machete blade and he won't clamp down on it. Offer him your finger and say good-bye to your finger. Most of the scavenging seems to be done by the juvenile crabs - mostly because there are so many more of them. These baseball-sized guys don't have the strength to crack big bones. The adult coconut crabs are very strong and they can go off with bigger bones but they seem more interested in cleaning all the flesh and gristle off than actually gnawing the bone itself. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 11:57:18 EDT From: Marjorie Subject: Re: Roosevelt's Request Is there any way Betty could have heard Mabel Larremore's story earlier? Has it been mentioned in the forum or on the Tighar website before this? I have no intention of questioning Betty's sincerity -- I find her notebook and story to be entirely possible. But to quote Ric himself: "So far we have no hard evidence that Roosevelt ever made such a request. The whole Japanese Capture Hypothesis was a classic case of life imitating art. The 1943 Hollywood film Flight For Freedom popularized the idea and "supporting evidence" quickly began to emerge." I find that I occasionally think I remember something happening only to discover later that my vivid memory was of something I dreamed or saw on television or read. It seems to me if Mabel's story about the FDR request has been published previously in something Betty reads, we must give as much weight to a "false recovered memory" explanation as we give to the "two separate sources" evidence for the FDR story. LTM, Marjorie ********************************************************************** From Ric Betty's first mention of her memory of a Roosevelt request was just last week, so what you suggest is at least theoretically possible. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 12:00:39 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Shoe parts Ric wrote: > You may be right. We're horrified at the prospects of being cast away on an > island like Niku but if we were we might make out better than we imagine. The > will to survive is a powerful force and the human animal is can adapt to all > sorts of conditions. Obviously I might not be right either, but I did promise that when I was well enough I'd do some castaway type experiments on the islands here as long as they didn't endanger my health. Which is sort of where the WOMBAT nickname came from. The wooden box experiment that we never did! Th' WOMBAT *************************************************************** From Ric As I recall we were going to lock you in a wooden box and see how long you lasted - or something like that. :-) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 12:16:24 EDT From: Daryll Subject: Earliest record of Noonan's injuries I posted this before, but don't forget the telegram that GPP received from the psychic. >?A100 67 DL=CD NEWYORK NY JUL 5 1937 458P > >OPERATIONS MANAGER=OAKLAND AIRPORT OAKLAND CALIF: > >PLEASE GET THIS INFORMATION TO GEORGE PUTNAM EMINENT PSYCHIC SAYS BOTH >ARE SAFE ON REEF LESS THAN 200 MILES NORTH WEST OF HOWLAND ISLAND PLANE >PRETTY WELL CRACKED UP BUT BOTH ARE SAFE MISS EARHART IN BETTER SHAPE >THAN NOONAN ITASCA WILL FIND THEM IN MORNING THEIR TIME HASTE IS >NECESSARY BUT THEY WILL BE RESCUED PLEASE TAKE THIS FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH >FROM WELL WISHER > >UNSIGNED. 225PM This telegram that GPP had saved in his files was published and made public, according to the author Dean Jennings in his story in POPULAR AVIATION issue of Dec. 1939. Would an unnamed psychic have any more OR less credibility than Betty's note book or other radio listeners of the period who referenced Noonan's injuries? Your call. This telegram does establish a record with a time and date that "MISS EARHART IN BETTER SHAPE THAN NOONAN" whatever the injuries may have been. When I first posted this on the forum you established that the telegram was sent 2 hrs after COMFRANDIV got notification of the "281 message". Their location in the telegram reflects the same doubt that the interpretation of the "281 message" generated within the Navy at Waliupe. Comments about Miss Earhart, Noonan and the airplane on a reef, square with Amaran's (?sp?) account many years later where he said he treated a man with head injuries who was accompanied by a woman, on a Japanese ship, that had an airplane with a broken wing in a sling off the stern, at Jaluit. Not having seen the original log entry for the "281 message" generated speculation that the entire "281 message" content had NOT been revealed. I suppose you can simply pass off what the unnamed psychic said about AE, FN & the plane. BUT the psychic seemed also to have a pretty good idea of where the ITASCA really was AND how long it would take for it to get to the area of where he speculated the reef to be, 200 miles NW of Howland (281 miles NW of Howland re the "281 message"). What time does the ITASCA log say they arrived in the area 281 miles NW of Howland? Daryll *********************************************************************** From Ric Itasca reached 281 north at about 9 p.m. local time on the 5th. The psychic's batting average was pretty crummy: There is no reef within 200 miles NW of Howland. Itasca did not find them "in the morning their time." They were not rescued. The mention of injuries - Noonan worse than Earhart - does seem to be the earliest description of such a situation. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 12:26:16 EDT From: Eric Subject: The Race to Find AE Paige Miller wrote: >Which raises the question, why would the government care to suppress >such information, especially since it was at the same time spending huge >amounts of money on a search? My own theory is that immediately after the loss of AE, the U.S. Government did not have sufficient assets in place to effectively follow up on any hot leads as to where she might be. If private short wave listeners were, in fact, receiving information that might help pin-point her location, the Government would not want it made public before they could act upon it themselves. By the time the Navy was able to start SAR operations, AE and FN might already have been picked up by some other foreign power. That made it a diplomatic matter. If that foreign power refused to acknowledge that they had AE and FN (but we knew that they did, because of our own intelligence efforts) what could we do? Push the issue and run the risk of starting a war? Perhaps FDR or his advisors decided that 1937 was not the time to pick a fight with Japan, even if it meant giving up AE. ("No blood for Amelia.") LTM, Eric, NAS NORTH ISLAND, San Diego, CA. ************************************************************************* From Ric If the U.S. had any concerns about a "foreign power" rescuing Earhart and Noonan why did they ask the Japanese to help search for her? In 1937 the United States and Japan were at peace. On occasions when U.S. citizens had become lost or strayed into Japanese areas, even sensitive Japanese areas, they had been treated courteously and promptly returned. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 12:43:04 EDT From: Woody Subject: Island Survival in General I've often toyed with the idea that TIGHAR ought to put a couple of people on the island to stay a while, test the survival facet first hand. I know many of you have spent a week or more there, so it's not like you are totally in the dark about some of these issues, but I wonder if a couple of months might yield some insights. I'm not volunteering by the way... but thinking over the logistics, it would not be desirable to buy such knowledge with somebody's life. If a couple of people went to live on Nikumaroro and one of them died, the other could report back that it's difficult to live all right... You'd want to have an emergency exit, say you had a serious injury or an appendicitis or something, you'd want a reliable radio link so you could call for help and get rescued in a day or something, score it as a death without anybody having to die. If they drowned or something it would be just part of life, it wouldn't be necessary to have an ambulance standing by for ten minute response time or anything like that. Gary Paulsen has written some novels on wilderness survival, exploring the philosophy of it. "Hatchet" is about a kid who goes down in northern Canada somewhere and survives for a summer before being rescued. "Brian's Return" I think it is explores the scenario where the government takes him back there and has him explain how he survived. Here we get into an interesting question: there's a difference between going thru a survival exercise for the camera, with a radio link to the rescue squad, and going thru it because you're lost and have to survive or die. In that exercise, Brian took the government man to the site and showed him how he started a fire, how he built a lean-to, how he used the smoke to drive away the mosquitoes... within a few hours, they had a pretty comfortable camp, because Brian already paid to learn all those techniques. When he was learning them, it was not only painful it was dangerous. I think of when the Marines or the Seals or whoever conduct a training exercise, with a bunch of recruits who are from various walks of life, and a bunch wash out and a few graduate. The washouts are like those who would die in an emergency wilderness survival situation, and in a group of 40 there are going to be anywhere from 3 to 37 of them, depending on how tough the course is designed to be. I think Fred would have been more likely to survive than "Amelia Bdelia". I think she was kind of a city girl, used to hotels and cabs waiting to take her there and so forth (I'm not all that familiar with this point) but wilderness survival, if that's what she was faced with, may have been new to her and she may have made a lot of mistakes, some unrecoverable. I think she'd have been one of those 3 to 27 that washed out. It might be valuable to test the question, could somebody survive for two days? You could put a dozen pairs of people on the island at different times and see what percentage have to punch 911. Just some thoughts. Wood (trying to avoid the phrase "would have" but it just ain't possible) ********************************************************************* From Ric Thanks for trying. Your next challenge is to do something about your sexism. Survival under severe environmental and emotional stress is a highly individual issue and there is no way to recreate the circumstances faced by Earhart or Noonan. We don't know how either of them would react; we don't know whether or to what extent they were injured; the island was different then than it is now; we don't know how often it rained in the days and weeks following the disappearance; etc., etc. We keep this project as safe as possible. I don't like having people stay overnight on the island and I discourage it unless there's a good operational reason to do it. