Amelia Earhart

[Labonte18]

Perhaps less fuel, but still.. At least I would think and hope.. A larger margin than they had from new Guinea to Howland. I get your point, tho.. safety.. seemed to not be as big a priority as it likely should have been.

I'm actually really enjoying this discussion, to be honest. I see it as a good, logical discussion.. I hope you see it the same. You bring in some good points, I hope i'm bringing in decent counterpoints.

Obviously.. as I said before.. We don't know what we don't know. so, most all of what we have is theory and speculation. Whether it be our own or others. But, at leas that we can have this discussion.. it's civil.. At least that's how I view it from my end.. I can't poke holes in any of your thoughts. I might not agree with them or consider them as much or as little as you do, but.. That's fine. You're also giving me good things to think about that I haven't before. And again, I hope you see it the same. I'm really having a great time with this..

it's a lost art.. Hell. It's probably an art that has never been developed on the internet. the Civil Discussion. lol.


So.. Unless you have something else.. I suspect we've probably beat the topics of where her skills were as a pilot. Which route likely would have been the safer/better route and.. Other things that I can't even think of right now.

So.. I throw out this one to you. Now, I am assuming that, like me, you put crash and sink at the tippity top of the likely outcomes. Over 90% i'd say.. And.. Probably.. Much higher than that, at least, that's how I feel.

But.. Of the other theories. And by that, I mean the.. 'mainstream' theories.. And yes, that's in quotes. We've got

1) Japanese Capture
2) Tokyo Rose
3) New Britain turnaround
4) She became Ms Bolam
5) Gardner Island

Which of those would you put, no matter how small a chance, as the next most likely outcome? I hesitate to put Ms Bolam and Tokyo Rose up there as they are pretty thoroughly debunked.. But.. When has that stopped people? So.. In fairness. I included them, but I'll be so honestly disappointed if you choose one. Though.. On the other hand.. I think I'd look forward to the debate.

[MediaHoarder]

Originally Posted by Labonte18

Perhaps less fuel, but still.. At least I would think and hope.. A larger margin than they had from new Guinea to Howland. I get your point, tho.. safety.. seemed to not be as big a priority as it likely should have been.

I'm actually really enjoying this discussion, to be honest. I see it as a good, logical discussion.. I hope you see it the same. You bring in some good points, I hope i'm bringing in decent counterpoints.

Obviously.. as I said before.. We don't know what we don't know. so, most all of what we have is theory and speculation. Whether it be our own or others. But, at leas that we can have this discussion.. it's civil.. At least that's how I view it from my end.. I can't poke holes in any of your thoughts. I might not agree with them or consider them as much or as little as you do, but.. That's fine. You're also giving me good things to think about that I haven't before. And again, I hope you see it the same. I'm really having a great time with this..

it's a lost art.. Hell. It's probably an art that has never been developed on the internet. the Civil Discussion. lol.


So.. Unless you have something else.. I suspect we've probably beat the topics of where her skills were as a pilot. Which route likely would have been the safer/better route and.. Other things that I can't even think of right now.

So.. I throw out this one to you. Now, I am assuming that, like me, you put crash and sink at the tippity top of the likely outcomes. Over 90% i'd say.. And.. Probably.. Much higher than that, at least, that's how I feel.

But.. Of the other theories. And by that, I mean the.. 'mainstream' theories.. And yes, that's in quotes. We've got

1) Japanese Capture
2) Tokyo Rose
3) New Britain turnaround
4) She became Ms Bolam
5) Gardner Island

Which of those would you put, no matter how small a chance, as the next most likely outcome? I hesitate to put Ms Bolam and Tokyo Rose up there as they are pretty thoroughly debunked.. But.. When has that stopped people? So.. In fairness. I included them, but I'll be so honestly disappointed if you choose one. Though.. On the other hand.. I think I'd look forward to the debate.

Re safety, there were many aspects of the planning and training that certainly cut corners on safety, but its at least worth noting that when it came to pace the attempt did not suffer from trying to fly in inappropriate weather in an attempt to make time, which does a lot of pilots in. At least in that respect they were not pushing their luck.

