4 ms·

From the Skeptoid link I provided above: "Near the skeleton, Gallagher also found a small wooden box with dovetailed joints, that he determined to be a sextant

From the Skeptoid link I provided above: "Near the skeleton, Gallagher also found a small wooden box with dovetailed joints, that he determined to be a sextant box. It was delivered to Harold Gatty, founder of Air Pacific, and a good friend of Fred Noonan and familiar with his navigation habits; for example, that he often carried an old-school sextant with him on flights in addition to modern equipment, just to double-check things the way a good navigator should. Regarding Gatty's own expertise, Charles Lindbergh had described him as the "prince of navigators". Another British officer in the area cabled Gatty's findings back to Gallagher: Mr. Gatty thinks that the box is an English one of some age and judges that it was used latterly merely as a receptacle. He does not consider that it could in any circumstance have been a sextant box used in modern trans-Pacific aviation. " https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4295 https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4295

curtis 8y ago
One reason that we should consider discounting Gatty's conclusion is that we now know stuff that Gatty did not know. Gallagher reports that the sextant box had two different numbers on it and he reports what those numbers were: 3500 and 1542 We do not have documentation for those specific numbers. On the other hand, if you take a look at the second link I posted (https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/52_NumbersGame/52_NumbersGame.html https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bullet...), you'll see they have an actual picture of a Brandis sextant box with the numbers 3987 and 1542 on it. They have a couple of tables with other sextants that they have identified with similar numbers, including: Brandis 3511 N.O. 1585 Brandis 3527 N.O. 1599 Brandis 3987 N.O. 1584 That doesn't conclusively identify 3500:1542 as a Brandis sextant with Naval Observatory number 1584, but it does look mighty suspicious. If that is indeed the case, then the sextant box the islanders discovered definitely dates to 1919 or later, as does the skeleton that was found near it. Even if we accept this conclusion, it does not constitute certain proof that Earhart landed on the island. It would seem to provide some solid support for the idea though. If we combine this with other independent lines of evidence (radio reception reports, interviews with people who were on the island in the early 1940s, etc.) you can make a stronger argument.

curtis 8y ago

One reason that we should consider discounting Gatty's conclusion is that we now know stuff that Gatty did not know. Gallagher reports that the sextant box had two different numbers on it and he reports what those numbers were: 3500 and 1542 We do not have documentation for those specific numbers. On the other hand, if you take a look at the second link I posted (https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bulletins/52_NumbersGame/52_NumbersGame.html https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/Bullet...), you'll see they have an actual picture of a Brandis sextant box with the numbers 3987 and 1542 on it. They have a couple of tables with other sextants that they have identified with similar numbers, including: Brandis 3511 N.O. 1585 Brandis 3527 N.O. 1599 Brandis 3987 N.O. 1584 That doesn't conclusively identify 3500:1542 as a Brandis sextant with Naval Observatory number 1584, but it does look mighty suspicious. If that is indeed the case, then the sextant box the islanders discovered definitely dates to 1919 or later, as does the skeleton that was found near it. Even if we accept this conclusion, it does not constitute certain proof that Earhart landed on the island. It would seem to provide some solid support for the idea though. If we combine this with other independent lines of evidence (radio reception reports, interviews with people who were on the island in the early 1940s, etc.) you can make a stronger argument.