TIGHAR's "Magic Scrap" ISN'T Earhart's

Of course MIT Proffessor “Over” Eagar wasn’t the only Proffessor to set aside the scientific process of analysis and replace it with the TIGHAR “Preposterous of Evidence” method.

Prof Janz’s  “identification” of bones found in 1941 on Gardiner Island (Nikumaroro) as being 99% likely to be Amelia Earhart (partly on an argument that it cant be anyone else?) , it is important to note that there is a bloody big ship wreck on that island that Tighar and Prof Janz politely ignore and his report specifically states that he doesn’t at all consider the possibility that the “castaway” might be one of the 8 missing crew members from that shipwreck?

This is called levitating by pulling on ones shoe laces.

There is no evidence that Earhart or her Electra were ever on the island but each Tighar hypothesis assumes that fact has already been proven and that then supports that finding via this next “analysis”.

Here is an extract of Prof Janzs report summary.

Note that there are 8 missing “male” crew members from the wreck of the Norwich City and he ignores the obvious strong possibility that the skelton of the “stocky male” could have easily been one of those! ie that one or more made it ashore badly injured or elsewhere on the island, and after the other survivors had been rescued, became marooned and stranded as the castaway

Proffessor Janz is another of those “experts fooled for many years” , along with Photogrammetry “Expert” Jeff Glickman and Archaeologist Tom King.

>>>>>>>

it seems difficult to conclude that Earhart had zero probability of being on Nikumaroro Island. From a forensic perspective the most parsimonious scenario is that the bones are those of Amelia Earhart. She was known to have been in the area of Nikumaroro Island, she went missing, and human remains were discovered which are entirely consistent with her and inconsistent with most other people. Furthermore, it is impossible to test any other hypothesis, because except for the victims of the Norwich City wreck, about whom we have no data, no other specific missing persons have been reported. It is not enough merely to say that the remains are most likely those of a stocky male without specifying who this stocky male might have been. This presents us with an untestable hypothesis, not to mention uncritically setting aside the prior information of Earhart’s presence.

while reviewing the recent posts on TIGHAR’s Facebook page I noticed their 2018 call out for donations from their 8.7k online followers.

They scored $45 from two people, – those drinking the Kool-Aide have certainly thinned out over the years, no wonder Ric went silent for a while!

Up until this latest eruption of Gillespie’s over the new sonar picture, I still had some lingering respect for his ability to use his media hound personna to unearth new or buried information about Earhart, Noonan and the 1937 World Flight. There are a lot of facts that are now in one (very disorganized) place that otherwise would not be. We can all use that information to better understand what happened and why.

But … it should be clear to even the most casual observer that Gillespie’s ONLY concern at this point is his upcoming Earhart book – and the payday associated with it – to the exclusion of all else. Anything that threatens what will arguably be his final work has been viciously put down by him with no regard for appearances or potential consequences. What happens to said book if it turns out the sonar image IS Earhart’s Electra?

There’s a saying where I live, “pig in a poke.” Has the US Naval Institute Press just bought one with Gillespie’s book?

I have been an on and off skeptic of Tighar, and particularly of this panel, – as Monty states, it was first claimed as absolute proof of the Tighar hypothesis, until claims that it was from the L10 Belly was refuted by Lockheed experts, then the second smoking gun came when it was claimed to be the lavatory window patch – claimed to “match” the rivet lines seen in a blurry Miami photo, subject to scientific reporting by Tighar “Photometric Expert” Mr Glickman, who strangely could never get round to publishing that paper, then an attempt to “fit it up against an existing L10 found it would not fit, – it was too big, and did not have rivet lines that aligned to the frames in front and rear of the window, – and Tighars answer to that was “Lockheeds production line had two sets of jigs and that made for different spacings (never mind the drawings not showing that!).

So then Tighar had a sample of the “patch” sent to a chemical lab, along with other known 1937 Electra aluminium samples, and samples from various WW2 wrecks, unfortunately the chemical composition of the patch did not match well with the other 1937 Lockheed samples but did match very closely with the WW2 samples – so that report was quietly filed in the archive without debate or comment.

So then Ric trotted off to MIT, and got a “Opinion for Hire” Metallurgy Proffessor to look at the patch, and to listen to Rics “sales pitch” and after only 2 hours of just listening and handling the patch, the MIT Professor “Over” Eagar proclaimed – ” “the preponderance of the evidence indicates you have a true Amelia Earhart artifact.” (without performing any tests or being aware of the chemical test results)- he looks like he was one of the “experts fooled for many years” – doesnt’ he!