I would not put crash and sink at 90% though. Perhaps 50% if that. At one time I considered it a fairly obvious outcome, but the theory put forward by Loomis makes a compelling case for the Japanese theory.

Tokyo Rose and Ms Bolam are patently absurd and don't warrant further consideration.

Gardner Island I find less compelling than crash and sink because unlike the crash and sink theory its reasonable to expect evidence to have been found on land. The fact that it has not seems to make this theory less compelling.

As to New Britain, the turnaround theory is central to what Loomis proposed for the Japanese encounter. But New Britain itself fails because Earhart could not have turned around at the halfway point and had her radio broadcasts received by Itasca at the strength they were.

The theory Loomis proposed is, essentially, that after sighting Nauru en route to Howland, Earhart drifted off course to the left (as her instructor had seen her do before) and ended up significantly north of Howland. She was still on 157–337 degrees however, as indicated in her radio message.

Loomis, using the work of others before him, proposes two key axioms at this point. First is that a loud and clear reception of her radio broadcast did not require her to be immediately next to Itasca, but merely within a reasonable distance (which he puts at ~150 miles). Second, that although she thought she was running low on fuel, she in fact still had a significant amount left for flight.

Both of these are based on various simulations and tests done by others that Loomis relies on. Given both conditions, he proposes that she reversed course and attempted to fly to the Gilberts which, at ~500 miles, were perhaps within range still and easier to spot than Howland. However, because she was off course to the north, this reversal brought her into the Marshall where she then landed and was captured by the Japanese.

Until I read his book I considered the Japanese theory far fetched because she would have had to be far off course to end up in the Marshall islands. But by combining the turnaround theory with a modest navigational error and an assumption about using Nauru as a waypoint it becomes quite reasonable to end up in the Marshall islands.

Other circumstantial evidence has always pointed to a Japanese capture and imprisonment/death on Saipan. There are various witness accounts and unexplained actions on the part of Japan that suggest involvement. The combination of this with a plausible flight path makes the Japanese theory viable in my mind, at least alongside crash and sink.

[Babalu]

I can't believe I never noticed this thread until now. I certainly never got into the details to the extent that you guys have, but from what I know about the subject, it's relatively simple.

Earhart was an incompetent pilot who was made a big deal out of because she was a woman. She got lucky a few times because she had more guts than brains. It caught up with her on her last flight. They got lost, ran out of fuel, and crashed. Exactly where? It doesn't make much of a difference, but I doubt any of these fanciful tales about where she wound up are true. I think she ignominiously crashed into the ocean in the middle of nowhere.

[Labonte18]

Originally Posted by MediaHoarder

Re safety, there were many aspects of the planning and training that certainly cut corners on safety, but its at least worth noting that when it came to pace the attempt did not suffer from trying to fly in inappropriate weather in an attempt to make time, which does a lot of pilots in. At least in that respect they were not pushing their luck.

I would not put crash and sink at 90% though. Perhaps 50% if that. At one time I considered it a fairly obvious outcome, but the theory put forward by Loomis makes a compelling case for the Japanese theory.

Tokyo Rose and Ms Bolam are patently absurd and don't warrant further consideration.

Gardner Island I find less compelling than crash and sink because unlike the crash and sink theory its reasonable to expect evidence to have been found on land. The fact that it has not seems to make this theory less compelling.

As to New Britain, the turnaround theory is central to what Loomis proposed for the Japanese encounter. But New Britain itself fails because Earhart could not have turned around at the halfway point and had her radio broadcasts received by Itasca at the strength they were.

The theory Loomis proposed is, essentially, that after sighting Nauru en route to Howland, Earhart drifted off course to the left (as her instructor had seen her do before) and ended up significantly north of Howland. She was still on 157–337 degrees however, as indicated in her radio message.

Loomis, using the work of others before him, proposes two key axioms at this point. First is that a loud and clear reception of her radio broadcast did not require her to be immediately next to Itasca, but merely within a reasonable distance (which he puts at ~150 miles). Second, that although she thought she was running low on fuel, she in fact still had a significant amount left for flight.

Both of these are based on various simulations and tests done by others that Loomis relies on. Given both conditions, he proposes that she reversed course and attempted to fly to the Gilberts which, at ~500 miles, were perhaps within range still and easier to spot than Howland. However, because she was off course to the north, this reversal brought her into the Marshall where she then landed and was captured by the Japanese.

Until I read his book I considered the Japanese theory far fetched because she would have had to be far off course to end up in the Marshall islands. But by combining the turnaround theory with a modest navigational error and an assumption about using Nauru as a waypoint it becomes quite reasonable to end up in the Marshall islands.

Other circumstantial evidence has always pointed to a Japanese capture and imprisonment/death on Saipan. There are various witness accounts and unexplained actions on the part of Japan that suggest involvement. The combination of this with a plausible flight path makes the Japanese theory viable in my mind, at least alongside crash and sink.

I put Gardner as the second most likely.. And.. It's really small because.. I just don't see them having the fuel to make it there. We can extrapolate her fuel usage based on he flight level as reported and the weather conditions of the day and.. She certainly would have been very low on fuel when making it to Howland, period.

The theory that she could get to Gardner island.. It requires suspension of disbelief.

I look at the Japanese capture much the same way. With even less of a chance of it.

If she had been killed by the Japanese.. First off, she'd have been a HELL of a lot more useful as propoganda. If you legit catch her spying or even can build the story that she was.. Do you quietly execute her and hide all the evidence of it? Or.. Do you parade her across, what I guess would have been news reels and newspapers at the time?

US/Japan relationships were deteriorating rapidly at that time. She would have been a huge bargaining chip for the Japanese.

The other thing.. The women on Saipan that were 'eyewitnesses' to her and Noonan's executions.. They all described a woman who was wearing man's clothes.. And that's one of the big pieces of evidence, supposedly for it being her.. But.. Anyone who was visiting that area.. Likely would have been dressed much the same. Pith helmet and khaki type clothes. Few women on that trip would be out there in a dress and heels. at least, that's how it seems to me.

Then there's the branch of marines who supposedly saw the plane on fire on Saipan. So, now.. You not only have a successful coverup from the Japanese but also a coverup by americans.. Let's just say that everything happened.. she was captured and executed on Saipan.. When the American forces find her plane.. That would be a rallying cry for the US. "Avenge Amelia" could have turned into a battle cry. Why would you cover that up? Because maybe you DID actually send her as a spy? Cover THAT part up, ok, I can understand it..

So, for me.. When you have to twist things to fit that much.. You have to step back and say.. Hey.. ONE of these things happening is a stretch.. ALL of them happening? That gets tough to swallow.

and.. again.. I'm not putting Gardner out there as a great theory. There's just about as many hoops you have to jump through to say that they made it there. That's why I have crash and sink as an overwhelming favorite as to the 'real' outcome. All the evidence for it is there. And.. You don't have to get into any wild and crazy conspiracy theories or overcome the laws of physics to get to that outcome.

The Tokyo Rose idea.. If it weren't completely debunked, because we know exactly who Tokyo Rose was.. Well.. at least some of them, as we basically know there was no one person. Iva Toguri is kinda the 'face' of Tokyo Rose. In a way.. That would make sense, the Japs capture her and force her to do propoganda broadcasts.. I could see that. But.. You'd have her do them as Amelia Freakin' Earhart.

I'll have to read up on the turnaround theory more. I'm not fully versed on that.. but.. I don't see how that works when she's broadcasting near the Itasca.. Even if 'near' is 150 miles away.. there's no chance a turnaround is a success. and if they turned around earlier, where they would have fuel to get back.. How do we get such a clear signal at the Itasca and why wouldn't they mention they had turned around?

[schmave]

Originally Posted by Babalu

I can't believe I never noticed this thread until now. I certainly never got into the details to the extent that you guys have, but from what I know about the subject, it's relatively simple.

Earhart was an incompetent pilot who was made a big deal out of because she was a woman. She got lucky a few times because she had more guts than brains. It caught up with her on her last flight. They got lost, ran out of fuel, and crashed. Exactly where? It doesn't make much of a difference, but I doubt any of these fanciful tales about where she wound up are true. I think she ignominiously crashed into the ocean in the middle of nowhere.

