Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Will the History Channel Eat Crow?
Sat Jul 22, 2017 23:10

A day after the History Channel aired their recent special on Amelia Earhart, I read that a military history blogger discredited that alleged photo of Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan in the Marshall Islands. The Japanese blogger found the photo after searching for just 20 minutes.

He said he found the very same picture in a Japanese coffee table book published in 1935, two years before Amelia and Fred took off on their ill-fated trip.

All of a sudden, the History Channel got quiet.

They certainly whipped-up the emotions of a lot of people on this planet.

The History Channel states that they care about history, and that they will be "transparent."

And the photo may stll be legit, but if the History Channel "experts" are indeed wrong, will they eat crow and publicly admit that they were wrong?

Could YOU admit if you were wrong about the Lindbergh case, no matter if you currently believed Hauptmann was guilty or if you think he was railroaded?

Psychobabble or responding in a hormonal way has no place in this case.

Only one scenario is the truth in this case or in any other case.

Your credibility is lost when you throw everything including the kitchen sink into the Lindbergh case.

    • Re: Will the History Channel Eat Crow?steve for sue, Mon Jul 24 10:00
      I discredit the photo also and I cant be wrong about the Lindbergh case to much evidence against hauptmann
    • Dark CornresRichard E Sloan, Sun Jul 23 09:36
      I learned an awful lot about every single element about the case from Mr. Melsky's book. I learned that everything and everyone is suspect. So it hasn't solved a darn thing for me -- yet. To quote... more
      • Re: Dark Cornressteve for rich, Mon Jul 24 10:02
        I don't believe Lindbergh had any involvement in the case. its so silly in a live debate these hauptmann was a great guy books don't cut it for me
      • Re: Dark CornresMichael For Richard, Sun Jul 23 16:03
        The whole idea was to reveal new facts and information so that one could apply them to whatever they already know then draw their own conclusions. I've sometimes given my opinion where I had to, but... more
        • overpriced editorsbob mills for michael, Fri Jul 28 04:59
          Michael, if you haven't hired an editor yet for Volume II, I'm a former freelance editor for Reader's Digest Illustrated Trade Books. Since moving to Florida I've handled projects for local retirees, ... more
          • Lost your contact infoRonelle to Bob mills, Wed Aug 2 15:44
            Bob (Or anyone else) My email address is
          • Re: overpriced editorsMichael For Bob, Mon Jul 31 20:46
            Thanks Bob. I will keep the offer in mind. Once the book came out I got a slew of offers from a lot of people who thought I didn't have the book edited. So it looks like I have someone already, and I ... more
          • overpriced editorsSam for Michael, Fri Jul 28 14:34
        • Re: Dark CornersJoe for Michael, Wed Jul 26 11:22
          Michael, by who's estimation does it become obvious that the crime took place at 8:00 pm? I would hope that no one will be "angered" if you were to present an excellent reason to demonstrate this,... more
          • Re: Dark CornersMichael For Joe, Wed Jul 26 17:59
            It's in the book. I suppose one could disregard the Conovers and the Moores eyewitness accounts. I suppose one could disregard Parker's conclusion based upon his investigative skill which, up to this ... more
            • Re: Dark CornersJoe for Michael, Thu Jul 27 08:01
              What's in your book is anything but conclusive as it relates to this account. Both Moore (at about 8:25 pm) and the Conover's (6:30 - 6:45 pm) saw a non-descript car in the dark, presumably both... more
              • Re: Dark CornersMichael For Joe, Thu Jul 27 18:06
                "Conclusive" is a strong word. How about what "common sense" suggests? What I think you are doing is ignoring what I wrote on page 1. Consider that people noticed cars and for what reasons they did.... more
                • dialogueRichard E Sloan, Wed Aug 2 00:16
                  Please keep this dialogue going, Joe and Michael. It is thought provoking. You both have interesting views and suspicions. Thanx for starting this. I sue hope you will want to continue it and remain... more
                • Re: Dark CornersJoe for Michael, Sun Jul 30 10:40
