The late Bill Prymak’s abundant contributions to Earhart research, though ignored and unappreciated everywhere else in our know-nothing media, are gifts that keep on giving to readers of this blog and Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last. Bill, the founder and former president of the Amelia Earhart Society, who passed away in July 2014 at 86, was the central hub and repository of the writings, reports, analyses and speculations of a wide variety of Earhart researchers.
This material’s accuracy, also quite variable, must be carefully sifted to separate the wheat from the chaff, and was compiled in his two-volume Assemblage of Amelia Earhart Society Newsletters, covering Prymak’s AES Newsletters from December 1989 to March 2000.
The following treasure appeared in the January 1997 issue of the Amelia Earhart Society Newsletters, and concerns a familiar face among the Saipan witnesses, Joaquina M. Cabrera, and a revealing interview she did with Joe Gervais, Capt. Jose Quintanilla, Guam chief of police; and Eddie Camacho, Guam chief of detectives, during their 1960 Guam interviews. (Boldface emphasis mine throughout.)
“THE STRANGE STORY OF INTERVIEW #23”
When Joe Gervais and Joe Klaas presented their manuscript of Amelia Earhart Lives  to McGraw-Hill, it was bulging with some 650 pages of research work. Much good material had to be trimmed to meet the publisher’s mandate not to exceed 275 pages in final form, and it has always bugged Gervais that one of his most profound witnesses had a crucial part of her testimony stricken from the book by the editors. Major Gervais recreates that scene for us, the way it should have been presented in the book:
At Chalan Kanoa, a village on Saipan, the investigators located Mrs. Joaquina M. Cabrera, fifty-one, who during 1937 and 1938 had been employed as a servant in the [Kobayashi Royakan] hotel.
“l used to have to take a list of the persons staying in the hotel to the island governor’s office each day,” Mrs. Cabrera remembered. “One day when I was doing this I saw two Americans in the back of a three-wheeled vehicle. Their hands were bound behind them, and they were blindfolded. One of them was an American woman.”
Gervais showed her a photo of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan. “Are these the two you saw?”
She squinted at the photograph. “They look like the same people I saw, and they are dressed the same way.”
“What happened to them?”
“I only saw them once in the three-wheeled truck. I don’t know what happened to them.”
The threesome, Capt. Jose Quintanilla, Guam Chief of Police; Eddie Camacho, Guam Chief of Detectives, and Capt. Gervais, were shocked when, after finishing the above interview, she suddenly came forward to Gervais and deliberately spat on the ground, in front of his feet.
Capt. Gervais regained his composure and asked Capt. Quintanilla
“Why is this woman so enraged at me? I had never met her before?”
Capt. Quintanilla, in a quiet voice, asked Mrs. Cabrera to explain her actions, and after a lengthy exchange of words in Chamorro, Quintanilla turned to Gervais with an ashen face and slowly, deliberately told him what Mrs. Cabrera had said:
“You Americans are two-faced people! What are you doing here in 1960 investigating what happened to Amelia Earhart 23 years ago when all the time you Americans knew she was here and none of you lifted a finger to help her?
“What kind of people are you?” (End Strange Story of Interview #23)
Amelia Earhart Lives author Joe Klaas, who passed away in February 2016 at 95, was a pilot and World War II hero, a POW and a talented writer with 12 books to his credit. But sadly, Klaas fell victim to the insane delusion that Joe Gervais had birthed and spread to other witless sheep over the years, that New Jersey housewife Irene Bolam was actually Amelia Earhart returned from Saipan via the Japanese Imperial Palace in Tokyo, determined to live out her life in obscurity and isolation from her family — something Amelia was incapable of doing.
It was a shame, because the eyewitness interviews conducted by Gervais, Robert Dinger and the detectives on Guam and Saipan in 1960, on the heels of Fred Goerner’s arrival on Saipan, were some of the most compelling ever done. The above incident is another example of important witness testimony that most will never see.
If you’d like to get reacquainted with all the sordid details of the long-debunked, worm-eaten Earhart-as-Bolam myth, I did a four part series on this dark chapter of the Earhart saga, beginning with “Irene Bolam and the Decline of the Amelia Earhart Society: Part I of IV,” on Dec. 29, 2015.
Fred Goerner also interviewed Joaquina at length in 1962, and later wrote in The Search for Amelia Earhart, “Mrs. Joaquina M. Cabrera brought us closer to the woman held at the Kobayashi Royokan [Hotel] than any other witness.” See my April 17, 2018 post, “Revisiting Joaquina Cabrera, Earhart eyewitness“ and pages 101-102 of Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last for more on Goerner’s interview with Joaquina.
(Editor’s note: “I was surprised to learn what Joaquina did after she was interviewed,” Marie Castro wrote from Saipan just after this post was published. “But I can also understand Joaquina’s reaction to Gervais, it was out of frustration because of the way Amelia suffered as a detainee. Joaquina noticed the bruises around Amelia’s arm and neck, so did Matilde.)