Not to take any of the fun out of it, because the theories can be fascinating, but at the end of the day this is the story and has been for 88 years even if not enough people want to admit it.
She made some basic mistakes and ultimately cost her and Fred Noonan their lives.

[Labonte18]

Originally Posted by schmave

Not to take any of the fun out of it, because the theories can be fascinating, but at the end of the day this is the story and has been for 88 years even if not enough people want to admit it.
She made some basic mistakes and ultimately cost her and Fred Noonan their lives.

I'd argue the failure wasn't solely hers. She had the least responsibility on that plane so far as the reason they went missing.

Of course.. There were only two. and, she does share in responsibility because she didn't know how to use the radio and direction finding equipment properly.. But.. Noonan was the one responsible for navigating them to Howland. So, he is the most at fault.. At least, under the most accepted 'crash and sink' theory.

There's only one thing that shuts up all the various theories, tho.. And that's finding the plane. I don't really buy into anything other than crash and sink.. But.. It is fun to think other scenarios through. Even if its just to debunk them.

[Dogface82]

As a Kansan I first learned about Amelia Earhart in the third grade. She was both a Heroine to be admired and a cautionary tale of what not to do. Believe it or not most of the topics related to her career and ultimate failure were discussed. Just not in this much detail. She had the fast initial learning curve which led to her biting off more than she could chew on more than one occasion. Her husband was generally blamed for this. By the time of her final flight she no longer enjoyed it and was doing it for the money and prestige. She went on various publicity tours when she should have been perfecting her skills as a pilot, navigator and radio operator. She allowed herself to be pressured to make the attempt when the seasonal winds and weather were no longer in her favor. Reversing her original course. It was generally thought she would have been successful if she delayed the attempt until conditions were favorable again. It also would have given her more time to train and learn. Again the blame game focused on her husband. Ultimately it was her responsibility. She took the risk and her luck ran out. I was taught and still think she sank. Japanese capture is a possibility though. The Pacific is dotted with tiny islands that are submerged seasonly or even daily by the tide. Ie Shima island where Ernie Pyle was killed is a low level island of this type, shinking in size during the day. Coral formations and submerged land masses can appear to be dry islands under certain conditions. So the research and debate/ discussion continues. Labonte18 is consistent with imforative and civil discussions that I find interesting and enjoyable.

[Labonte18]

Originally Posted by Dogface82

As a Kansan I first learned about Amelia Earhart in the third grade. She was both a Heroine to be admired and a cautionary tale of what not to do. Believe it or not most of the topics related to her career and ultimate failure were discussed. Just not in this much detail. She had the fast initial learning curve which led to her biting off more than she could chew on more than one occasion. Her husband was generally blamed for this. By the time of her final flight she no longer enjoyed it and was doing it for the money and prestige. She went on various publicity tours when she should have been perfecting her skills as a pilot, navigator and radio operator. She allowed herself to be pressured to make the attempt when the seasonal winds and weather were no longer in her favor. Reversing her original course. It was generally thought she would have been successful if she delayed the attempt until conditions were favorable again. It also would have given her more time to train and learn. Again the blame game focused on her husband. Ultimately it was her responsibility. She took the risk and her luck ran out. I was taught and still think she sank. Japanese capture is a possibility though. The Pacific is dotted with tiny islands that are submerged seasonly or even daily by the tide. Ie Shima island where Ernie Pyle was killed is a low level island of this type, shinking in size during the day. Coral formations and submerged land masses can appear to be dry islands under certain conditions. So the research and debate/ discussion continues. Labonte18 is consistent with imforative and civil discussions that I find interesting and enjoyable.

There's so many things just interesting about this.. I don't know if i've brought it up here before or not.. but Amelia's sister was a pretty interesting woman herself.. And died not too long ago in 1998. In fact, she spoke out against the Japanese spy theory during her lifetime.