                  I'm not ignoring anything that you've written in your book, that I've tried to understand and process. And that in itself can be anything but straightforward, given the nature of your style of... more
                  • Re: Dark CornersMichael For Joe, Mon Jul 31 20:09
                    My style of presentation is to list the facts then let the Reader decide what those facts represent. As far as spelling mistakes or "then/than" types of mistakes - I don't see how something like that ... more
            • Re: Dark CornersMichael For Joe con't, Wed Jul 26 19:26
              You're curious about my interpretation in the morgue? I've rec'd email from people accusing me of lying about this FACT. That's how insane what he did there was. I know you like the guy but nothing... more
              • Re: Dark CornersAnonymous, Thu Jul 27 08:37
                Yes, I am curious about your interpretation of his actions within the morgue, with respect to your belief that he participated in the disappearance of his son, and you didn't answer the question. No... more
                • Re: Dark CornersMichael For Joe, Thu Jul 27 18:13
                  There is no rational explanation for how Lindbergh treated his son's corpse. None. He wasn't even needed for that identification and insisted on going - which was the only reason he was there.... more
                  • Re: Dark CornersJoe for Michael, Sun Jul 30 10:55
                    What's not real life, but is unfortunately practiced far too often in this world, is when someone attempts to impose his or her own personal code of fundamentalist morals and behavioral standards as... more
                • Re: Dark CornersJoe for Michael, Thu Jul 27 08:39
                  My apologies, as I meant to address this Joe for Michael.
        • Dark CornersRichard E Sloan, Sun Jul 23 21:22
          I get the distinct impression that you are indicating that there are enough "facts" to suspect that Lindy was involved in his son's death. Can we believe those people you show were liars and... more
          • Re: Dark CornersMichael, Mon Jul 24 06:44
            What I think is that once the totality of the real circumstances are presented we must take notice. Of course Whited is a dubious witness. Over the years no one but those who believe Hauptmann 100%... more
            • millard whitedbob mills for michael and forum, Mon Jul 24 11:55
              A liar whose own family couldn't trust him denies having seen anything suspicious on the day of the kidnapping. Two-and-a-half years later, having been offered a share of the reward money, he... more
              • the caseRichard E Sloan, Tue Jul 25 09:32
                Whether guilty or innocent of kidnapping, murder, or extortion, Wilentz's witnesses included liars, charlatans, and unethical handwriting experts who have to be entirely stricken from OUR record... more
                • Re: the casesteve for rich, Wed Jul 26 12:53
                  how can you ever say the handwriting experts were unethical. they wernt witnesses. what about hauptmanns witnesses? talk about jokes
                  • "experts"Richard E Sloan, Thu Jul 27 09:32
                    handwriting experts are notorious for testifying for whoever pays them. SOme of Reilly's experts were jokes, and PUBLICLY the Osborns were NOT in agreement at first. ANd you do know whose "expertise" ... more
                • witnesses to a railroadingbob mills for richard and forum, Tue Jul 25 12:56
                  Don't know if Lindy can be blamed for Wilentz' use of Hochmuth and Whited. Schwarzkopf let Lindy run the investigation in the early stages, but by the time of the trial the ball was in Wilentz'... more
                  • Lindy on BrunoRichard E Sloan, Wed Jul 26 08:36
                    Hi, Bob. Sorry you couldnt make it to our BX reunion back in May. We had a blast. You last stated that Lindy reversed himself on his ID of Bruno. Please tell me to what you are specifically... more
            • Re: Dark Cornerssteve for mike, Mon Jul 24 10:05
              you know mike when he was questioned by the police about certain things he told stupid alibis that were corny so why the police would believe that crap like the board in the closet and some of his... more
    • the non-history channelbob mills for sue and forum, Sun Jul 23 04:39
      Don't expect them to eat crow, Sue. They follow a new line of thinking, get debunked, then move on to another story without comment. In "Conscience of a Conspiracy Theorist" I devoted a chapter to... more
  • Click here to receive daily updates