3 ms·
I am highly skeptical of any analysis performed by TIGHAR. They are way too biased in their interpretation of their "finds." I would like to see a detailed repo
by goodcanadian 12y ago
I am highly skeptical of any analysis performed by TIGHAR. They are way too biased in their interpretation of their "finds." I would like to see a detailed report on how they determined that piece of metal is the one they say it is. If and only if that report draws reasonable conclusions, I would then be interested in what a third party analysis had to say about it. That is my minimum bar for even considering TIGHAR's claims.
- kevinskii 12y agoFor detailed skeptical analysis of TIGHAR's other Earhart claims, see: http://skeptoid.com/blog/2012/03/20/more-amelia-earhart-nonsense/ http://skeptoid.com/blog/2012/03/20/more-amelia-earhart-nons... http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4295 http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4295
- smacktoward 12y agoIndeed, we seem to see announcements of TIGHAR "finds" about once a year, with each one being pretty vague and not leading specifically to the discovery of Earhart's actual aircraft. If one were cynical, one could conclude that the annual "finds" are just exercises to keep TIGHAR's name in the news.
- ChuckMcM 12y agoActually to be cynical you would have to see them as funding teasers to elicit funding for yet another trip out to the atoll. That said, if they dive down and find the plane they are going to be pretty pleased with themselves. As far as I can tell there aren't any facts that would rule out their theory that Earhart ended up here.