This, like DB Cooper and other cases.. We don't have a solution on. So.. Theories abound. And.. Many of them cannot be disproven, so.. While *I* may not think that is what happened.. I can't disprove it, so.. While I can say why I don't put much faith in something being the outcome.. I still have to acknowledge.. It's possible. Unlikely in my mind, but..

As I've said many times before.. I sure didn't have Hantavirus and natural causes anywhere on the board when it came to Gene Hackman. Not sure anyone did. And I wouldn't have ranked that outcome very high on my list of possibilities if someone brought it up. So.. I always have to leave that possibility out there that.. As much sense as something makes for me.. Doesn't mean i'm right.

Plus.. It's just human nature. All of us love a good mystery.. but.. We also all want it solved.

[diesteldorf]

Originally Posted by Labonte18

There's so many things just interesting about this.. I don't know if i've brought it up here before or not.. but Amelia's sister was a pretty interesting woman herself.. And died not too long ago in 1998. In fact, she spoke out against the Japanese spy theory during her lifetime

Here is a decent article from 1983 to prove his point:

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news...y/62851717007/

[Dogface82]

Originally Posted by diesteldorf

Here is a decent article from 1983 to prove his point:

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news...y/62851717007/

That article is interesting. Her sister may have been the family member that debunked the shoe sightings. I only knew a couple of people that believed She was Eleanor Roosevelt's personal spy. The Japanese capture theory was based on her wandering into their territory and triggering paranoia. If the Japanese recovered them alive and interogated or tortured them it would be a delicate situation to explain if they were to return them. Easier to just dispose of them. Japanese officers were also known to lose their temper and execute people in their custody. I find it plausible but not probable. As someone pointed out the Malaysian airliner a much larger aircraft with modern flight tracking systems and black boxes disappeared. The Pacific is unbelievably huge.

I have to add the Soviet downing of the KAL airliner in the 1990s for those who can't accept a military overreaction to "invasion" of their airspace.

[MediaHoarder]

Originally Posted by Labonte18

I put Gardner as the second most likely.. And.. It's really small because.. I just don't see them having the fuel to make it there. We can extrapolate her fuel usage based on he flight level as reported and the weather conditions of the day and.. She certainly would have been very low on fuel when making it to Howland, period.

The theory that she could get to Gardner island.. It requires suspension of disbelief.

Or just a different fuel analysis. I find Gardner unconvincing because nothing has been found there and it would be reasonable to expect something to be found. But in fairness to the theory, the same fuel analysis used for the Japanese theory permits her to fly to Gardner.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

I look at the Japanese capture much the same way. With even less of a chance of it.

If she had been killed by the Japanese.. First off, she'd have been a HELL of a lot more useful as propaganda. If you legit catch her spying or even can build the story that she was.. Do you quietly execute her and hide all the evidence of it? Or.. Do you parade her across, what I guess would have been news reels and newspapers at the time?

Quietly execute and hide the evidence. There would be zero propaganda value to capturing her.
Consider this, who would the propaganda be for?
Japan? They already had total propaganda telling exactly what they wanted, factual or not, they had no need of her.
The US? That would only incite the US to act against Japan, which is exactly what Japan was trying to avoid.
Third party countries that Japan wants to align with itself against America? The only one that might have any use, but its hard to foresee what states those would be that it would be meaningfully useful for, and in any case it would never outweigh getting the ire of the US.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

US/Japan relationships were deteriorating rapidly at that time. She would have been a huge bargaining chip for the Japanese.

I see no value whatsoever as a bargaining chip. Holding her ransom might extract a short term concession, but that would be meaningless victory given how it would expose Japan's activities in the Marshall Islands.

Loomis addressed the geopolitical situation in his book, and in essence the Japanese activities on the Marshall Islands were highly secretive and against prior agreements. The primary goal would simply be to maintain that secrecy. Earhart materializing in those islands would contravene that. Either alive, with knowledge of the military presence, or dead, which would invite questions and demands for answers Japan didn't want to provide.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

The other thing.. The women on Saipan that were 'eyewitnesses' to her and Noonan's executions.. They all described a woman who was wearing man's clothes.. And that's one of the big pieces of evidence, supposedly for it being her.. But.. Anyone who was visiting that area.. Likely would have been dressed much the same. Pith helmet and khaki type clothes. Few women on that trip would be out there in a dress and heels. at least, that's how it seems to me.

