Author Topic: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?  (Read 4587 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9877
Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« on: March 07, 2018, 02:29:21 PM »
This may not be a hoax...

New forensic analysis indicates bones were Amelia Earhart's -- ScienceDaily]
Quote
Bone measurement analysis indicates that the remains found on a remote island in the South Pacific were likely those of legendary American pilot Amelia Earhart, according to a UT researcher.

Amelia Earhart and the Nikumaroro Bones: A 1941 Analysis versus Modern Quantitative Techniques | Jantz | Forensic Anthropology]

Quote
Bone measurement analysis indicates that the remains found on a remote island in the South Pacific were likely those of legendary American pilot Amelia Earhart, according to a UT researcher.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline Billzbub

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3975
  • I know you know I know
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #1 on: March 07, 2018, 03:27:34 PM »
If that is a hoax, then someone went to an awful lot of trouble to perpetrate it.  It looks legit to me.
Quote from: Steven Novella
gleefully altering one’s beliefs to accommodate new information should be a badge of honor

Online Noisy Rhysling

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3991
    • Hyperwar, WWII in Hypertext.
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #2 on: March 07, 2018, 03:42:41 PM »
When I see one of these I talk a long deep breath and put it on the shelf. I check back every few months.
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life." Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

Offline Friendly Angel

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4315
  • Post count reset to zero in both forum apocalypses
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #3 on: March 07, 2018, 03:57:11 PM »
They're hypothesizing that the plane landed on the island and then the tide washed it away?  That doesn't sound very likely.

The other stuff sounds believable though.  If so - she may have been alive for quite a while before an infection or something finished her off.
Amend and resubmit.

Online Desert Fox

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 18342
  • Hopeful Non-Theist
    • Kitsune's Web Page
"Give me the storm and tempest of thought and action, rather than the dead calm of ignorance and faith. Banish me from Eden when you will; but first let me eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge."
— Robert G. Ingersoll

Online Noisy Rhysling

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3991
    • Hyperwar, WWII in Hypertext.
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #5 on: March 07, 2018, 07:00:37 PM »
I caveat'd my posts on this with "possibly". The final results will be the ones I'm interested in.
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life." Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9877
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #6 on: March 07, 2018, 07:03:40 PM »
Almost certainly no
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4295
https://skeptoid.com/blog/2016/11/01/even-more-amelia-earhart-nonsense/

Read journal article, I think he makes a pretty good case that the remains are hers.

And directly counters the argument that they belonged to a  "stocky male."

Personally I don't believe we need the hypothesis that she survived as a castaway to make these bones her.

Her body and the wreckage could have washed up on shore.

and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online Noisy Rhysling

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3991
    • Hyperwar, WWII in Hypertext.
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #7 on: March 07, 2018, 07:22:03 PM »
Let's see if there is any DNA to test.
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life." Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

Online Desert Fox

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 18342
  • Hopeful Non-Theist
    • Kitsune's Web Page
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #8 on: March 07, 2018, 07:40:21 PM »
I read a book, I can find it if people wish, that supports the issues with the radio signals that indicates that she was to the northwest of Itasca while Nikumaroro Island is in a southerly direction.
"Give me the storm and tempest of thought and action, rather than the dead calm of ignorance and faith. Banish me from Eden when you will; but first let me eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge."
— Robert G. Ingersoll

Offline daniel1948

  • Hasn't
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7720
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #9 on: March 07, 2018, 07:42:26 PM »
So they found a photograph of her (with clothes on, of course) and from that they determined the length of her bones. They found a skeleton on an island which has the same size bones as they determined from the photograph. And so these are the remains of Amelia Earhart? Yeah, right. Sorry, not convinced. I want more evidence than the size of bones as determined from an old photograph.

They claim that only 1% of people have bones of this size. How many people died in the Pacific ocean during the time that the bones might have been left there? (And a war going on!) If 100,000 people died in the area during the time these bones might have gotten there, and only 1% were the right size to match Earhart, then there's one chance in a thousand that these bones are hers.


Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9877
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2018, 08:04:43 PM »
Let's see if there is any DNA to test.

