AP/ December 17, 2010, 3:30 PM

Amelia Earhart Mystery Solved? Bones Examined

FILE - In this 2005 file handout photo provided by the Gross family, Alan and Judy Gross are seen in Jerusalem. A lawyer for Gross, a Maryland man imprisoned in Cuba for more than two years says his client's health is worsening and that country is withholding the results of medical tests performed on him there. (AP Photo/Gross Family, File)

FILE - In this 2005 file handout photo provided by the Gross family, Alan and Judy Gross are seen in Jerusalem. A lawyer for Gross, a Maryland man imprisoned in Cuba for more than two years says his client's health is worsening and that country is withholding the results of medical tests performed on him there. (AP Photo/Gross Family, File) / Anonymous

Updated at 1:45 p.m. ET

Three bone fragments found on a deserted South Pacific island are being analyzed to determine if they belong to Amelia Earhart - tests that could finally prove she died as a castaway after failing in her 1937 quest to become the first woman to fly around the world.

Scientists at the University of Oklahoma hope to extract DNA from the bones, which were found earlier this year by a Delaware group dedicated to the recovery of historic aircraft.

"There's no guarantee," said Ric Gillespie, director of the International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery in Delaware. "You only have to say you have a bone that may be human and may be linked to Earhart and people get excited. But it is true that, if they can get DNA, and if they can match it to Amelia Earhart's DNA, that's pretty good."

The remains turned up in May and June at what seemed to be an abandoned campsite near where native work crews found skeletal remains in 1940. The pieces appear to be from a cervical bone, a neck bone and a finger.

But Gillespie offered a word of caution: The fragments could be from a turtle. They were found near a hollowed-out turtle shell that might have been used to collect rain water, but there were no other turtle parts nearby.

"This site tells the story of how someone or some people attempted to live as castaways," Gillespie said in an interview with The Associated Press. Bird and fish carcasses nearby suggested they were prepared and eaten by Westerners.

"These fish weren't eaten like Pacific Islanders" eat fish.

Lab officials said results of the tests could take week or months.

Gillespie has been traveling to the site since 1989 but acknowledges there's been little progress toward solving the Earhart mystery. It did not help that bones and a sextant box found three years after Earhart's disappearance disappeared themselves after being sent to Fiji.

"It's like science. You take the information you have and formulate a hypothesis, but 9? times out of 10 you turn out wrong, then you go through the whole thing again - but you're closer," Gillespie said.

Anthropologists who had previously worked with Gillespie's group suggested that he ask the University of Oklahoma's Molecular Anthropology Laboratory to try to extract DNA from the fragments for comparison to genetic material donated by an Earhart family member.

Cecil Lewis, an assistant professor of anthropology at the lab, said the university received a little more than a gram of bone fragments about two weeks ago.

"I think it's best to talk about more when we have something say about it," Lewis said. "Think how disheartened people will be if it's just a turtle bone."

Gillespie said the group had tried to test possible genetic material recovered during a 2007 expedition, but a Canadian lab was unable to extract DNA from dried excrement.

Other material recovered this year also suggested the presence of Westerners at the remote site on Nikumaroro Island, 1,800 miles south of Hawaii:

• Someone carried shells ashore before cutting them open and slicing out the meat. Islanders cut the meat out at sea.
• Bottoms of bottles found nearby were melted on the bottom, suggesting they had been put into a fire, possibly to boil water. (A Coast Guard unit on the island during World War II would have had no need to boil water.)
• Bits of makeup were found at the scene. The group is checking to see which products Earhart endorsed and whether an inventory lists specific types of makeup carried on her final trip.
• A glass bottle with remnants of lanolin and oil, possibly hand lotion.

Some evidence has suggested that Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, landed on the island, but, Gillespie said, "we are constantly agonizing over whether we are being dragged down a path that isn't right."

Still, the island is on the line Earhart planned to follow from Lae, New Guinea, to Howland Island, which had a landing strip and fuel. Gillespie, a pilot, said she would have needed only about 700 feet of unobstructed space to land because her Lockheed Electra would have been traveling only about 55 mph at touchdown.

"It looks like she could have landed successfully on the reef surrounding the island. It's very flat and smooth," Gillespie said. "At low tide, it looks like this place is surrounded by a parking lot."
© 2010 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
13 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
thetruthwillout says:
What's all the mystery about? Earhart died when her plane went down. Whether she died as a castaway on an island or she went down with the plane, what difference does it make at this point in time? What is the importance of it? If it is her bones, then what? Do we search the island for clues on how she may have survived how many years ago? I just don't see the importance of this. What bothers me is that this is probably one of the special interest grants that are given out by the government. That means the taxpayers are essentially footing the bill to find out what happened to Amelia Earhart. And who cares?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bajajohn1 says:
If all these items and bone fragments were found, then are there any parts of the plane anywhere?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
askagain says:
There is nothing like jumping the gun. The bone fragments haven't even been tested and they may be from a turtle yet the tirle leads one to believe that Amelia Earhart has been found.
reply
formrusmcsgt replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
It's called "begging the question".
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Harden_Tar says:
Human or turtle?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
formrusmcsgt says:
Amelia Airheart was an amazing woman, indeed. Especially so considering the time in which she lived and the roles women played in society at the time.

How irnonic an end, indeed, for Amelia if she actually ended up living and dying isolated as a castaway as a result of her wishing to open doors for women.....
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Jaylah54 says:
In a way, I kind of hope the bones are just a turtle.

I guess I'd rather Amelia crashed at sea and died instantly, than dying slowly on a remote island, always hoping for a rescue that never came.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
thomm1961 says:
What has happened to the media? Amelia Earhart Mystery Solved!!!?? Oh it's probably just a turtle. What a waste of time and space.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
dagrandma says:
I hope it"s Jimmy Hoffa.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frkingz says:
I have an idea. Work with me here.

If and when they determine that the bone fragments are Amelia Earhart's and not a turtles that will be news. What is in the article is not news. It is an excuse to put a headline on the website that will catch people's attention and persuade them to click on it and therefore generate ad money for CBS.

And to answer the question posed by the title of the article, no mystery not solved. Some bone fragments found at a campsite could be from some person or they could be from a turtle. We'll get back to you with another eye catching headline soon!
reply
bikelegs2 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Gotcha!!! LOL What a sucker!!
bikelegs2 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
As you noticed but failed to comprehend is that it is a question. Your comment is treating it as a question and a statement.
See all 13 Comments