“Preponderance of Evidence” ? – its clearly now proven to have been the “Preposterous of Evidence”

With rulers, photographs and diagrams, he shows where it could have fit on Earhart’s customized Lockheed Electra, over the hole left when she removed a window on the right rear fuselage. “These things don’t just line up by coincidence,” he says. In late October, after seizing a chance to compare his aluminum sheet against an Electra under restoration in Kansas, he announced that the rivet holes and other features were the equivalent of “a fingerprint” establishing that it had come from Earhart’s plane, leading some news organizations to declare the case closed (Discovery News headline: “Amelia Earhart Plane Fragment Identified”). He tells me he’s “98 percent” sure the piece came from Earhart’s plane. He raises that figure to 99 percent after getting a report from a leading metallurgist, Thomas Eagar of MIT, who concluded that “the preponderance of the evidence indicates you have a true Amelia Earhart artifact.” That’s still 1 percent less certain than he was in 1992, when he told Life magazine: “There’s only one possible conclusion: We found a piece of Amelia Earhart’s aircraft.”

Will the Search for Amelia Earhart Ever End? | History| Smithsonian Magazine

J Boyle said, “To not admit an error for years compounds the error (and make one look bad).  Another example of the group’s myopia on AE and [her] fate.”

It would be a little less egregious if this was the only time it’s happened – but it isn’t. Gillespie has done the same thing over and over, for decades. He always shrugs it off when he’s proven wrong about something, saying “That’s science at work,” but that is NOT how science works. Science investigates and incorporates new facts into a theory and moves in a different direction when the data and facts indicate to do so. Gillespie does not – his default position on anything found on Nikumaroro is, Must be Earhart’s and, This solves the mystery! until exhaustive efforts prove otherwise. A few examples:

• The Wreck Photo: In 1989 Gillespie was shown a grainy black-and-white photo of a twin-engined aircraft crashed in a jungle setting and asked, Is this Earhart’s Electra? He investigated the photo for the next 20 years, while issuing numerous “research bulletins” and updates about how the wreck could, or could not, be Earhart’s. In 1998 Gillespie stated the photo could not be of a Japanese Tachikawa Ki-54, a twin-engined aircraft which resembles the Electra. In 2006, he said, “After many years of research and head-scratching, I’m convinced that the Wreck Photo shows a Tachikawa KI-54 ‘Hickory’ advanced trainer.” It took him another three years, until 2009, to come out with a “research bulletin” titled The Wreck Photo Resolved.
• The Knob: During its November 2001 trip to Nikumaroro, TIGHAR found a metallic object that archaeologist Dr. Tom King initially identified as a metal cap for some kind of container. By the time Gillespie (who is not an archaeologist) was through with his initial write-up, the cap had morphed into “a knob which originally turned a shaft which, in turn, performed some function on an instrument or device.” Months of citizen scientist speculation ensued on TIGHAR’s discussion forums. After a detailed examination with a (gratis) scanning electron microscope and months of effort by TIGHAR’s forensic photo analyst to decipher a series of letters and numbers embossed on the artifact, it was identified in July 2002 as – a cap. Probably for some type of lubricant. The only thing atypical of this positive identification was how quickly Gillespie moved to nail it down.

These are just a few examples. Gillespie has shown a consistent pattern through the decades of seeing what he wants to see, and hearing what he wants to hear, if it agrees with what he thinks happened. That’s not how science works.

Not from an Electra? I am shocked, shocked! Gambling in Rick’s Cafe? Shocked!

He must think people are stupid…but then again he found enough people to pay him.an exceptionally good wage for 20 + years while producing very little for the effort and money expended.

Of course it isn’t.

Did anybody, apart from Gillespie, ever believe it was?

I still think the reference 2-2-V-1 was meant to sound science based and impressive rather than “this ally panel we found and are determined to make it fit our obsession.”

Inexcusable for a reportedly professional “scientific” organization.

As I recall, very legitimate questions were raised almost immediately due to aluminum production markings on the back side of the piece…codes were consistent with a wartime piece of metal, not 1937-38.

it’s not bad to be wrong, (after all it is part of the scientific process), but to state publicly it is what it isn’t  when there are legitimate questions outstanding, comes off as unprofessional (or self serving).

To not admit an error for years compounds the error (and make one look bad).

Another example of the group’s myopia on AE and her fate.

How many times has RG publicly proclaimed  “case closed” only to be proven wrong?

Now they can move on to another “100%” theory and fund the next holiday.