OK, so I'm going to add some data just to keep it interesting.
When I'm not building airplanes I'm an amature forensic historian, so I thought it might be fun to look at bit closer at the "debunk". BTW...those guys are usually FOS.
I'll begin by saying that I did not watch the History Channel special, I don't have television. I did however read all of Yoichi Shimatsu's white papers on this subject, and listened to a two hour interview featuring Sihimatsu. I still have that interview, and the white papers archived.
Shimatsu addresses the claim by debunkers putting the 1935 publishing date up as evidence.
Analysis Below By Yoichi Shimatsu
7-19-17
The mainstream media involved in denying the validity of a photograph taken of a Amelia Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan on a dock at Japanese Navy-controlled Jaluit Atoll cite only one bogus claim for “debunking” that telltale evidence: That the photo is a page from a “book” published in “1935”, two years before Earhart’s disappearance.
*
These debunkers overlook the fact that the disputed photo was never reproduced in book form but was inserted into a photo album produced at the Japanese militarist spy center in Palau, at the colonialist South Sea Agency (Nanyo-cho). That photo collection was deliberated back-dated to avoid detection in case of interception by a Pacific Islander still loyal to former colonial power Germany or spies working for the Australian or Dutch intelligence services. At the time the photo was taken, nearly six months after her disappearance, those Western intelligence agencies were cooperating with the U.S. effort on an intense regional search for the missing pilot.
*
To accept at face value such a dubious date stamped by a known colonialist intelligence service is similar to how a tourist can proudly wear a $40 gold Rolex bought from a street vendor in Hong Kong or Bangkok. This sort of buffoon wants to be deceived and actually thinks he’s fooling others. Go back to Atchison, Kansas, you clodhopper, where your neighbors might actually impressed.
My Observations
I followed the CNN link to the "book".
http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/1223403/99?itemId=info%3Andljp%2Fpid%2F1223403&contentNo=99
The photo is a very large, but over compressed file that compromises much of the detail. What I noticed right away were three problem areas.
First, the number on the page was not in Japanese, but a western typestyle.
Second, both the page number and text show a very definite affinity masking artefact that only surrounds the text, but does not appear on the paper around the print.
Third, there is a blueish color, interlacing throughout the apparent mask layer.
The photo is digitized and manipulated, so there goes the providence for accurate dating.
The fact that there are three questionable aspects to the photo give me reason to question it's authenticity. I would want to see the book or negatives.
This data supports Shimatsu's argument that the photo was actually injected into the record to obfuscate the real story.
The arguments made by the Mashable and CNN offer some reasonable conjectures, but they remain conjecture. In Shimatsu's analysis, the question is raised that the US may have been using the Amelia Earhart attempt as a data gathering exercise. Remember, in 1937 Japan was still an ally of the United States and the detaining or execution of an American citizen would have been a huge political blunder. Wars start that way.
Another interesting aspect of the photo. There appears to be a second airplane, this one on the forward deck of the tramp steamer at the left side of the photo. What this indicates, I have no idea but it is very interesting.
I don't really have any real interest in this story, but I detest debunk sites for their cavalier and grossly inaccurate and generalized "reporting". If you really want to get me going...point to Snopes as a source for anything.
Following debunk sites, I have even less regard for media news sites, particularly the aforementioned CNN.
One final little detail. I've relied on Yoichi Shimatsu for quite a few years now to provide comprehensive, well researched and vetted data. I have a large collection of his various white papers, and trust his established credential.
The Earhart story will always be a mystery, so these considerations are merely that...considerations.
I've offered this data in the interest of filling out the story a bit, and providing some tantalizing data for those who enjoy perusing the minutia.
IMO.