As if we need more evidence that Smithsonian magazine is among the vanguard in the U.S. government-media complex’s ongoing program of deceit in the Earhart disappearance, the following is submitted for your information. (Boldface and italics emphasis mine throughout.)
On Aug. 2 a reader sent me the link to the Smithsonian’s July 31, 2019 screed, “Why the Much-Publicized Mission to Find Amelia Earhart’s Plane Is Likely to Come Up Empty,” subheaded, “The explorer who discovered the ‘Titanic’ is searching for the lost aviator. A Smithsonian curator doesn’t think he’ll find it.”
Here we have the incompetent advising the accomplished and misguided. Dorothy Cochrane, the Smithsonian’s Air and Space curator, has taken over from Tom Crouch as that institution’s selected mouthpiece about all things Earhart, but this is the same gibberish we heard from Crouch, and will continue to hear from the Smithsonian until Judgment Day. We know that the famed Bob Ballard, who found the Titanic, is out of his depth in the Earhart search, but we certainly don’t need an overpaid PR hack to tell us why.
The author of the current Smithsonian drivel, one Brigit Katz, writes that “Dorothy Cochrane, a curator at the aeronautics department of the Air and Space Museum, doubts that the upcoming expedition to Nikumaroro, will turn up any tangible signs of Earhart’s plane. It’s highly unlikely, she says, that Earhart and Noonan ever ended up on the island.”
Cochrane, who in a better world would be arrested for impersonating an Earhart expert, is right about that, but not for any legitimate or coherent reason. In her government-apologist role, Cochrane remains stuck back in July 1937, connected at the hip to the Navy-Coast Guard verdict that the Earhart Electra “landed on the water within 120 miles of Howland Island” — volumes of evidence to the contrary be damned.
As a trusted, highly placed representative of the U.S. establishment, that’s her story and she’s sticking to it, just as her predecessor so stubbornly did. But does the reality-challenged Cochrane really believe the garbage that she’s forced to disgorge by her masters, given, that is, that she’s ever read anything at all except her marching orders?
The “crashed-and-sank” canard, a natural assumption without a single trace of supporting evidence in 1937, was soon overwhelmed by evidence and events, including the 1944 discovery of the Earhart Electra in a hangar on Saipan, if not long before. “Crashed and sank” became so ludicrous and untenable by the mid-1980s that it forced the Powers That Be to commandeer the current Earhart lie, the only slightly less ridiculous Nikumaroro theory, dressed up as a “hypothesis,” by its TIGHAR proponents.
Unknown to most, the Nikumaroro fiasco is itself a third-hand idea initially conceived by famed inventor Fred Hooven, who presented his research paper, Amelia Earhart’s Last Flight at the Amelia Earhart Symposium at the Smithsonian Institute’s National Air and Space Museum in June 1982. Hooven called it the “McKean-Gardner Island landing theory,” but was later convinced by Fred Goerner that Amelia and Fred Noonan could not have possibly landed there. (See Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last, pages 56, 303 and 304 for more.)
Note also that unlike the National Geographic story touting Ballard’s upcoming visit to Nikumaroro, which mentioned Saipan in passing, the Smithsonian story assiduously avoids anything that hints at the hated truth.
Though Jerry Adler’s January 2015 Smithsonian cover story,“Will the Search for Amelia Earhart Ever End?,” attacked and attempted to undermine Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last with a flotilla of lies, at least Smithsonian editors referenced the book along with their litany of falsehoods. I responded appropriately, with a 5,000-word rebuttal, Smithsonian mag throws “Truth at Last” a bone: Says, “it’s possible . . . Campbell is on to something,” that I hope you will take the time to read, if you haven’t already.
The below was my second of three attempts to post my comment on Aug. 2, despite being convinced it had no chance for approval:
Why did you delete my below comment, as if I don’t know that you are among the leaders in the campaign to keep the masses ignorant about the truth in the Earhart disappearance. I think I’ll do a blog post about this. If you change your mind, you can delete this paragraph and post the original as sent. Fat chance.
The very idea of the “Earhart Mystery” in itself is one of the most enduring lies of the 20th, and now 21st century. Neither Nikumaroro nor Crashed and Sank have a shred of evidence to support them, while Earhart’s landing at Mili Atoll in the Marshalls and later death on Saipan are supported by mountains of evidence in the forms of eyewitness and witness accounts, letters, documents, and the words of three flag officers — Adm. Chester Nimitz and Generals Graves Erskine and Alexander A. Vandegrift — and much more, attesting to the presence and deaths of Earhart and Fred Noonan on Saipan.
For more, please see www.EarhartTruth.com
According to my Discus account profile, the above comment was in “Pending” status until about 7 p.m. Saturday night, Aug. 3, when it unceremoniously disappeared without explanation, as did the others. But on the afternoon of the next day, Aug. 4, the comments mysteriously showed again as “Pending.”
Monday, Aug. 5 has now passed and my comment has been pending for four days. Instead of rejecting my comments outright, the Smithsonian magazine editors have chosen to do nothing, a non-action that seems quite appropriate for these unsavory characters. While permanent pending status is the same as deletion or rejection, I do wonder how long they’ll wait before actually deleting it — like cowardly thieves hiding and waiting for the coast to clear. Or could this post shame them into finally approving it? Not if they have no shame, which has pretty well been established. Be sure I will keep you updated.
