• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Inside the Bermuda Triangle

I couldn't find anywhere him addressing the missing navy flight squadron. I think I had heard that they found the planes where they crashed or at least had found some unidentified planes that were pretty intact. Can anyone shed some light on that for me?
 
leon_heller said:
Journalist Tom Mangold has a BBC Radio 4 series running this week in which he debunks the various theories about the so-called Bermuda triangle:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mjpcq

Leon
Click to expand...

It has been an excellent series so far - really urge everyone who is interested in seeing a sound investigative approach to the myth of "The Bermuda Triangle" to try and listen to it.

What is really refreshing is that this is not a "have to present a balance" style investigation, it is one that follows the evidence and forms conclusions based on the evidence.
 
jakesteele said:
I couldn't find anywhere him addressing the missing navy flight squadron. I think I had heard that they found the planes where they crashed or at least had found some unidentified planes that were pretty intact. Can anyone shed some light on that for me?
Click to expand...
According to Wikipedia: "In 1986, the wreckage of an Avenger was found off the Florida coast during the search for the wreckage of the Space Shuttle Challenger. Aviation archaeologist Jon Myhre raised this wreck from the ocean floor in 1990. He was convinced it was one of the missing planes, but positive identification could not be made. In 1991, the wreckage of five Avengers was discovered off the coast of Florida, but engine serial numbers revealed they were not Flight 19. They had crashed on five different days 'all within a mile and a half [~2.4 km] of each other.' Records showed training accidents between 1942 and 1946 accounted for the loss of 94 aviation personnel from NAS Fort Lauderdale (including Flight 19.) In 1992, another expedition located scattered debris on the ocean floor, but nothing could be identified." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_19
 
Darat said:
It has been an excellent series so far - really urge everyone who is interested in seeing a sound investigative approach to the myth of "The Bermuda Triangle" to try and listen to it.

What is really refreshing is that this is not a "have to present a balance" style investigation, it is one that follows the evidence and forms conclusions based on the evidence.
Click to expand...
Very much agree. I am pleased it is continuing next week.
 
What's to debunk? Isn't even the basis of all the myths - that more planes and boats disppear in the Triangle than elsewhere - itself a myth?
 
jakesteele said:
I couldn't find anywhere him addressing the missing navy flight squadron. I think I had heard that they found the planes where they crashed or at least had found some unidentified planes that were pretty intact. Can anyone shed some light on that for me?
Click to expand...

I have read the board of enquiry into the incident and two range finders had the flights position fixed. The problem was they could not communicate this information to the flight leader

The saddest part of the incident, they were actually on course to complete the training flight when they thought they were lost.
 
Safe-Keeper said:
What's to debunk? Isn't even the basis of all the myths - that more planes and boats disppear in the Triangle than elsewhere - itself a myth?
Click to expand...

In one of the programmes, the Thursday one I think, Tom Mangold talks to the author of a new book which appears to be trying to revive the 'mystery'; the book is full of, wel, extremely dodgy 'facts' it seems! I have just tried to find the title by googling, but could not do so. I think the author's name was something like croissard.
 
Safe-Keeper said:
What's to debunk? Isn't even the basis of all the myths - that more planes and boats disppear in the Triangle than elsewhere - itself a myth?
Click to expand...

The rate of loss in the triangle is among the highest in the world. Rather than metaphysical reasons it is soley based on the fact the area is one of the most highly travelled areas in the world
 
MG1962 said:
The rate of loss in the triangle is among the highest in the world. Rather than metaphysical reasons it is soley based on the fact the area is one of the most highly travelled areas in the world
Click to expand...

I think that's the point Safe-Keeper was making - the rate of loss isn't any higher than anywhere else, it's the absolute numbers that are high simply because there are more things there to be lost.
 
jakesteele said:
I couldn't find anywhere him addressing the missing navy flight squadron. I think I had heard that they found the planes where they crashed or at least had found some unidentified planes that were pretty intact. Can anyone shed some light on that for me?
Click to expand...

Best. Skeptic. Book. Ever.

Right there in the cream of the crop for required reading, along with Flim Flam! and Demon Haunted World. And it's 35 years old.


He examines all available data, including all the original data, the official reports, and so on, and finds out that, even though there are a few odd mysteries still, almost every single case is not mysterious whatsoever.


The famous Navy flight was a training flight, and the trainer was confused, thinking they were over the Gulf of Mexico when they were, in fact, out over the Atlantic. Hence his strategy to fly north-ish was pretty stupid. They ran out of gas and ditched together.

Then a search plane sent to rescue them disappeared -- and it was a model that was known for blowing up due to fuel fumes in the tank, or something.


The Bermuda Triangle book hawkers deliberately don't tell you these things. That's the real key point of this book. "Here's the actual, known data."
 
Beerina said:
Best. Skeptic. Book. Ever.

Right there in the cream of the crop for required reading, along with Flim Flam! and Demon Haunted World. And it's 35 years old.