There is no DNA to test. They are examining records from the examination of the remains that were made in 1940. The remains have since been lost.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online Desert Fox

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 18342
  • Hopeful Non-Theist
    • Kitsune's Web Page
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2018, 08:08:50 PM »
By the way, you know a tramp steamer wrecked on  Nikumaroro?
"Give me the storm and tempest of thought and action, rather than the dead calm of ignorance and faith. Banish me from Eden when you will; but first let me eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge."
— Robert G. Ingersoll

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9877
Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2018, 08:13:03 PM »
So they found a photograph of her (with clothes on, of course) and from that they determined the length of her bones. They found a skeleton on an island which has the same size bones as they determined from the photograph. And so these are the remains of Amelia Earhart? Yeah, right. Sorry, not convinced. I want more evidence than the size of bones as determined from an old photograph.

They claim that only 1% of people have bones of this size. How many people died in the Pacific ocean during the time that the bones might have been left there? (And a war going on!) If 100,000 people died in the area during the time these bones might have gotten there, and only 1% were the right size to match Earhart, then there's one chance in a thousand that these bones are hers.

No, they didn't find a photo or a skeleton. They are examining records and evidence from the past with a Forensic Anthropology approach.

Basically they are looking at the methodology that was used to reject the bones as belonging to her in 1940 and the second look at that evidence more recently (1988ish?) and finding flaws. But there were excellent records kept during the 1940s examination and using numerous photos of Earhart they are able to get an accurate estimate of the dimensions of her bones and compare that to measurements taken of the remains.

They find the remains are consistent with the sizes of her bones; other artifacts found with the remains are consistent with them being hers.

Not sure I'd be so quick to dismiss this.

By the way, you know a tramp steamer wrecked on  Nikumaroro?

Yes. And I was reminded of that when I read the article and that was discussed in depth.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2018, 01:39:02 AM by CarbShark »
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online Noisy Rhysling

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3991
    • Hyperwar, WWII in Hypertext.
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2018, 07:02:47 AM »
Earhart was declared missing before WWII started. JAN. 5, 1939, is the official date of death.
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life." Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

Offline daniel1948

  • Hasn't
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7720
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Amelia Earhart's remains identified -- For real?
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2018, 08:47:27 AM »
So they found a photograph of her (with clothes on, of course) and from that they determined the length of her bones. They found a skeleton on an island which has the same size bones as they determined from the photograph. And so these are the remains of Amelia Earhart? Yeah, right. Sorry, not convinced. I want more evidence than the size of bones as determined from an old photograph.

They claim that only 1% of people have bones of this size. How many people died in the Pacific ocean during the time that the bones might have been left there? (And a war going on!) If 100,000 people died in the area during the time these bones might have gotten there, and only 1% were the right size to match Earhart, then there's one chance in a thousand that these bones are hers.

No, they didn't find a photo or a skeleton. They are examining records and evidence from the past with a Forensic Anthropology approach.

Basically they are looking at the methodology that was used to reject the bones as belonging to her in 1940 and the second look at that evidence more recently (1988ish?) and finding flaws. But there were excellent records kept during the 1940s examination and using numerous photos of Earhart they are able to get an accurate estimate of the dimensions of her bones and compare that to measurements taken of the remains.

They find the remains are consistent with the sizes of her bones; other artifacts found with the remains are consistent with them being hers.

Not sure I'd be so quick to dismiss this.

By the way, you know a tramp steamer wrecked on  Nikumaroro?

Yes. And I was reminded of that when I read the article and that was discussed in depth.

So they have no evidence at all. They have a report of an examination of the bones, and they think they know the length of her bones because they have a photograph. Somebody thought it was maybe her, but that was rejected because the examiner thought the bones belonged to a man. Now they've read the examiner's report and decided he was wrong, and the remains might not have been from a man. Ergo they must be from the most famous person lost in the Pacific around that time, in spite of other evidence strongly suggesting she was not lost anywhere near there.

Give me a break! The chances of this being Amelia Earhart, the most famous person to have been lost under mysterious conditions in that century, the person everybody wants to find, the person who is the subject of a new "We have now discovered her" report every year, are vanishingly slim.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

 

personate-rain