I’m not a lawyer, but it occurs to me that as a publication of the U.S. government, the Smithsonian magazine’s editors, by not allowing my comment to stand, are in direct violation of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The comment of publisher Doug Westfall, whose Special Books, a vanity press that has historically provided a platform for authors with certifiably crackpot ideas about the Earhart case, was allowed to stand. This isn’t surprising, since Westfall’s statement is an insipid, meaningless aside, promoting another lunatic fringe theory that only serves to militate against anyone taking legitimate research about the Earhart matter seriously. The Smithsonian magazine is quite happy to publish comments such as Westfall’s, as it makes their own propaganda sound less absurd:
I whole-heartedly [sic] agree. “They are looking in the wrong place!” (Salah to Indiana in Raiders of the Lost Arc [sic].) We published William Snavely’s book, Tracking Amelia Earhart — and he shows how she turned back and splash landed off Buka Island — see the map in this article. As well, he found a plane. Smithsonian Magazine published Snavely’s story in the January 2015 issue. Since then there have been two more dives.
So what? People go diving all the time. “He found a plane,” Westfall says, but he doesn’t tell you it wasn’t Earhart’s. Westfall has always been part of the problem, and neither he nor Snavely even bothered to put Tracking Amelia Earhart on Amazon.com, where 30 million books are available in the world’s largest book marketplace — such is their confidence in their unsellable fish wrapper.
Lies and Deceit: Thy names are Legion. Thy names are the American Media.
UPDATE: At about 3 p.m. Aug. 7, I see that my comments, all three, have gone up on the Smithsonian page. A considerate editor would have deleted two of them, because they are all the same with one slight exception, but consideration is the last thing I expect from them. I’ve now changed the headline on this post accordingly.
It appears that after 13 fruitless trips to Nikumaroro by The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR), the powers that be have finally decided to turn this tar baby over to someone who can bring real gravitas to the longstanding Earhart myths and lies. (Boldface and italics emphasis mine throughout.)
Ric Gillespie is out, Robert Ballard is in, and we can all now rest assured that the “Earhart Mystery” will be solved in short order. If you doubt this, I refer you to the National Geographic’s July 23, 2019 story: “Robert Ballard found the Titanic. Can he find Amelia Earhart’s airplane?” subheaded, “Ocean explorer Robert Ballard will lead a major expedition to the remote Pacific in hopes of discovering the famed aviator’s fate.”
With the same breathless tones that accompanied countless announcements that preceded so many of TIGHAR’s Nikumaroro boondoggles over the past 30 years, National Geographic’s “Now Robert Ballard, the man who found the Titanic, is planning to search for signs of the missing aviators. On August 7, he’ll depart from Samoa for Nikumaroro, an uninhabited island that’s part of the Micronesian nation of Kiribati. The expedition will be filmed by National Geographic for a two-hour documentary airing October 20.”
This is the same National Geographic Channel that produced and aired a much-anticipated (among some Earhart researchers) Amelia Earhart special in late 2006 to debut its short-lived Undercover History series, for which writer-co director Quinn Kanaly talked to me twice at length via phone. At my insistence, she took her crew to Woodbridge, Conn., to interview Robert E. Wallack about his summer 1944 discovery of the Earhart briefcase in a blown safe on Saipan, a segment that was included in the program that aired on Nov. 29, 2006, and which also depicted eyewitness Bilimon Amaron’s 1937 encounter with the fliers at Jaluit, as well as a thorough forensic debunking of the Irene Bolam-as-Amelia Earhart lie.
Only the slightest trace of that program can now be found on an Internet search, an IMDb entry that’s been swept clean of any meaningful information, as has the rest of the Internet. To see for yourself, please click here. Did National Geographic go to great lengths to cover the history of its past productions on the Earhart disappearance to protect the “credibility” of the current Ballard search? Just askin’.
Fox News, which has led the way in the Earhart deception business for several years now, followed the same day with their own story, and on July 26, a reader told me, “Ballard’s second in command was just on Fox News in studio with Harris Faulkner.” Another bunch allergic to the truth, Coast to Coast AM, did their part for the bad cause with their own story July 24.
In its July 23 story, National Geographic wastes no time, and starts right in with the lies that have so characterized the popular myths about the “great aviation mystery” for so many decades. In its lead paragraph, we’re told, “After taking off from Lae, New Guinea, in Earhart’s Lockheed Electra 10E, the pair aimed for tiny Howland Island, just north of the Equator. But they couldn’t find it, and despite many attempts, no one has been able to find them.”
“No one has been able to find them”? No one, that is, except the prewar Japanese on Mili Atoll and Saipan in 1937, Bilimon Amaron on Jaluit, Mera Phillip, John Tobeke and others on Kwajalein’s Roi-Namur, and many native Chamorros on Saipan that same year, beginning with the still-living Josephine Blanco Akiyama.
How about the numerous members of the American military, including Brig. Gen. Graves Erskine, during its summer 1944 invasion of Saipan, when the Electra was discovered in a Japanese hangar and was soon burned beyond recognition, according to several witnesses including Thomas E. Devine and Earskin J. Nabers? Sixteen years later, Fred Goerner and Joe Gervais found the fliers through numerous eyewitness and witness accounts, and soon Vincent V. Loomis, Don Kothera and other researchers added their own witnesses and findings to the growing volume of evidence, solidly establishing the presence and death of the fliers. The foregoing is just for starters. No point in going further here, when the entire content of this blog is devoted to these and so much more that attests to the hated truth.
National Geographic continued with its latest propaganda:
The National Geographic Explorer at Large brings a state-of-the-art research vessel, the E/V Nautilus, and extensive underwater expertise to this historic search. In addition to locating the Titanic, Ballard discovered the remains of John F. Kennedy’s World War II patrol boat in the Solomon Sea, the German battleship Bismarck in the Atlantic, and many ancient ships in the Black Sea, as well as hydrothermal vents near the Galapagos.
People have been looking for Earhart ever since she went missing. The U.S. Coast Guard and Navy scoured the area by ship and plane for two weeks. George Putnam, Earhart’s husband, enlisted civilian mariners to continue the hunt. Eventually the U.S. government declared that the plane had most likely crashed and sunk into the Pacific.
“Eventually”? How about within three weeks of the fliers’ disappearance, when the commanders of the Coast Guard Cutter Itasca and the U.S.S. Lexington group filed their search reports? Please see “The Search and the Radio Signals,” pages 38-59 in Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last for the facts without the hype.
The Ballard news is highly reminiscent of the clatter that surrounded the similarly hyped 2017 Nauticos search for the Earhart plane in the waters off Howland Island. Here’s how I began my March 27, 2017 post on that time waster:
One of the better-known definitions of insanity has been attributed to Albert Einstein, who described it as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” I wonder how many times it would take Nauticos, or the rest of clueless crashed-and-sankers to search the Pacific floor without finding the Earhart Electra before they admitted they might be wrong about what happened to Amelia and her plane. Based on past performances, the answer is, sadly, “Never.”
For more on my Nauticos post, see “Nauticos continues Earhart ocean-search insanity.”
It’s fair to ask why someone with Ballard’s impressive resume and fame is suddenly so interested in the rotten can of worms that the “Search for Amelia Earhart” has become, thanks to the ceaseless disinformation and distractions of the U.S government-media establishment.
We know, of course, that he is very much a highly regarded member of said establishment, and if you doubt that, here’s a YouTube video of Ballard’s remarks at a special event on March 20, 2012, at the U.S. State Department, announcing TIGHAR’s July 2012 expedition “to search for the remains of Amelia Earhart’s Lockheed Electra”: “Dr. Ballard endorses TIGHAR.”
We also know that Ballard won’t find anything at Nikumaroro, and so does he, unless he is far more uninformed about the Earhart disappearance than the average reader of this blog, which is just too much for me to bite off. As with nearly everything in this hard world, it’s always about the money, and Ballard is no exception, but does he really need the gelt so badly that he would purposely taint his legacy with the certain stain of failure in the phony Earhart chase?
(As an aside, for readers who don’t know me, this has never been about money for me, another reason why you can believe what you read here.)
Perhaps Ballard let his ankle show when he told National Geographic, “Maybe some things shouldn’t be found,” he says. “We’ll see if Amelia is one of them.”
The switch from Gillespie to Ballard indicates, at least to this observer, that this has latest machination from the establishment has the potential to be very big. Endless empty claims and wasted trips to Nikumaroro have stripped Gillespie of all credibility among the masses, but Ballard is an entirely different story, and most will believe him what he says uncritically.
Thus, the forthcoming Earhart disinformation operation is far more disturbing than the usual, as we wonder why the famed ocean explorer would allow his name to be associated with this transparent charade, proven over 30 years to be nothing more than a huge mendacity that even casual observers of the Earhart case are now sick of watching.
Further, and worse, would Ballard knowingly be a part of a scheme in which he would discover planted material on or off Nikumaroro? It might be a piece of an engine or something else that can somehow be plausibly, though briefly, linked to the Electra, something that they can make plenty of noise about, but which would ultimately fail, because we know where the ruined remains of the Earhart bird are buried — under the Saipan International Airport.
I don’t know, but at this point, after nearly 32 years of studying this story, nothing would surprise me, except seeing anything resembling the truth coming from anyone in our thoroughly corrupt national media.
This constant barrage of lies and misinformation is proving two things: One, the U.S. establishment remains committed to protecting the Earhart sacred cow and keeping the truth from the masses, and two, that they rightfully believe in the overwhelming ignorance and indifference of America to the Earhart disappearance. The comments below the story on Fox News reveal this fact, as they always do. Why do they even bother, then, when the few who actually care are in their dotage and dying daily?