I would not characterize the man's clothes as the big piece of evidence, its a minor point. Its more that a Caucasian woman was there at all. This was not an area that any foreigners were permitted in as a matter of course. No one was visiting, especially not American women. That aspect of the testimony makes it highly reliable.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

Then there's the branch of marines who supposedly saw the plane on fire on Saipan. So, now.. You not only have a successful coverup from the Japanese but also a coverup by americans.. Let's just say that everything happened.. she was captured and executed on Saipan.. When the American forces find her plane.. That would be a rallying cry for the US. "Avenge Amelia" could have turned into a battle cry. Why would you cover that up? Because maybe you DID actually send her as a spy? Cover THAT part up, ok, I can understand it..

I'm on the fence about the Marines story. On the one hand, I would have expected Japan to destroy the plane long before then.
But the US did not need an "Avenge Amelia" in 1944 at any rate, Pearl Harbor was plenty and the war was well underway. It would have had little propaganda value.
As to covering it up, that may have been expedient because if it was found she had been there in 1937 there may have been awkward questions of the Roosevelt Administration as to why nothing was done.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

I'll have to read up on the turnaround theory more. I'm not fully versed on that.. but.. I don't see how that works when she's broadcasting near the Itasca.. Even if 'near' is 150 miles away.. there's no chance a turnaround is a success. and if they turned around earlier, where they would have fuel to get back.. How do we get such a clear signal at the Itasca and why wouldn't they mention they had turned around?

I would like to find the original analysis Loomis referred to on fuel. That would help me understand its plausibility.

The radio analysis does show 150 miles is plenty for the radio signal as it came in. As to why she didn't say she was turning around...that could be any number of reasons. One was likely panic setting in and desperation, she had never had full communication with Itasca and may have given up, realized that she needed to act decisively to reach some landing location, and been focused on that instead of notifying Itasca which would not have helped at that point anyway. Or it may have been she did, but due to the ongoing frequency issues it was not received. Really, we don't know what messages were not received that trip, but given the issues, I would not be surprised if she broadcasted some messages on a frequency that Itasca did not hear.

[Labonte18]

Originally Posted by MediaHoarder

The radio analysis does show 150 miles is plenty for the radio signal as it came in. As to why she didn't say she was turning around...that could be any number of reasons. One was likely panic setting in and desperation, she had never had full communication with Itasca and may have given up, realized that she needed to act decisively to reach some landing location, and been focused on that instead of notifying Itasca which would not have helped at that point anyway. Or it may have been she did, but due to the ongoing frequency issues it was not received. Really, we don't know what messages were not received that trip, but given the issues, I would not be surprised if she broadcasted some messages on a frequency that Itasca did not hear.

I don't agree with the rest.. But this part..

Ok.. remember the final transmissions. Or, at least, the final official transmissions.

They broadcasted that they were on the line 157/337.. Which I can't see them doing that if they turned around.

But, also, "We must be on you now but cannot see you"

Why would you transmit to the Itasca that you couldn't see them if you had turned around, or had bailed to Gardner?

Now.. It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense that the Itasca started sending up smoke from the engines and she was unable to see that as well.


You mentioned no evidence on Gardner island but.. There has been SOME evidence recovered from there.. However.. None of it can conclusively be tied to her. It's all very circumstantial and there could be many other explanations.

There was a jar of 'freckle cream', which.. Seeing how big a concern weight would be.. I don't know she would have brought that, though, it was only an ounce or two. There was the shoe heel that is consistent with her shoe size. There was the skeleton that was examined and concluded to be a man, but, it disappeared so no modern analysis can be done on it. And there was a part of what is believed to be an Electra found there, but.. It can't be matched up to her plane.

I think.. Most of that is likely TIGHAR buffeting up the theory and hoping to get more money for more expeditions, but..

It's.. Really difficult to fathom the distances between places in the Pacific. The Gardner theory is about like they were flying to Omaha, NE from the south and crashed in Charlotte, NC.