He examines all available data, including all the original data, the official reports, and so on, and finds out that, even though there are a few odd mysteries still, almost every single case is not mysterious whatsoever.


The famous Navy flight was a training flight, and the trainer was confused, thinking they were over the Gulf of Mexico when they were, in fact, out over the Atlantic. Hence his strategy to fly north-ish was pretty stupid. They ran out of gas and ditched together.

Then a search plane sent to rescue them disappeared -- and it was a model that was known for blowing up due to fuel fumes in the tank, or something.


The Bermuda Triangle book hawkers deliberately don't tell you these things. That's the real key point of this book. "Here's the actual, known data."
Click to expand...

I read this when it was first published. It is an excellent example about how to analyze Woo beliefs -- GO BACK TO THE SOURCE DOCUMENTS and do not depend on tellers of tall tales.

One of the other nice things about it is that it usually filed alongside the Woo books in bookstores and may, just may, convert a few who buy it by mistake. ;)
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
I read this when it was first published. It is an excellent example about how to analyze Woo beliefs -- GO BACK TO THE SOURCE DOCUMENTS and do not depend on tellers of tall tales.

One of the other nice things about it is that it usually filed alongside the Woo books in bookstores and may, just may, convert a few who buy it by mistake. ;)
Click to expand...
"To my knowledge there was no public hint of alcohol associated with Flight 19 until 1980, when Larry Kusche sought to extricate the flight from the clutches of UFOs and the Bermuda Triangle. In doing so, he unintentionally introduced a theory based on the worst and unchallenged hearsay, typical of his clumsy style of examination . . . Although Kusche was not remotely trying to label [Lieutenant Charles C.] Taylor as a drunk, his indiscriminate wanderings on rumors has caused Taylor and the Navy some of its worst injuries. The image he left of a careless pilot is equally groundless. Georgia and Whitney Lowe, Taylor’s sister and brother-in-law, freely gave him, a man who called them friends, family papers, pictures and stories, only to receive in return a book that characterized C.C. Taylor according to second and third hand rumors, vague 35 year recollections, and then fingered him with the blame. Thus ended the friendship." See http://www.bermuda-triangle.org/html/flight_dui.html

"Some of the worst misinformation, sadly, originates with the only author who was able to publish a book entirely devoted to Flight 19. This was Lawrence Kusche who wrote The Disappearance of Flight 19 in 1980, the culmination of his years of 'research.' The book, furthermore, was promoted as being written by a man who 'set new standards for investigative reporting on popular subjects.' This becomes a ghastly canard when Kusche’s numerous false statements are brought to light, the reason for which seems merely to undermine the 'legend' and the 'sensationalists' and to find something elemental, if not simple to blame. This superficial approach to the subject was fraught with as much inaccuracy as the sensationalistic. See http://www.bermuda-triangle.org/html/bad_navigation_.html
 
When I first heard about Flight 19 when I was a kid, the thing that clinched it in my mind back then that it was "spooky" **** was the supposed last transmission from the squadron. It was reported that they said something to the effect that their compasses were going bonkers and they saw green/white sea or something and were freaking out like they had seen monsters.

Does anyone know what they last transmissions and was it anything that could be remotely construed as "spooky" ******
 
Rodney said:
"To my knowledge there was no public hint of alcohol associated with Flight 19 until 1980, when Larry Kusche sought to extricate the flight from the clutches of UFOs and the Bermuda Triangle. In doing so, he unintentionally introduced a theory based on the worst and unchallenged hearsay, typical of his clumsy style of examination . . . Although Kusche was not remotely trying to label [Lieutenant Charles C.] Taylor as a drunk, his indiscriminate wanderings on rumors has caused Taylor and the Navy some of its worst injuries. The image he left of a careless pilot is equally groundless. Georgia and Whitney Lowe, Taylor’s sister and brother-in-law, freely gave him, a man who called them friends, family papers, pictures and stories, only to receive in return a book that characterized C.C. Taylor according to second and third hand rumors, vague 35 year recollections, and then fingered him with the blame. Thus ended the friendship." See http://www.bermuda-triangle.org/html/flight_dui.html

"Some of the worst misinformation, sadly, originates with the only author who was able to publish a book entirely devoted to Flight 19. This was Lawrence Kusche who wrote The Disappearance of Flight 19 in 1980, the culmination of his years of 'research.' The book, furthermore, was promoted as being written by a man who 'set new standards for investigative reporting on popular subjects.' This becomes a ghastly canard when Kusche’s numerous false statements are brought to light, the reason for which seems merely to undermine the 'legend' and the 'sensationalists' and to find something elemental, if not simple to blame. This superficial approach to the subject was fraught with as much inaccuracy as the sensationalistic. See http://www.bermuda-triangle.org/html/bad_navigation_.html
Click to expand...

