View Single Post
  #49  
Old 09 March 2018, 11:16 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,759
Whalephant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
Is it just me, or does this sort of thing appear about every five years.
Well, TIGHAR has been pushing their evidence every year or so. I think they are very serious and committed to solving the mystery. My problem with all of their evidence is that they've engaged in a tremendous amount of work to confirm their hypothesis and almost none to disprove it so (of course) they've confirmed it many ways, many times and there's no way of knowing at this point the likelihood they are wrong or right.

This particular study is not them (I guess) but it's someone working on their particular hypothesis and it seems like the same trap. The study itself mentions at least seven other reasonable people documented to have disappeared on the exact island during that time whereas Earhart is known to have been somewhere in a several hundred mile radius. So the statement in the paper that "In the case of the Nikumaroro bones, the only documented person to whom they may belong is Amelia Earhart" is more a statement on the lack of the specific physical records of those people. (Gee, why do we have more documentation about a world-famous aviator than random shipwreck victims and castaways?) There were several other known shipwrecks and many people known to have died in the area. How many other people could have had their skeletons arrive on the island in various ways during the previous 30 or 50 or 100 years... So this kind of statement is extremely dubious (to me at least - maybe I'm missing something).

It's frustrating because this has been the way this avenue has been pursued the whole time. They find a bit of a comb or something and trace it back to 1930's US female populations. But there's no effort to find such evidence on similar islands that are definitely not where she disappeared or to make a catalogue of all the items found that were not from the same period. So sifting through tonnes of flotsam and jetsam on an island they found what they think is compelling evidence and a compelling story. We're left wondering "what are the odds?" and there's not going to be an answer, presumably because that kind of research doesn't get funded, I suppose.

I'm glad this adds more evidence but it doesn't make a big change in the quality of the evidence.
Reply With Quote