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:52:46 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: Radio Relay League A couple of months ago I contacted a principal member of the ARRL at St Petersburg, Fl to see if any of their oldtimers had heard signals from AE in 1937. whether there were any news reports between themselves, etc., So far I have had no reply. Ron Bright ************************************************ From Ric I think it's pretty clear that ARRL is dry hole. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:58:43 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: What really happened I would guess that when Vidal talked with GP right after the loss, Vidal told GP that AE's intentions were to fly back to the Gilberts. GP relays that to McIntyre. Years later Vidal told an interviewer of that alleged intention. He probably inferred that was what "really happened". [Vidals undated interview transcript, Univ. of Wyoming] We have no idea if indeed that AE made that statement prior to the flight, or if she meant it or if that was in fact a contingency plan. LTM, Ron Bright Bremerton, WA ************************************************************** From Ric You may be right. We do know that what followed shortly thereafter was an official State Dept. request for British assistance in checking out a specific uninhabited island in the Gilberts. Arrangements were made (it's a fascinating story that we'll have on the website soon) but it turned out that the island existed only in legend. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:31:26 EDT From: Ron Bright Subject: Re: FDR interest in AE's fate I disagree that that memo had "no value". Baloney. What triggered the memo was that Vidal thought may have happened. Take it at face value. No doubt that Vidal was a "public figure", but nevertheless, the basis of the 5 min proposed meeting centered around what happened to AE. We also know that Vidal thought he knew what happened from later documents, such as returning to the Gilberts. It seems to me that we could find the notes of that meeting someplace in the FDR library, if it took place. But if it had contained substantive information about the fate of AE, I would guess it would have surfaced by now. Ron B. ************************************************************************ From Ric Exactly. GP was sure that AE was on an island and he thought he knew what island it was - a small island near Tarawa. That fit with Vidal's own recollection of AE's comment about turning back to the Gilberts. There seems to be every reason to believe that Vidal met with FDR, made his case, and the president asked the State Dept. to cooperate in asking the British to search the island. The British tried but the island wasn't there. ********************************************************************** From Daryll Ric wrote: >You may be right. We do know that what followed shortly thereafter was an >official State Dept. request for British assistance in checking out a >specific uninhabited island in the Gilberts. Arrangements were made >(it's a fascinating story that we'll have on the website soon) but it >turned out that the island existed only in legend. The same article that I quoted the psychic telegram from talks of that search also. The author, Dean Jennings, says "All material used to illustrate this article from George Palmer Putnam" It was late in July ...."That morning Mr. Putnam received the following telegram from Hamilton, Ontario: AMELIA EARHART ALIVE ON CORAL SHOAL ON ONE OF THE GILBERT ISLANDS LATITUDE 2 ABOVE THE EQUATOR 174 LONGITUDE. THIS MESSAGE RECEIVED BY MR. L _____ NEW YORK MEDIUM [my note, The telegram came from Hamilton Ontario but made a reference to a "MEDIUM" in New York. It could be the same psychic that sent GPP the telegram on the 5th since the telegram in that header had DL=CD and this telegram had MR. L _____ as the medium. The DL=CD might be similar to a secretary's notation at the bottom of a letter] George noted the Lat. & Long. in the telegram intending to check it on the map later. "An hour or so later, when the morning mail was delivered, there came a brief but pleasant note from Captain T____ M_____ of Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia..." It read : "...I am the retired captain of a copra boat that used to trade in the South Seas. I just happened to remember an uncharted island that we frequently visited for turtle eggs. The Gilbertese natives know where it is, too. The island is at ____" Supposedly GPP jumped up and had David, his son, get the telegram that he had read earlier and compared the Lat. & Long. from the medium and Capt. M____. They were the same but the Captain was more detailed. "174 degrees 10 minutes east longitude, 2 degrees 36 minutes north latitude" . "....roughly about 85 miles from Tarawa island". GPP headed for New York. "Two days later, in New York, George Putnam knew in his heart that he must have that island searched". GPP worked with Summner Wells, Under-Secretary of State, who in turn worked with the British who then worked with their consul in the Gilberts to get the island searched. The vessel set out from Makin Island. The vessel cruised around the coordinates for 2 days, even taking soundings. "But there was no land within 20 miles,...". The search cost GPP $1000. "...island existed only in legend." (Ric G) Do you mean like the "Golden Fleece" kind of legend? "Captain M_____ and former members of his crew, all reliable seamen, swore they had been to the island half a dozen times. Even the log of the copra ship confirmed their tale....". "The episode had only one weird sequel---baffled admission from the Ontario medium that he was never again able to contact Amelia Earhart on the island where he had last heard her voice." This medium seemed to move between Ontario and New York. His words were "...he was never again able to contact Amelia Earhart on the island where he had last heard her voice." If this so called medium wanted to disguise the true source of his visions, it could easily fit into receiving post loss radio messages which only lasted for about a week after her disappearance. It was an unidentified psychic that sent GPP the telegram on the 5th that closely paralleled the "281 message" in content and time-line. I believe I recall a letter from GPP in which his focus shifted to the Marshalls in late July. It is a matter of record, that within a couple of months of July, GPP went on vacation to the Galapagos islands and was essentially incommunicado for several months. In the same time period of GPP's vacation, FDR talked his friend Astor, a New York resident, into taking his yacht, the Nourmahal (larger than the KOSHU), to the Marshalls where the Japanese, our so called friends, denied him permission to visit Jaluit. Daryll ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:33:15 EDT From: Art Rypinski Subject: Roosevelt Public Papers I've been traveling for a few days, and have been catching up reading about a week's worth of forum postings. It strikes me that this discussion about President Roosevelt has gotten waa-aa-ay ahead of the available information. If we want to learn what President Roosevelt said to the public, the best quick source would the following publication: "Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt" (13 volumes, covering 1928-1945). (New York: Random House, 1938-1950). This is part of the National Archives' series "Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States," and covers the public statements, press releases, and public correspondence of every modern President. Presidential papers since 1992 (i.e., President Bush the elder's last year) are available on-line. See: http://www.gpo.gov/nara/pubpaps/aboutpaps.html Most of the series has been published by the Government Printing Office, but for some unknown (to me) reason, Roosevelt's papers were published commercially. Most good University libraries are likely to have a copy of this series (along with other Presidents) in their reference collection. LTM, Arthur Rypinski #2548 *********************************************************************** From Ric Thanks Art. Maybe someone who remembers how to use a real library would like to take this on. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:34:37 EDT From: Dave Bush Subject: Bones and crabs Isn't it possible that the bones you found at 50 cm could have been buried by a castaway who was concerned by the fact that just piling the bones on the open ground attracted the crabs and thus burying the bones helped keep the crabs out of the area? LTM, Dave Bush ******************************************************************** From Ric Tom? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:35:36 EDT From: Ron Berry Subject: Re: Earliest record of Noonan's injuries It's not a fair comparison Betty's Note Book and something that a unknown physic had predicted. If this prediction had been right then we would all know his name, but sense his guess was wrong in every respect he never came forward. Betty's Note Book is a synapse of what she thought was an important event. Even though some of it can't be explained, that is what makes it a very interesting piece of evidence. She wrote down things that she did not understand, that is what lends shades of truth to her scribblings. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:36:41 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Shoe parts > As I recall we were going to lock you in a wooden box and see how long you > lasted - or something like that. :-) But we like Ross. Should I suggest some other candidates for the wooden box or should we pass on that? Alan ********************************************************************* From Ric We'll pass on that. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:40:06 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: Earliest record of Noonan's injuries > The mention of injuries - Noonan worse than Earhart - does seem to be the > earliest description of such a situation. That also could be the original source of subsequent mentions. As to putting any credibility to this I know of no documented evidence any psychic has ever demonstrated their "talent" successfully in all of history. Alan ****************************************************************** From Ric I don't think anyone is suggesting that we put any credence in psychics but if the allegations of the psychic were publicized it cold, as you say, be the original source of subsequent mentions. However, I don't think they were made public. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:41:12 EDT From: Paige Miller Subject: Contradicted by history Eric writes: >My own theory is that immediately after the loss of AE, the U.S. Government >did not have sufficient assets in place to effectively follow up on any hot >leads as to where she might be. If private short wave listeners were, in fact, >receiving information that might help pin-point her location, the Government >would not want it made public before they could act upon it themselves. Yes, the US had very few assets in the area. From what I've read, the US had one asset in the area on July 2, 1937, and that's one more than any other government had. Your hypothesis is contradicted by history. If the US Government gets a solid piece of information on AE's whereabouts, then Itasca is there to search. When it appears a specific piece of information is obtained from a non-government source, the 281 message, Itasca immediately steams to that location, effectively following up on this seemingly specific piece of information. If a private radio operator gets a solid piece of information and makes it public, there is no other ship near Howland but Itasca, so no other government can get there faster than the US. If a private radio operator were to hear a solid piece of information about AE's whereabouts, I see no benefit to anyone by making that radio operator keep quiet, nor could the US Government legally make such a request to keep quiet. >By >the time the Navy was able to start SAR operations, AE and FN might already >have been picked up by some other foreign power. In order to make this argument, you need documentation and evidence. What government and what ship? Again, your statement is contradicted by history. Itasca started search and rescue the same day AE disappeared. No other government could have started faster, since Itasca started search and rescue before the rest of the world knew about AE's disappearance. Paige Miller, #2565 LTM ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:45:40 EDT From: Ed Subject: Re: Noonan's Head injury I firmly believe that there is still more to learn from Betty's experience. Has Betty given any thought to undergoing Hypnosis to perhaps amplify on weak memories or renew those that were unrecalled but relate to the notes? The team that put together the matrix of signals analysis could put together some questions. This wouldn't be a test of Betty's integrity (I believe she heard her!) but rather seize upon a real time opportunity to interview Betty (a true witness) through multiple sessions using her journal. If Betty is willing and TIGHAR can get an accredited/professional hypnotist? Any thoughts? LTM Ed of PSL #2415 ************************************************************************ From Ric This has been suggested and discussed before. Hypnosis is not a "truth serum" or a method for recovering lost memories. Information obtained from a person under hypnosis is no more reliable than what they tell you in a normal state. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:49:12 EDT From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: FDR's Request Paige Miller wrote: >Seems to me there is a huge difference between the Secret Service >effectively restricting a very obvious activity in a crowd in a >contained area, and the "government" monitoring conversations anywhere >in the country. I submit that the latter was not possible in 1937. I'm not so sure. I think it was quite possible in 1937 that most citizens would have been awed by any government statement with FDR's named attached even by implication. Based on my talks with my father (born in 1910) and his buddies, that time before WW2 was one of mindless acceptance of Federal edicts. After all, they told me once, FDR had ended the Depression; to think he could do anything 'wrong" is totally unacceptable. (I've not tried it, and I can't any more because of my father's memory loss, but I bet they'd deny the truth of the story about the Secret Service and the cameras.) >Which raises the question, why would the government care to suppress >such information, especially since it was at the same time spending >huge amounts of money on a search? That's the only real question, here. I can't arrive at any reason they'd bother to say anything at all. Mike Holt ************************************************************************ From Ric FDR was popular, yes, but there was also no shortage of people who despised him. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:50:14 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Radio Relay League Based upon previous research postings by Mike Everette, I certainly have to agree with Ric. I don't however see any harm in a member going back and taking a second look at the last half of the year 1937. No telling what another pair of eyes may see. Bob ************************************************************ From Ric Be my guest. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 11:53:10 EDT From: Bob Lee Subject: Re: Island Survival in General Take away all the problems of physically getting someone to the island and leaving them there for a couple of months -- with some emergency backup plan -- and remember this crucial fact. We don't know what condition (physical or mental) that either AE or FN were in. We can assume they were tired, scared and maybe a bit frustrated. I would have to assume that the island is NOT a very good place to recover from injuries. Add to that that they just might have spent what energy they could muster in an attempt to get off some radio messages before the loss of the aircraft, thereby further reducing their strength and chance of long-term survival. Could a couple of people survive on Niku? From what I've read on the forum -- two healthy people that knew their time on the island was limited to a couple of months, probably could survive; but I am not sure what that proves. Bob ************************************************************************ From Dan Postellon > Thanks for trying. Your next challenge is to do something about your sexism. Several starvation survival studies have been done, as well as historical reviews of situations like the Donner party. Women have a clear survival advantage over men, possibly due to smaller size and a greater percentage of body fat. Daniel Postellon TIGHAR#2263 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 14:49:57 EDT From: Dennis McGee Subject: Kind of off-topic . Mike Holt said: "After all, they [Mike's father and his friends] told me once, FDR had ended the Depression; . . ." Not really, Mike. Unless, of course, you want to blame WWII of FDR, which many people do. The sad truth is that the Depression did not begin to end until FDR began the military build-up in the late-30s. When the war started (for us, in 1941) our politicians were smart enough to turn on the printing presses and go onto a war footing from day-one, unlike the Japanese and Germans who delayed cranking up their economies for total military production until 1943, or so, by which time it was too late. World War Two forced us to spend our way out of the Depression and when it ended the economy slumped again until the manufacturers could retool for civilian consumption rather than military hardware. LTM, who wears combat boots, too Dennis O. McGee #0149EC ******************************************************************* From Ric Not to get into an off-topic debate but - While it is true that most historians see WWII as the economic engine that finally ended the Great Depression, it is also true that by the mid '30s the programs of the New Deal had had (or at least were widely credited with having) a significant mitigating effect on the Depression. Roosevelt's re-election in 1936 is proof enough of the widely held perception that his policies had brought improvement. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:12:41 EDT From: Mike Holt Subject: Re: Noonan's Head injury Is it possible the head injury idea is a holdover from all the aviation movies? In most of them, as I recall dimly, the usual injury resulting from a crash landing is a head injury. The public may have come to expect that kind of thing. Mike Holt *********************************************************** From Ric The odd thing is how consistently it is Noonan, not Amelia, who is seriously injured. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:32:43 EDT From: Alan Caldwell Subject: Re: FDR interest in AE's fate Ric wrote: > Exactly. GP was sure that AE was on an island and he thought he knew what > island it was - a small island near Tarawa. That fit with Vidal's own > recollection of AE's comment about turning back to the Gilberts. There > seems to be every reason to believe that Vidal met with FDR, made his case, and > the president asked the State Dept. to cooperate in asking the British to > search the island. The British tried but the island wasn't there. Sorry, guys but I don't see any substance here. I don't know what GP thought or what Vidal thought at the time. I don't know why or if FDR met with anyone or what they talked about. I don't believe in psychics and all I'm hearing is Monday morning quarterbacking. Speculation won't cut it. It didn't in 1937 and it won't now. The bottom line of all that discussion is zero. No documentation, no island, and no Amelia. I can speculate as well that GP would have jumped at any suggestion made with his wife lost in the Pacific. We would have done the same. We would have had the Gilbert's searched the Phoenix Island's searched, looked at Mili Atoll, checked out Tokyo Rose and grasped at every straw thrown. What GP actually believed at the time I suggest no one knows. I have never seen any substance to what Vidal claimed at any given time. If in fact AE ever mentioned the Gilbert's to Vidal or any one else there is no documentation of that nor is there any significance that I can see. The issue is what AE decided to do at 8:43 am on July 2nd 1937 given the immediate circumstances not some supposed casual remark made long before. Alan ********************************************************************* From Ric Refreshing your memory...the subject line of this thread is "FDR interest in AE's fate" and the point here was to determine to what degree President Roosevelt was interested and/or involved in finding Earhart. There is documentation establishing that he at least agreed to see Vidal and there are documented government actions subsequent to the proposed visit which strongly suggest that the meeting took place and the president extended a degree of cooperation in setting up what turned out to be a wild goose chase. I think the incident is valuable in that it does appear to define the degree to which Roosevelt was interested - which is to say, mildly. I think this information further reduces the possibility that there was ever a publicly-issued presidential request that said anything about Amelia Earhart - but as Art Rypinski has pointed out - that can be researched definitively. More importantly, I think this incident argues against high-level government knowledge of Earhart's fate. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:40:48 EDT From: Mike Holt Subject: Government edicts Dennis McGee wrote: >Mike Holt said: "After all, they [Mike's father and his friends] >told me once, FDR had ended the Depression; . . ." > > Not really, Mike. Unless, of course, you want to blame WWII of >FDR, which many people do. That's not at all what I was getting at. My father's little group credited FDR with winning the war, by the way. Ric wrote: >... '30s the >programs of the New Deal had had (or at least were widely credited >with having) a significant mitigating effect on the Depression. >Roosevelt's re-election in 1936 is proof enough of the widely held >perception that his policies had brought improvement. And it's the public perception that's important. I don't find it at all hard to believe that someone in the government might have said something like "This flight by AE has value for American aviation, both commercial and military. Therefore, finding her is of potential commercial and military value" -- or something faintly similar. By the screwball twists that still alter the public understanding of Federal messages, this might have been understood that finding AE is a top secret activity. No, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but the mindset in 1937 does not seem to have been the same as it is now. There was a lot more feeling that whatever America does is important and needs to be kept away from the other countries. At the end of it all, as someone said, there's an innocent statement that we may not see as sending the message the two women reported receiving. Mike Holt ***************************************************************** From Ric Man oh man, if we're going to get into how the mindset of the nation has changed since 1937 we have our work cut out for us. I think, honestly, that all we can say is that everyone processes the news through his or her own filter - and that is as true today as it was in 1937 or 1837. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:47:30 EDT From: Tom King Subject: Re: Bones and crabs Dave Bush asks: >Isn't it possible that the bones you found at 50 cm could have been buried >by a castaway who was concerned by the fact that just piling the bones on >the open ground attracted the crabs and thus burying the bones helped keep >the crabs out of the area? Yeah, but digging 50 cm in coral rubble is hard, especially without a shovel (unless you're a crab). And I did some experimentation and found that burying lamb bones only 1/4 inch deep deterred the crabs. And of course, we found lots of fish and bird bones in the fire features at between 0 and 10 cm. So it's possible, but I'd say the crabby idea is a lot more likely. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:51:04 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Re: Shoe parts Alan said: > But we like Ross. Should I suggest some other candidates for the wooden box > or should we pass on that? > ********************************************************************* > >From Ric > > We'll pass on that. Ross has been uncharacteristically quiet on this...... *********************************************************** From Ric One might say he has kept the lid on it. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:59:35 EDT From: Ross Devitt Subject: Hypnotising Betty... From Ross Devitt Ric wrote: > This has been suggested and discussed before. Hypnosis is not a "truth serum" > or a method for recovering lost memories. Information obtained from a person > under hypnosis is no more reliable than what they tell you in a normal state. Is it not true though, that hypnosis can help a person remember the "peripheral" memories relating to the experience? Betty's interest in the forum has been wonderful to experience. Some people are naturals for hypnosis and some aren't. If Betty is the sort of lady who is not averse to new experiences, and if she herself is curious about remembering more, it just might be fascinating. For me, I turned 49 a few months ago, and I'm still as fascinated by the reminiscences of older people as I was when I was young. Th' WOMBAT ******************************************************************* From Ric >Is it not true though, that hypnosis can help a person remember the >"peripheral" memories relating to the experience? Yes, it is not true that hypnosis can help a person remember the "peripheral" memories relating to the experience. Or, more accurately, if it can help there is no way to know it can help because the "peripheral" memories you may get under hypnosis are indistinguishable from wishful thinking or imaginative embellishments. The reminiscences of older people are indeed fascinating. Some are even true, but it takes hard documentation to sort them out. LTM, Ric ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:28:04 EDT From: Tom Riggs Subject: Re: FDR interest in AE's fate My wife has a book titled, "Eleanor Roosevelt" Volume 2 1933-1938, authored by Blance Wiesen Cook, published in 1999 by Viking, Penguin Putnam Inc. 375 Hudson St. Ny, Ny 10014. The book contains a very detailed biographical account of ER's life. Pages 458-460 discuss the disappearance of AE/FN. The only mention Eleanor Roosevelt (ER) makes about FDR and his interest in AE's fate was on July 7, 1937 when she wrote a letter to a friend stating, "FDR was not very hopeful that they will find Amelia. It just makes me sick". The author further states that ER learned of the disappearance on a trip home from Delaware. ER wrote a letter to her daughter and said she, "heard about Amelia over the radio and felt even lower. I do like her and I'll miss seeing her if she's gone but perhaps she'd rather go that way. Life might not have held such a happy future for her". The author comments these are mysterious words for ER to write about AE, and questions what would prompt her to say such a thing. The author wonders if ER was referring to Earhart's marital situation, or another reality we know as yet nothing about? As a footnote, the author includes the following (which is re-hash we've already heard before): "A most curious exchange between ER and Henry Morgenthau, whose Treasury Department presided over FDR's Secret Service and Intelligence unit heightens the puzzle. When ER asked him to release the Itasca file to Earhart's friends, aviators Paul Mantz, Jacqueline Cochran, and others, Morgenthau's office sent ER an unsigned memo stating the secretary (Morgenthau), "cannot give out any more information than was given to the papers at the time of the search for Amelia Earhart. It seems they have confidential information which would completely ruin the reputation of Amelia and which he will tell you personally some time when you wish to hear it. He suggests writing Paul Mantz and telling him that the President is satisfied from his information, and you are too, that everything possible was done." ER followed that suggestion." Relative to Vidal, another section in the book discusses Amelia's involvement in FDR's politics and a situation that occurred when Vidal was temporarily removed from his post as director of Air commerce. "Eleanor Roosevelt's reference to tensions between Gene Vidal, director of air commerce, and other Department of Commerce officials, including its secretary, Daniel Roper, is one example of her (AE's) endless ability to involve herself in every aspect of FDR's administration. In September, Vidal (Gore Vidal's father) was removed. Amelia Earhart (his champion and lover) was furious and threatened to abandon her promise to ER to campaign. She wrote ER, who appealed to FDR, and Vidal was temporarily restored. After that, Earhart made twenty-eight speeches for FDR throughout the country." Don't know where the author got info AE and Vidal were "lovers"? This is the first I've ever read about any hanky-panky between AE and anyone other than George Putnam and the young fellow she met in college. It would seem nearly impossible given the fact GP was constantly with AE, other than when she was flying, and seemingly dominated her every move in public and private life. Plus, they "seemed" genuinely devoted to each other. TR #2427 ****************