Plus.. IIRC.. Putnam actually did send a search team to Gradner island. It was.. I think a year or so later, but..

I'll also add. Roosevelt sent 10 ships out searching for her.. That.. Doesn't really help back up the 'spy' theory.

[Labonte18]

So.. There's another one out there. This is a paywall article.. I can't find one that's not, though I read one earlier today..

https://www.popularmechanics.com/fli...arharts-plane/

It's just a random guy who says he's found her plane using Google Earth off of Gardner Island.

Ah.. Here you go.. Non-paywall of the article

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/...l?guccounter=1

not putting much faith it it.. This is, apparently, different than what Purdue University will be going to Gardner island to investigate later this year or next..

I doubt either turns up anything substantive.. But.. You never know.

[MediaHoarder]

Originally Posted by Labonte18

I don't agree with the rest.. But this part..

Ok.. remember the final transmissions. Or, at least, the final official transmissions.

They broadcasted that they were on the line 157/337.. Which I can't see them doing that if they turned around.

But, also, "We must be on you now but cannot see you"

Why would you transmit to the Itasca that you couldn't see them if you had turned around, or had bailed to Gardner?

Now.. It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense that the Itasca started sending up smoke from the engines and she was unable to see that as well.

Its important to make a distinction here. The Gardner theory requires them to turn around earlier I think, so your reasoning would correctly cast doubt on it.

However, what Loomis proposed was based on that transmission being correct, insofar as they were at that line at that time. So no disagreement there.

He proposes that they turn around after that transmission, and based on the fuel analysis he had plus them being on that line but to the north they are within reach of the Marshall Islands.

That also fits with the Itasca smoke not being seen. They were 150 miles north on that line of longitude and thus out of visual range for the smoke.

Originally Posted by Labonte18

You mentioned no evidence on Gardner island but.. There has been SOME evidence recovered from there.. However.. None of it can conclusively be tied to her. It's all very circumstantial and there could be many other explanations.

There was a jar of 'freckle cream', which.. Seeing how big a concern weight would be.. I don't know she would have brought that, though, it was only an ounce or two. There was the shoe heel that is consistent with her shoe size. There was the skeleton that was examined and concluded to be a man, but, it disappeared so no modern analysis can be done on it. And there was a part of what is believed to be an Electra found there, but.. It can't be matched up to her plane.

I think.. Most of that is likely TIGHAR buffeting up the theory and hoping to get more money for more expeditions, but..

It's.. Really difficult to fathom the distances between places in the Pacific. The Gardner theory is about like they were flying to Omaha, NE from the south and crashed in Charlotte, NC.


Plus.. IIRC.. Putnam actually did send a search team to Gradner island. It was.. I think a year or so later, but..

I'll also add. Roosevelt sent 10 ships out searching for her.. That.. Doesn't really help back up the 'spy' theory.

Can't say I would disagree with this, although in summation there isn't really any evidence on Gardner, certainly not what would be expected of an entire aircraft landing there.

Likewise I don't put any weight on the spy theory. But there are explanations for them ending up in the Marshall Islands which are independent of the spy theory that can account for the Japan angle.

[MediaHoarder]

Originally Posted by Dogface82

That article is interesting. Her sister may have been the family member that debunked the shoe sightings. I only knew a couple of people that believed She was Eleanor Roosevelt's personal spy. The Japanese capture theory was based on her wandering into their territory and triggering paranoia. If the Japanese recovered them alive and interogated or tortured them it would be a delicate situation to explain if they were to return them. Easier to just dispose of them. Japanese officers were also known to lose their temper and execute people in their custody. I find it plausible but not probable. As someone pointed out the Malaysian airliner a much larger aircraft with modern flight tracking systems and black boxes disappeared. The Pacific is unbelievably huge.

I have to add the Soviet downing of the KAL airliner in the 1990s for those who can't accept a military overreaction to "invasion" of their airspace.

KAL 007 was 1983. Incidentally, I find it interesting that UM never did a KAL 007 segment. It would have made for a very good subject. Multiple theories about what happened with that one.