Disappearance of Amelia Earhart

[n4gix]

Hello Ganter,

Here is a piece of the image I downloaded a few weeks ago.
I do not see the bracelet you describe though I do see an artifact of some kind around the dark object immediately behind.

- Ivan.

Ivan, it really doesn't matter, since the photo was published in a Japanese book in 1935, some two YEARS before Amelia's flight in 1937...

In fact, if you check the Expanded Metadata, this is what you will find regarding that book's photograph:
Publication Date (W3CDTF fortmat) (issued:W3CDTF)1935

 

[gman5250]

Hello Gman5250,

I downloaded a 5000 x 3000 resolution copy of the image being discussed and although I see something on the deck of the ship to the left, I cannot conclude that it is an aeroplane. I can't conclude that it is NOT an aeroplane either for that matter.
Do you have a better copy of the photograph?

I was about to dispute your assertion that Japan was an ally of the United States in 1937 but in your latest post, we seem to be in pretty good agreement.
.......

If you downloaded the photo from the Japanese link, you most likely have the same image as the one I examined.

If anyone is interested in following the link to the data questioning the dating, and origin of the photo, I can provide that. If there seems to be a consensus that the Shimatsu research is irrelevant, I'll refrain from further commentary.

 

[lownslo]

Japanese Blogger Points Out Timeline Flaw In Supposed Earhart Photo:

Bill, in post #9 Gordon offers some compelling testimony countering the 1935 publication date of the photo/book.

In the end, though, this claim of Earhart sitting on a dock after going missing in the Pacific expanse holds as much allure for me as the story concocted by Joe Gervais and Joe Klass claiming Earhart was alive and well and living in New Jersey as Irene Bolam. https://earharttruth.wordpress.com/tag/joe-gervais/

Don't even get me started on TIGHAR!

Greg

 

[Ivan]

Ivan, it really doesn't matter, since the photo was published in a Japanese book in 1935, some two YEARS before Amelia's flight in 1937...

In fact, if you check the Expanded Metadata, this is what you will find regarding that book's photograph:
Publication Date (W3CDTF fortmat) (issued:W3CDTF)1935

Hello n4gix,

The problem with "Metadata" is that it is a creation and assignment after the fact as are the digital images we exchange so readily.
Keep in mind that in 1935, the electronic digital computer was many years in the future as were digital images, so how reliable can this assertion of metadata be?

Some things are a bit harder to dispute such as the vessel that is in the photograph and its movements. This has actually be a topic of discussion on the J-aircraft site though I get lost very easily since I do not read Japanese.


Hello lownslo,

I have actually followed the TIGHAR claims longer than this latest photographic evidence.
I believe their claims are reasonably compelling though not conclusive.
What is it that you dispute in their claims? (Other than the idea that they keep coming up in the news without having added anything substantial recently.)

- Ivan.

 

[lownslo]

Other than the idea that they keep coming up in the news without having added anything substantial recently.

Yep, Ivan, that's pretty close. They've created a cash flow machine and have proven quite good at getting folks to feed it.

Greg

 

[n4gix]

Bill, in post #9 Gordon offers some compelling testimony countering the 1935 publication date of the photo/book.

Oh I see now. Somehow I'd missed that when reading the wall of text in post #9. Thanks Greg. I'll withdraw then since I don't have a pony in this race anyway.