No one is perfect and maybe all that Kusche reports in The Disappearance of Flight 19 is absolutely and completely wrong (reading the the above article only refutes the claim of possible drunkenness) but The Bermuda Triangle Mystery - Solved stands on its own as an example of research and logical thinking.
 
jakesteele said:
When I first heard about Flight 19 when I was a kid, the thing that clinched it in my mind back then that it was "spooky" **** was the supposed last transmission from the squadron. It was reported that they said something to the effect that their compasses were going bonkers and they saw green/white sea or something and were freaking out like they had seen monsters.

Does anyone know what they last transmissions and was it anything that could be remotely construed as "spooky" ******
Click to expand...

The green ocean was disturbing because, they thought they were in the Atlantic, which if I correct has a much lower algae bloom that time of year, so they should have been seeing the classic grey blue ocean.

In terms of spooky there is one mystery no one has ever figured out. Sometime after the flight had to have ditched. A brief mayday was recieved from a plane with a call sign from the flight. Opinion is divided over the source, some say it was a hoax, others that at least one of the planes made it down into the ocean intact and its crew was indeed still alive
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
No one is perfect and maybe all that Kusche reports in The Disappearance of Flight 19 is absolutely and completely wrong (reading the the above article only refutes the claim of possible drunkenness) but The Bermuda Triangle Mystery - Solved stands on its own as an example of research and logical thinking.
Click to expand...
No, it stands as an example of someone who had his mind up before he started and then did a half-baked job of research, selectively reporting facts. Forget about Flight 19, let's consider the mysterious 1918 disappearance of the USS Cyclops, with 306 hands on board. See http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/c/cyclops.htm. Kusche devotes a number of pages to this famous incident, but because of his bias and inadequate research, arrives at a conclusion inconsistent with the facts. First, at p. 53, he informs the reader that "the ship was bound for Norfolk* . . ."

"* The destination has sometimes been given as Norfolk, sometimes as Baltimore."

Had Kusche bothered to do more than cursory research from newspaper accounts, he would have discovered that the Cyclops was definitely bound for Baltimore, not Norfolk. See, for example, http://bermuda-triangle.org/html/cyclops_pg2_.html. So why does Kusche claim Norfolk? Because, he argues, a storm off the Norfolk coast on March 10, 1918 is what sank the Cyclops, and a sunken ship discovered off the Norfolk coast in 1968 "might very well be the Cyclops." (p. 64). Accordingly, Kusche "confidently decided that the newspapers, the Navy, and all the ships at sea had been wrong, and that there had been a storm near Norfolk that day that was strong enough to sink the ship." (p. 61). Kusche then congratulates himself for discovering information about this storm, which "was quietly tucked away in the Weather Bureau's statistics sheets where it would remain undiscovered for fifty-six years." (p. 63) Kusche also maintains that, "contrary to public opinion, there never was an inquiry into the disappearance" of the Cyclops (p. 63).

So what's wrong with this picture? Almost everything. First, Kusche was evidently unaware that his speculative hypothesis had been proposed 45 years earlier in the June 1929 edition of Popular Science magazine. In an article titled "Strangest American Sea Mystery is Solved at Last", Alfred P. Reck also claimed that the March 10, 1918 storm off the Norfolk coast had sunk the Cyclops. See http://books.google.com/books?id=XS...r=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q="new ice age"&f=false (article begins at page 15). Reck argued that a ship called the Amalco passed within five miles of the Cyclops north of Norfolk on March 9; however, as Gian Quasar discovered when he examined the voluminous records of the naval inquiry into the disappearance of the Cyclops -- an inquiry that Kusche maintains never took place -- the Cyclops was not due in Baltimore until March 13, and so would have been well south of Norfolk on both March 9-10. See http://bermuda-triangle.org/html/skepticism___the_triangle.html (Reck also misspelled the name of the ship -- it was actually the Amolco; see July 27, 2005 post of "shipwreck" at http://boards.history.com/topic/Deep-Sea-Detectives/Uss-Cyclops/100033294&start=30

What of the sunken ship discovered in 1968 off the Norfolk coast? "A different wreck was located and nothing resembling the Cyclops was found." See June 16, 2005 post of "goindwn" at http://boards.history.com/topic/Deep-Sea-Detectives/Uss-Cyclops/100033294&start=30

In summary, Kusche's account of the disappearance of the Cyclops not only brings nothing new to the table, it misleads his readers into thinking that he solved a long-standing mystery because of his diligent research when, in fact, that research failed to uncover either the June 1929 Popular Science article or the extensive naval inquiry into the ship's disappearance. If Kusche had a more open mind and done his homework, he would likely have echoed the official Navy statement about the disappearance of the Cyclops:

". . . The disappearance of this ship has been one of the most baffling mysteries in the annals of the Navy, all attempts to locate her having proved unsuccessful. Many theories have been advanced, but none that satisfactorily accounts for her disappearance . . ." See http://bermuda-triangle.org/html/cyclops_pg3.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom