Earhart Survived

Cajun_Flyer said:
There are a lot of Sasquatch eyewitness accounts out there too. Some even sound really credible and I think many of the people truly believe they saw what they say they saw. But I still don't believe in Sasquatches.
Click to expand...
True, but one limitation of that analogy is that the existence of Amelia Earhart is not in doubt.
 
Palmpilot said:
True, but one limitation of that analogy is that the existence of Amelia Earhart is not in doubt.
Click to expand...

True. My point was more that people lie and make stuff up... some do so really convincingly. There are also some people who actually believe they saw things they saw, but they actually didn't. I just don't trust eyewitness accounts, even when they seem legit. If I were on a jury, I would want hard evidence to convict someone, not people's stories. The History Channel was trying to play the photo as hard evidence, but obviously that isn't the case.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
There are a lot of Sasquatch eyewitness accounts out there too. Some even sound really credible and I think many of the people truly believe they saw what they say they saw. But I still don't believe in Sasquatches.
Click to expand...

What about the Yeti? ;) :D
 
Sac Arrow said:
A couple possibilities: An agenda driven person may have cared enough to phony up a 50 page book, make it look old, and cause it to get stuck in a government library.
Click to expand...
It just seems far-fetched to me. It would be a labor-intensive project, and it would require personnel of Japan's national library to go along with it and keep quiet about the deception.

I would be interested to see if that photo of the page of the book passes the image tests run by the History Channel team on the photo itself.
Click to expand...

Me too.

Another possibility was that the then-current government of Japan at the time may have cared enough to create a pre-dated book with the photo in it, and stick it in their library.
Click to expand...

Considering stuff like the Nanking massacre and the Bataan death march, I have a hard time believing that they would have cared that much what anybody thought about their treatment of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. And how would the WW II Japanese government have known that the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence had the photo, or that anyone would identify it as them?

In any case, it's really not that important. All the other evidence combined looks pretty compelling, even if it was obtained by coincidence and mistake.
Click to expand...
The other evidence certainly beats the over-interpretation of compression artifacts that we saw in another thread, but as I said, I haven't gotten around to reading some of the critiques yet.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
True. My point was more that people lie and make stuff up... some do so really convincingly. There are also some people who actually believe they saw things they saw, but they actually didn't. I just don't trust eyewitness accounts, even when they seem legit. If I were on a jury, I would want hard evidence to convict someone, not people's stories. The History Channel was trying to play the photo as hard evidence, but obviously that isn't the case.
Click to expand...
Hard evidence is good, but there's not always enough of it to base a decision on. One of the jobs of a jury is to decide which witnesses are credible. It's a judgment call, but one of the attorneys who post on the AOPA Forum has said that juries are pretty good at it. I'm not comfortable with blanket dismissal of eyewitnesses. "Your mileage may vary."
 
Palmpilot said:
....
Considering stuff like the Nanking massacre and the Bataan death march, I have a hard time believing that they would have cared that much what anybody thought about their treatment of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan...
Click to expand...

I have been thinking along those same lines. With all the savagery that the Japs committed during that era, anything they did to those two wouldn't have added much fuel to the fire.
 
I thought she was captured by the Germans right before they bombed Pearl Harbor.....
 
Sac Arrow said:
In any case, it's really not that important. All the other evidence combined looks pretty compelling, even if it was obtained by coincidence and mistake.
Click to expand...

Oh, come now.

If the photo is discredited, and so easily at that, how much credibility remains in the rest of the "research" that went into this piece? Either the documentary producers knew the photo pre-dated her flight and they're charlatans, or they did not know and they're incompetent researchers.

If you're on a jury and a witness is proven to be lying in one aspect of his testimony, do you trust anything else the witness says?
 
Half Fast said:
If you're on a jury and a witness is proven to be lying in one aspect of his testimony, do you trust anything else the witness says?
Click to expand...

Speaking of, the guy in the documentary who apparently uses his expert status to verify photos in court is probably not going to be taken too seriously in court from now on. He gave a scale on how likely the photo was to be of Earhart and Noonan and said he would rank it "very likely." The whole time I was just shaking my head.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Speaking of, the guy in the documentary who apparently uses his expert status to verify photos in court is probably not going to be taken too seriously in court from now on. He gave a scale on how likely the photo was to be of Earhart and Noonan and said he would rank it "very likely." The whole time I was just shaking my head.
Click to expand...


Of course, we don't know how many other experts said it was nigh impossible that it was them. The expert knew there would only be a TV show and money for him if he said "very likely." The experts who disagreed didn't make the editor's cut.
 
Half Fast said:
Oh, come now.

If the photo is discredited, and so easily at that, how much credibility remains in the rest of the "research" that went into this piece? Either the documentary producers knew the photo pre-dated her flight and they're charlatans, or they did not know and they're incompetent researchers.

If you're on a jury and a witness is proven to be lying in one aspect of his testimony, do you trust anything else the witness says?
Click to expand...

No, but I might be inclined to trust multiple other witnesses, particularly if there is come corroboration of their stories.
 
Sac Arrow said:
No, but I might be inclined to trust multiple other witnesses, particularly if there is come corroboration of their stories.
Click to expand...

Suppose the liar gets to pick and choose which witnesses give evidence. Would you believe the other witnesses?

Look, this was a TV show crafted to sell advertising. Don't try to consider it seriously.
 
I believe in Occam's Razor. Ergo, they're at the bottom of the Ocean. The rest of the theories are fodder for cheap TV shows and books.:cool:
 
Sac Arrow said:
A couple possibilities: An agenda driven person may have cared enough to phony up a 50 page book, make it look old, and cause it to get stuck in a government library. I would be interested to see if that photo of the page of the book passes the image tests run by the History Channel team on the photo itself. Another possibility was that the then-current government of Japan at the time may have cared enough to create a pre-dated book with the photo in it, and stick it in their library.
Click to expand...

Seriously?
 
Sac Arrow said:
I wouldn't. I would immediately Pooh Pooh it.

Like a good majority of the posters in here.
Click to expand...
How could anyone not believe a Tigger?
Theyre bouncy, trouncy, flouncy, pouncy
Fun, fun, fun, fun, fun!

I guess the most wonderful thing about believing Tiggers is I'm the only one.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Well, if it's one of those pretentious microbrew fruity IPA things that bearded men in skinny jeans call "beer," then the keg might still have a few drops left.
Click to expand...

Hey I don't have a beard and there is no way in hell that I can squeeze into skinny jeans but I happen to love a good IPA so ....







... :raspberry:






:cheers:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top