Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > What happened to Amelia Earhart - evidential trail Marshall Islands
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 4818 | TRs

gb
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 7:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
gb wrote:
"If the trolleys were used for the heavy aircraft it is likely they were run over lumber..."

After consulting the resident civil engineer here:

That scenario is possible, but:
Assuming the surface of said island is soft (which is most likely) and the aircraft weighs 6500 pounds, your "lumber" would have to be about 8 inches thick x 16 inches wide, and would need to be supported and tied together in some fashion by means of some sort of understructure, otherwise the force of the wheel (which would be on the inboard side of the wheels, considering those wheels in the photo have a lip around the inside perimeter) would push the inboard side of the "lumber" down and toward the outboard side.
This would require six parallel wooden "tracks" spaced appropriately apart from each other; two for each wheel/axle set.
Unless you're going to move the aircraft only a few feet at a time, and then move the pieces from the rear and set them up again in the front of the aircraft, this would require an enormous amount of wood.

So sure, possible, but an extremely difficult task requiring a huge amount of material and labor.

I agree. But the same thing may have been done to move huge blocks of granite in ancient Egypt (with or w/o wheels). The lumber would have been moved and likely valuable would have been recovered. I'm not saying that that proves anything about the use of the trolleys. Their presence is curious, however.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12410 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
seeking hygge
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 7:38 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb wrote:
So, it is simple, debunk the photo of Earhart's survival in 1937 by demonstrating her being in the Marshall Islands prior to "date" of publishing, and you remove the photo as evidence for survival. But it cuts two ways, prove she wasn't in the Marshall Islands prior to the "date" of publishing and you prove a conspiracy in the date of publishing which would strongly implicate her survival.

No, I got that you were taking walking circles around the barn to posit a conspiracy theory. But your conspiracy theory works only if you assume that she and Noonan are in the photograph, and, again, that requires an absurd leap of faith.

gb wrote:
.  .  .   the logic, here. (Which is very simple)

One tell of a conspiracist is the claim that his theory is "very simple."

gb wrote:
It seems you have a big horse in this race.....me, I want to know one way or the other.

My horse is named Evidence. When the horse named Evidence is not there, I am able to say "I don't know." Seems to me your need to believe is stronger than your desire to know.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9117 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((>
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 10:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb wrote:
But the same thing may have been done to move huge blocks of granite in ancient Egypt (with or w/o wheels).

Not wheels. Rollers. As in rounded pieces of wood - "logs", if you will.
In that case the load would be distributed downward, not outward, which you may have missed in my statement above.
Think: "snowplowing" on downhill skis. Same/same.

So again, any "lumber" that might have been used in combination with those wheels shown in the photograph I linked to above, which have a lip around the inside perimeter (the same as wheels on a train), would have required that whatever sort of "track" they ran on, whether wood or metal, would have required some sort of understructure that held the rails together in parallel, and did not allow them to flex outward.
Either way - wood or metal - it would have required tremendous amounts of material and manpower, and the task would have been complicated by the fact that you're talking about moving three-and-a-half tons of aircraft over what could reasonably be assumed to be a soft, sandy surface.

It is indeed curious that those metal wheel/axle assemblies were found on that tiny island, but without any evidence of anything else that could possibly be related to them, you're back to speculation and conjecture.

As Steve says above: the horse is named Evidence.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 4818 | TRs

gb
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 10:46 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve wrote:
gb wrote:
It seems you have a big horse in this race.....me, I want to know one way or the other.

My horse is named Evidence. When the horse named Evidence is not there, I am able to say "I don't know." Seems to me your need to believe is stronger than your desire to know.

Your last statement proves that you have no reading of me whatsoever.

As to Evidence, the photo stands as Evidence if it can be shown that Noonan (perhaps) and Earhart were not in the Marshalls prior to 1935. Show me the Evidence>

As to the whether the photograph is real or not, your horse is carrying an argument similar to "There was no collusion" or "So what if there is". Can't have both.

As to Witnessses -they were believable.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 4818 | TRs

gb
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 10:55 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski,

Unquestionably a lot of manpower, but there was apparently a 2000 man base in the Mili Atoll area.....

The trolleys are the weakest of the evidence for the plane crash. The best is the Marshall Islands (and Saipan) witnesses and old video of the same. Were the witnesses telling a story they had not told before, I would have questioned their authenticity.

The stamps tell a story that people told 30 years ago and/or was passed down as stories. Why?
If it were me running the History presentation I would have found out (or tried to) why the stamps were issued. On what decree?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead
Member
Member


Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 603 | TRs

thunderhead
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 11:35 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Your silly marshall islands conspiracy theory requires you to ignore entirely the radio communications with the cutter.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 4818 | TRs

gb
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 4:39 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead wrote:
Your silly marshall islands conspiracy theory requires you to ignore entirely the radio communications with the cutter.

You are conspiring with yourself albrghtmd.

Your ignorant comment requires that the timing of the closest radio calls coincide with the time of when the fully loaded Electra would have run out of fuel. You apparently don't understand that Earhart, from wherever she was, may have turned back in an effort to find an easier to spot landing. Find a written record by Earhart that tells what her intention was.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Seventy2002
Member
Member


Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 387 | TRs

Seventy2002
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 4:47 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb wrote:
the photo stands as Evidence if it can be shown that Noonan (perhaps) and Earhart were not in the Marshalls prior to 1935. Show me the Evidence>

First, show us the evidence that it is Fred Noonan in the photograph.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13761 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 5:00 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
She died smile.gif

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9117 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((>
PostSat Jul 15, 2017 6:19 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb wrote:
Unquestionably a lot of manpower, but there was apparently a 2000 man base in the Mili Atoll area.....