Perhaps news of Marie Castro’s efforts on Saipan to build the Earhart Memorial Monument has created some small anxiety among the deep-state operatives responsible for managing the Earhart deception. These vermin understand that the memorial’s possible success on Saipan, as unlikely as it seems now, would bring more heat for disclosure to bear on Washington, something they want to avoid at all costs. Just a thought.
In light of Ballard’s forthcoming search, it might be an appropriate time to re-introduce readers, old and new, to the basic truth about the Earhart disappearance, by way of the Earhart Disappearance Position Statement I first presented in last year’s post commemorating Amelia’s final flight, “July 2, 2018: 81 years of lies in the Earhart case.” I’ve extracted and slightly edited the most germane paragraphs; to see the entire statement, just click on the blue link.
The very idea that the disappearance of Amelia Earhart is a “great aviation mystery” is among the most despicable of all the prevailing myths of mainstream American history. So effective have the U.S. government and its media allies been in creating, maintaining and protecting this straw man as the unquestioned narrative, that it has become a piece of our cultural furniture, a triumph of propaganda that would make even Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels proud.
Because of its universal acceptance by the gullible, incurious masses, the false phraseology “Earhart mystery” defines and dominates all public dialogue about the Earhart case, while the fact of Amelia’s wretched and unnecessary demise at the hands of the prewar Japanese on Saipan is ignored or labeled “conspiracy theory,” advanced only by and for the fringe conspiracy lunatics of society. Among our media – even our so-called conservative media – no story is as hated and demonized as the truth about Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan’s deaths at the hands of the Japanese on Saipan.
But in the deepest bowels of the U.S. government security apparatus, some are well aware of the fliers’ true fate, and they oversee and protect the physical evidence that would reveal the truth, known only to these scant few custodians of this precious evidence. I explain all this in my book and in my blog, and won’t go on at length here.
Discerning individuals who examine the popular Earhart “theories” soon find not a scintilla of evidence for either crashed-and-sank or Nikumaroro that doesn’t break down under the slightest scrutiny. Not a single artifact in a dozen trips since 1989 that’s been scrounged up from the Nikumaroro garbage dumps has been forensically linked to Amelia Earhart or Fred Noonan, despite the constant drumbeat of our corrupt media establishment telling us to buy this snake oil. Many of the ignorant and gullible have indeed bought it, much to their chagrin as they realize the Nikumaroro bill of goods is rotten at its core.
In fact, no real “theories” exist in the Earhart disappearance, as the word is properly defined. We have the truth — supported by several dozens of eyewitnesses, witnesses, documents, letters and other evidence — that Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan crash-landed in the Marshalls, were picked up and taken to Saipan by the Japanese, and died there at some unknown date before the American invasion in June 1944, likely as many as six years before the Battle of Saipan. Several small details remain unknown, most importantly the how and why behind the Electra’s Mili Atoll landing — but the big picture is lying in plain sight, as clear as the nose on Fred Noonan’s face, obvious to all but the blind and the agenda driven.
And we have enormous, transparent lies. First came the original crashed-and-sank myth born in 1937 with the Navy-Coast Guard’s search findings — briefly logical until quickly overcome by the facts — which finally became so ludicrous and unacceptable by the late 1980s that a new deception to distract the sheeple was necessary. Thus was born the current Nikumaroro virus, which continues to be the media’s default position, infecting virtually everything Earhart. Even most of the brain-dead are no longer fooled, but that doesn’t stop our media from continually trying to force this lie down our collective throats.
Just as they are doing now, courtesy of National Geographic and Bob Ballard. We’ll know soon enough if these miscreants are up to more than the usual high-tech dog-and-pony show, with much sound and fury going in and nothing at all coming out, empty as usual. I do hope that’s all it is, but we have a new player in this game, and we don’t know yet what he’s got up his sleeve. You’re welcome to check in here whenever the spirit moves you; I’ll do my best to keep you informed and up to date — and will never lie to you.
It’s late July again, when thousands of the uninformed flock to Atchison, Kansas for the annual Amelia Earhart Festival, where the “Great Aviation Mystery” is renewed and celebrated. The only questions the sheeple ask are whether Amelia’s Electra 10E crashed and sank off Howland Island or landed on Nikumaroro, where she starved to death, along with navigator Fred Noonan, on an atoll teeming with natural food and water sources.
I sometimes imagine that some of the benighted at these Atchison shindigs actually hope that, just maybe, she’s still flying around out there in the timeless ether, searching endlessly for a way back to 1937 America — an eternal, romantic enigma without solution. That may be an exaggeration, but it’s no stretch to say that wherever PC and groupthink predominate, as in Atchison, the hated truth is assiduously avoided, and can be found only in the darkest corners, where vile conspiracy theorists speak in hushed tones about the despised “Japanese Capture Theory” that so intimidates all but the boldest Earhart truth seekers.
Once again we’ve reached another Earhart birthday, this one Amelia’s 122nd. It’s hard to say how long America’s First Lady of Flight might have lived had her remarkable life not been so cruelly stolen from her by a wretched combination of circumstances that have yet to be fully understood, but I can’t imagine Amelia would still be with us at 122, though she would have given it her best shot, you can be sure.
Amelia came from hardy genes indeed, if her mother and sister were any indications. Grace Muriel Earhart Morrissey, of West Medford, Massachusetts, two-and-a-half-years younger than Amelia, died in her sleep on March 2, 1998 at the age of 98. Amy Otis Earhart, Amelia’s mother, was born in 1869 and died in 1962 at 93.
As is usually the case when Amelia’s birthday rolls around, the only Earhart-related news in America is about plans for more TV productions, more deceitful documentaries and specials by the true conspiracy theorists, who have only one goal in mind, besides ratings and dollars, of course, and that is to keep the same kind of gullible people who yearly flock to Atchison clueless about the truth. I will spare you the boring and meaningless details, which will be known and forgotten soon enough.
Amelia Mary Earhart was born in Atchison, Kansas on July 24, 1897 to Amy Otis and Edwin Stanton Earhart. Edwin, an itinerant lawyer and faithful husband, was also “a drunkard,” according to biographer Mary Lovell (The Sound of Wings, 1989), but Amelia’s childhood was nonetheless nearly idyllic.
Alfred Otis, Amy’s father, was a wealthy judge, and it was hard on the banks of the Missouri River in the home of Judge Otis and her grandmother, Amelia Josephine Harres, that Amelia came into the world.
Growing up in nearby Kansas City, Kansas, Amelia’s adventurous persona manifested early. Amelia (“Meelie”), and Muriel, or “Pidge” were close, “lived in reasonable comfort, unaware of any financial constraints” and were secure and happy despite occasional problems resulting from their father’s uneven professional life.
As we see in the early pages of another fine biography, Amelia, My Courageous Sister (1987), by Muriel Earhart Morrissey and Carol L. Osborne, Amelia was a consummate tomboy. At 7 she rode an elephant at the 1904 St. Louis World’s Fair and was fascinated by the small cars that sped around an aerial track, though her mother said it was too dangerous for little girls to ride them. Soon after the family returned home, Amelia enlisted her uncle Carl Otis to help her, Muriel and the boy next door build a makeshift roller coaster in their back yard, with its starting point at the top of the tool shed, eight-feet high.
When all the sawing and nailing of boards and tracks was complete, Amelia stuffed herself into a wooden crate for the first ride. “As it careened down the track,” Muriel recalled, “we heard the sound of splintering wood. The car and Amelia departed the track when the car hit the trestle. Both tumbled onto the ground. Amelia jumped up, her eyes alight, ignoring a torn dress and bruised lip. ‘Oh, Pidge’ she exclaimed, ‘it’s just like flying!’ ”
Amelia wasn’t moved when she saw her first airplane at the 1907 Iowa State Fair, in Des Moines, recalling it as “a thing of rusty wire and wood and looked not at all interesting.“ At 9, Edwin presented her with a .22 rifle “so she could clear the barn of rats,” much to the consternation of her well-to-do grandparents. “Don’t worry, Mother Otis,” Edwin told her grandmother. “This is really a very small rifle.” Describing their beloved father many years later, Muriel called him “loving, generous, impractical.”
For more on Amelia’s happy youth and the events that to her fateful meeting with Neta Snook, her first flight instructor, please see Chapter I, “Birth of a Legend,” pages 5-19 in Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last.
Back to the present, and a final observation. I find it greatly ironic that for the past two years the only significant news in the Earhart case has come from Saipan, where Amelia and Fred Noonan suffered and died so ignominiously. Here, as well, is our last living link to Amelia, 86-year-old Marie S. Castro, president of the Amelia Earhart Memorial Monument Committee, who daily wages a losing battle in her campaign to erect a memorial monument to the doomed fliers. If not for this blog and the two Saipan newspapers, not a soul in the United States would know about Marie and her quest to properly honor and commemorate the hapless duo at the site of their murders. For this sorry state of affairs we can thank our corrupt media, of course, which continues to dutifully cover up the truth in the Earhart saga, like the mindless, heartless little soldiers they are.
The uninformed, incurious and ultra-propagandized Saipan populace is either strongly against the Earhart Memorial Monument (see top right of this page for the architect’s model) or hopelessly indifferent. The former faction includes most of Saipan’s politicians, who can also be relied upon to bend to the popular wind, currently blowing stiffly in the wrong direction. Marie often finds herself surrounded by smiling faces who assure her of their support, but those who sincerely care are far too few, and as things look now and for the foreseeable future, it will require divine intervention before we ever see the Earhart Memorial Monument on Saipan. I sincerely hope I’m wrong, and will gladly admit it if the sentiment on Saipan ever turns in Amelia’s favor.
I’ve written plenty about Marie Castro’s work and will continue to do so. Although the Marianas Variety and Saipan Tribune have supported the AEMMI movement to varying degrees, fundraising from the United States has been very disappointing, and from Saipan it’s been far worse. Please see the Media Page of this blog for links to the newspaper stories; and for a complete list of all the posts I’ve done here since the institution of the AEMMI, please click here.
In any event, Happy Birthday, Amelia!
Today we begin where we left off — with the confusing concept (to most non-aviation types anyway, including your editor) of the “azimuth” and its application to the last flight of Amelia Earhart. Let’s take another look at the azimuth, as explained by our resident aviation expert, Calvin Pitts.
Calvin Pitts: It is easy to see why the non-navigator would find this Wikipedia drawing confusing. TRY THIS: Replace the N with E (for East). Go to the back of the picture 90 degrees on the horizontal plane beneath the word “Zenith,” and place the N.orth on the same plane as E.ast.
The Electra is flying East toward the rising sun. The direction from the “Observer” toward the E.ast, is 90 degrees from the N.orth on the horizontal plane.
On July 2, 1937, the crest of the sun broke above the eastern horizon at 6:15 Howland time. The Observer would be looking 23 degrees to his left when he first spots the sun at 67 degrees (90 – 23 = 67). That difference of 67 degrees from North (000 or 360) is called the “azimuth” on the horizon.
That azimuth, 67 degrees on the horizontal plane, is used to calculate a “sun line” overhead for navigational purposes. In this case, that imaginary “line” is perpendicular, or 90 degrees to the horizontal azimuth (90 + 67 = 157 or 157 + 180 = 337) (157/337 degrees) to an altitude overhead, and is called a “Line of Position (LOP).” That position defines the line on which the plane is flying, but it provides no “point” on that line. What it does is to define “directional” information, i.e. the plane is either flying NW or SE.
As the sun rises, it is moving toward the North on the horizontal plane. After 1+02 hours on that morning, it’s “azimuth” was now 66 degrees to the horizontal plane. There At that point, since there is no longer an azimuth of 67 degrees, correspondingly, there was no longer a 157/337 line of position. Since the azimuth changes, so does the LOP. It is now only an imaginary line. If the pilot chooses to fly a “heading” of 337 or 157 degrees, that’s fine. But to call it a “line of position” is a misnomer.
Hence, Earhart’s call at 8:43 a.m., 1.5 hrs after the 67 azimuth disappeared, referencing a “line of 157/337” confuses the ears which hear it. Did she mean a “line of position,” which no longer existed, or did she mean a “heading on an imaginary line running NW and SE”? No one can answer that question.
Unfortunately, the position she gave had no meaning for those on the cutter or elsewhere, because it failed to give the all-important reference point for computing her bearing. What the figures meant, and why they were incomplete, can only be guessed.”
(And there are some reasonable guesses available.)
An important point that should be noted is that the plane (sic) direction finder evidently was not working as well as it should for she could not cut in on the agreed frequencies.
“Agreed frequencies” was precisely the problem. There was no agreement, nor understanding of what those frequencies were meant to be. Earhart believed that she had made it clear through Richard Black and husband George Putnam, but somehow, somebody dropped the ball. Frequency incompatibility was the major problem on this leg of the flight.
Another fact that is perhaps of significance is that when Miss Earhart reported half-hour fuel — the Itasca estimated that she should have about four hours’ fuel supply.
Itasca had it right in that she had four to five hours of “contingency fuel” remaining.
It is probable that she barely had gas enough to reach Howland, although she thought she was there at 11:20 a.m. (wrong time) when she circled (wrong assumption) trying to pick up land.
Calvin: After studying, not just reading this book, Earhart’s Flight Into Yesterday: The Facts Without the Fiction, I am of the opinion it should be renamed with a subtitle: “The Facts are exceeded only by the Fiction.” It is literally filled with non-facts, a statement which can be substantiated by evidence. Other than its fiction, its facts are interesting and well-written. But by the time you wade through its fiction, you begin to wonder about its facts.
Conclusive proof then exists that the Earhart plane landed safely, or at least that its occupants and its radio apparatus were unharmed, somewhere on land in the South Pacific. If on an island, where and why were they not found?
There is proof that the Electra contacted the coral-covered ground without death to the crew. There is reasonable cause to believe that they made one or more radio calls while the battery still lasted. But more importantly, there is “conclusive proof” that we have known the why and the where for longer than the public has been led to believe.
There are two schools of thought about the disappearance of the Earhart plane. Each cannot be right.
Indeed, they are not. No greater misrepresentation could be made. There may be only two “elementary-schools” of thought, but there are “university-schools” where thought is generated by factual evidence which is substantial for anyone who has been awakened to the biased agenda of the Establishment, which, more often than not, is the Government’s answer to undesirable truth.
One is that the plane was lost at sea. The other is represented by this memorandum.
As to the first, is it not perfectly natural that even those closest and among the most dear to the missing flyers, with the evidence of the Navy search of the sea close to Howland Island, would prefer to think that the flight had come to an end — to avoid the lifelong torture of a question in their minds? (Creating facts to avoid a painful reality? Is that the way history is recorded?) The facts (sic) as related have been to intrude such a question. No comfort, then, could come from, and the mind would seek to shut them out, in favor of the peace that comes from resignation (also known as self-deception).
In an effort to reconstruct what might have happened, let us review the possibilities. We know that the Earhart plane was lost. (To whom? A non-fact.) The navigation had gone wrong. It is likely, even, that it was hundreds of miles (Not likely. A non-fact.) from the sea area near Howland which the Navy searched, and from the Gilbert group.
With little gas left (Proof? A non-fact.) and after circling (a non-fact) the area beneath them. what would experienced fliers do? No doubt they had passed many islands on the course behind them. Any pilot, under the circumstances, probably would have gone back to one of them and landed, relying on their radio and on searching parties for rescue.
Not if she had a minor mission-agenda which precluded that. This “buried” fact is the subject of a possible later posting, “My Earhart Scenario.”
THAT RESCUE NEVER CAME BECAUSE NO ADEQUATE SEARCH HAS EVER BEEN MADE.
Compiled from notes and copied in August 1939. Recopied from original February 2, 1948. (End of E.H. Dimity’s “Grounds for Earhart Search.”)
Editor’s close to Part II: The study of the alleged Earhart post-loss messages is one fraught with endless speculation and individual interpretation, even by the real radio experts who have written and pronounced publicly on the topic. I have no expertise in this area, and so have no problem presenting others’ work as clearly and objectively as I can. The statements and opinions are those of E.H. Dimity, presented for your consideration, education and entertainment, and are not necessarily shared by the editor.
Calvin Pitts: The “post-loss messages” are an unnecessary cloud over an already-difficult story, which is challenging and exciting on its own merit without a venture into hoax-land. It is possible that one or two of those messages were valid, but to give them credibility-without-proof is to weaken the greater truth which can, and should be allowed to stand on its own legs. Distraction is precisely the thing that feeds the Government’s Establishment gorilla. Other than this, it was a privilege to read what someone had to say in 1939.
P.S. There is a CAVEAT here: This critique addresses the misstatements relating to the official Itasca crew logs of AE’s Lea-Howland flight. The log used here is presented as “official.” However, suppose a scenario like this: A crewman made a personal copy in the interest of preserving history. Reading it, he notices an omission which should have been included. Knowing that the weather was “Overcast” for an extended period, he adds this missing word for the sake of clarity. His motive is good, but he has just corrupted the official record. He should have noted this on his copy, but he did not. His well-intended corrupt copy now gets copied and passed on.
We can’t say such a thing did not happen. But to our knowledge, there is no evidence that it did. Thus, our comments are based upon this copy of the log that was used. Additionally, there were other intercepts of Earhart’s transmissions that were heard by stations like Nauru which were not heard by the Itasca. Any additional sources such as this must be added to the story, properly identified. There were weather reports, correspondence, personal conversations, and after-the-fact interviews of various “players.” While they cannot be part of the Itasca records, they are additional and sometimes useful material. (End of “Calvin Pitts weighs in.”)
“There had to have been a copy [of the logs available] before this because Dimity makes too many references to its times,” Calvin wrote in an email. “What did he use in 1939?”
“Was he writing from Hawaii using that time zone?” Calvin continued. “Some of his information is 3.5 hours off, some four hours, some 1.5 hours out of sync with other known events, and at least one time was accurate. The 3.5 hour discrepancy could be answered, perhaps by looking at the time differences between Howland and Hawaii. And then, at 7:42 a.m., he strangely gets the time accurate. The inconsistencies in the errors are bizarre. Even Paul Briand in 1960 made many references to the logs, with times and recorded events.
“These question aside, Dimity’s ‘all-over-the-map’ times need to be red-flagged. Where was he living in 1939 when he wrote this? And what were his sources? What was his professional career? Another interesting page in the Earhart Saga.”
Editor’s final close: First, I want express my deep thanks and appreciation to Calvin Pitts for his passion and selfless efforts, and for another significant contribution to the Earhart record. We are truly blessed to have him as a friend.
At the end of the day, it does appear that Dimity did not have the official logs of the Itasca to reference in his treatise, nor did Paul Briand Jr. in 1960. But when were they released? I can’t find any record of the Itasca flight logs’ public release except references to Leo Bellarts’ sons, Leo Jr. and Dave, turning over the three pages of his father’s original Earhart flight log in 1975. In a Sept. 1, 2008 article titled, “KHAQQ CALLING ITASCA . . . “ in Wings over Kansas, we find:
Chief Bellarts kept the first three pages of the Earhart Flight Log plus other messages and pertinent information under lock and key. Upon arriving at his homeport (San Diego, Calif.) Chief Bellarts removed these documents thinking that there would be some type of investigation by higher authority and he would be called to testify. But this never happened. Thus, these papers, including the three pages of the original Earhart Flight Log, remained in his possession until his death in 1974. His two sons, Leo Jr. and David Bellarts donated these papers and other items concerning Amelia Earhart in 1975 to the National Archives in Washington D.C.
To read the entire story, please click here.
Since Dimity never mentioned his sources for his numerous citations of the log entrees, and it seems he could not have had the official logs, he probably relied on many news reports and other sources from the original search in July 1937, which naturally would have been inaccurate and “all over the map,” as Calvin says. If anyone out there can shed some light on this little mystery — i.e. when were the official logs released, if not 1975? — please let us know.