3 ms·
So, I had a quick look at your links, and found nothing new there. The artifacts point to human presence (hardly a surprise), but there is little more than conj
by goodcanadian 12y ago
So, I had a quick look at your links, and found nothing new there. The artifacts point to human presence (hardly a surprise), but there is little more than conjecture to link them to Earhart or Noonan. In fact, the telegraph writers clearly thought an Earhart link was unlikely.
- curtis 12y agoThe artifact is suggestive rather than conclusive. However, I'd argue that the "human presence" part actually was a surprise. If that really was a Brandis sextant box that had been surplused from the U.S. Navy, it indicates a human presence on the island during a relatively narrow time period, roughly 1919-1937. During that time period the only documented human presence on the island was the survivors of the wreck of the SS Norwich City and their rescuers in 1929, and accounts of that event indicate that they were never on the part of the island where the sextant box was found. The sextant box was also found near a number of large bones which were clearly identifiable as human. Where did that person come from? Were they shipwrecked on the island sometime between 1919 and 1937, but in a different event than the Norwich City wreck? What ship went missing in that area of the Pacific during that time period? So anyway, this is just some circumstantial evidence. But it's not the only evidence that TIGHAR has. If you start combing through their website, you'll find they have a bunch of independent circumstantial evidence, none of which is conclusive by itself, but taken together starts to look suspicious.