2237, per the document I cited above.
If we leave out the commanding officer, and a few of the other muckity-mucks, let's say you've got 2000 able-bodied Imperial Japanese Army and Navy personnel.
6500 pounds of aircraft / 2200 guys = 2.95 pounds for each guy. If it were possible to do so, they could have just lifted the damn thing up and muscled it across that island.
I'm not contesting the availability of manpower - that's not it.
In order to use those three sets of wheels, you'd have to have some sort of "track" or something constructed, though - that in and of itself would be a major undertaking.
So sure, possible, but I just don't see it happening that way without some serious engineering at work, and I think that would have left behind some physical evidence.

gb wrote:
The trolleys are the weakest of the evidence for the plane crash. The best is the Marshall Islands (and Saipan) witnesses and old video of the same. Were the witnesses telling a story they had not told before, I would have questioned their authenticity.

I would argue that the photo is weaker than the wheel/axle assemblies, but that's because it was debunked by the guy in Japan almost immediately after the History Channel broadcast.
The best and only "evidence" that can be taken seriously are the oral histories from the locals. That's where it gets kind of sketchy.
Again: go back and read what people said who were at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963: were there three shots? or two? or four? or five? or one? or nine?
As Steve has pointed out already, not just here but in many other threads, "eyewitness testimony" is in many cases simply bogus.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead
Member
Member


Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 603 | TRs

thunderhead
Member
PostSun Jul 16, 2017 3:14 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Quote:
Find a written record by Earhart that tells what her intention was.

The coast guard cutter kept detailed logs, including her last massage which stated her intentions, which were no where near the marshall islands.  That about sums that up.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
AR
724



Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 1510 | TRs
Location: Saratoga Passage
AR
724
PostSun Jul 16, 2017 3:38 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I seriously think a low yield nuclear device could be made with all this horse sh##.
At some point it will collapse into itself.

--------------
...wait...are we just going to hang here or go hiking?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 4818 | TRs

gb
Member
PostSun Jul 16, 2017 5:00 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I intend to get this book: Mike Campbell

On his website he details his own investigations and those of years past. In a brief reading of his website, he details the release of the stamps and mentions over 100 witnesses that saw Earhart, a couple with details that are too specific as to be made up. The History Channel barely scratched the surface of the eyewitness accounts in the Marshalls and on Saipan and only mentioned the stamps. Campbell details the accompanying materials that came with the commemorative stamps i.e. Why they were issued.

I suspect he will provide details of Earharts flying and confirm she was not on Yacluit prior to 1937.

Why is it so hard to believe that the Japanese believed she was a spy and that they probably gave the US the run around for some time? By the time we knew of her survival and imprisonment it was late in the game and the US did not want war with Japan and did not expect war in 1937. The US (Roosevelt) was dealing with economic hardship and the Dust Bowl at that point in time and was somewhat isolationist.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 15320 | TRs

Tom
Admin
PostSun Jul 16, 2017 5:13 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead wrote:
her last massage which stated her intentions

Air travel just isn't what it used to be...
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9117 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((>
PostSun Jul 16, 2017 7:35 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Quote:
Why is it so hard to believe that the Japanese believed she was a spy and that they probably gave the US the run around for some time? By the time we knew of her survival and imprisonment it was late in the game and the US did not want war with Japan and did not expect war in 1937. The US (Roosevelt) was dealing with economic hardship and the Dust Bowl at that point in time and was somewhat isolationist.

It is not hard to believe the Japanese might have thought she was a spy.
Hmmm.... as I recall, by 1937 the Japanese were a little pissed off at Roosevelt for freezing assets and cutting off shipments of oil, because Roosevelt saw the handwriting on the wall and knew that war was inevitable, but he had a Congress and Senate that wanted no part of it, and moreover an American public that absolutely wanted no part of any "foreign wars".
Roosevelt wasn't so much an "isolationist" as he was a shrewd politician, and he knew that he wasn't going to get any support there - look at what he had to finagle to push through the "Lend Lease Act".

gb, in my humble opinion the only thing that supports the argument is the "eyewitness testimony", but as I noted above, it is in the end, no matter how you slice or dice it, still anecdotal. Much of what was presented on the History Channel broadcast was second hand; "stories my father (or uncle) told me".

See what Campbell's book turns up. Maybe he got something with a bit more substance.
Best you've got right now is the 90-year-old woman in San Mateo, who was 10 years old at the time and was there. I watched that part of it with great interest; she seemed lucid, clear of mind, and credible. That said, it's still anecdotal.

And don't think I'm just blowing you off on this. Working with a credentialed archaeologist on a historical document, we ran into a mess of stuff that was gleaned from interviews done in the 1950s. All those people were dead, the people who did the interviews were dead, and there was no way to substantiate anything said either by physical evidence, documents, or by maps of the area (which were horribly inaccurate and lacking in detail.)
In the end, a lot of stuff just got left out, because even though you've got so-and-so corroborating whats-his-name's story, it's still anecdotal and won't pass muster in a document that may (or may not) have to go through the "peer review" process.
So in spite of my being able to state with all confidence "Mr. X had a fruit orchard here", there's no way to claim it's fact without something to back it up.
(I really hope that makes sense.)

BK

... and yes, AR, with all this foofaraw, we could probably re-invent the wheel.... but at least it's not a conversation about Elvis sightings! dizzy.gif

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > What happened to Amelia Earhart - evidential trail Marshall Islands
  Happy Birthday mtnrider, PetDrAndrea, Quest for Adrenaline, RockShadow, hikejon!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy