[Here
she be, The conclusion—A villain’s name is revealed! IF YOU HAVE NOT READ PARTS
1-3, well, it’d be silly to consume the blow that follows.
Parts
1-3 set the stage for what is the reality as compared with the hoax of the so-called
Devil’s Triangle.
The
origins of this hoax bear directly on a series of Frontier Historical volumes
that many use in good faith to inform their knowledge of early frontier ways, Early
American history, and combat matters.
While,
initially, the first three parts of this series may seem to be nothing more
than an exploration of the hallmark case of The Bermuda Triangle, but it has a
direct link to a blackmark on Frontier Historical Combat Research—practically
every resource I see on early tomahawk “fighting” and like Eastern Woodland
Warfare matters are implicated in this hoax. I know all this seems unrelated
but stay with me—the Warrior-Scholar will be rewarded. Now, dig in, as I’ve
been putting this together for a long time, a lotta work here and the
revelation, well, stay with me, you’ll see.]
“Science
must begin with myths and with the criticism of myths.”—Karl Popper,
Philosopher of Science
The Story Thus Far
·
27 men died the day
Flight 19 was lost.
·
All subsequent
military inquiries confirm pilot error + compounding weather effects.
·
Pilots within Flight
19 itself point to this as the causative factor.
·
Maternal and amital
love led to the military altering the record slightly to preserve the sensibilities
of two litigious women.
What the Story DOES NOT Say
·
There is no reference
to supernatural phenomenon that day from pilots, rescue crews, or crew on the
ground.
·
There are no anomalous
radar images pointing to some extraterrestrial involvement.
·
There is zero, absolutely
zero mention made of anything hoodoo like from any of the lost flight crews.
Quite
the opposite, nothing but mundane radio chatter and confusion over bearings.
The
events of Flight 19 occurred on December 5, 1945.
Flash
Forward 17 years to April 1962.
That
is the year American Legion Magazine published a brief article titled “The
Mystery of the Lost Patrol.”
The
article begins with this paragraph.
“On
December 5, 1946 a flight of five TBM Avenger propeller-driven torpedo bombers
took off from the United States Naval Air Station at Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
For all intents and purposes it was a routine patrol flight differing not in
the least from dozens of other patrol flights having originated there. This
particular flight, however, was destined never to be forgotten because it flew
directly into one of the greatest and most incredible mysteries in the history
of manned flight. A mystery no closer to being solved today than it was 16
years ago.”
Right
off the bat notice that the date is wrong by a full year. So much for accuracy.
But,
let us carry on.
Those last two sentences
in this opening paragraph are the beginning of the assertion that this was some
unsolved mysterious occurrence.
Nothing of the sort
was ever reported the day of the tragedy or in the 17 years that followed and
yet the author of the article assumedly peered into the record to say something
no one had ever said.
The article’s author
goes on to offer dialogue from the radio communication between the ground and
Flight 19.
Some of which we find
in the official transcripts and other bits of dialogue, well, it occurs nowhere
but in this article, only to go on and be trumpeted by other purveyors of the mysterious
who never bothered to go to the original source. Rather all decided that it’s
more fun to stick with the mysterious than go the extra five minutes to test
counter-factuals regarding the lives of 27 lost men and their grieving
families.
We are treated to such
made-up dialogue as…
"We cannot be
sure of any direction . . . everything is wrong . . . strange . . . the ocean
doesn't look as it should."
Again, the above is
not in the record, but our article author frames this as the beginnings of, “Ah,
something mighty mysterious is occurring!”
We are also treated
with this paragraph of fantasy…
“An immediate
investigation of the strange occurrence was made by the Navy. After exhaustive
study of the entire incident, the Naval Board of Inquiry reported in detail all
that had transpired and then summed up with this succinct phrase : "We are
not able to even make a good guess as to what happened."
I repeat that final
line: "We are not able to even make a good guess as to what
happened."
Sounds like a kicker for
a fine unsolved mystery.
The only mystery is
where this succinct phrase is found. The author claims it is in the official Naval
Board of Inquiry record.
It is not.
The author then goes
on to detail other “mysterious” losses within the Devil’s Triangle, all of
which [ALL] if one bothers to check the record have zero unknown circumstances surrounding
the losses.
In one single article
the author is constructing an entire myth of mystery out of thin air.
Perhaps feeling that
maybe this is all a bit too much he then adds a “source” for his material.
Wise to the fact that
anyone with a brain would want to check his story, he assigns the source a pseudonym
and cops to the fact that the source is not quite real—a composite-- then
switches from straight reporting to novelistic reconstruction. [This novelistic
reconstruction is important—stay with me.]
“Commercial pilots
unwilling to discuss the matter are even more unwilling to have their names
connected with opinions regarding such disappearances. Yet, most of them have
very strong opinions which are basically alike. In dozens of coffeecup
interviews, here's what a composite pilot—let's call him Captain Jimmy Drake —
had to say on the subject:”
Bullshit Scorecard Thus
Far
·
Incorrect dates
regarding the subject of your own article.
·
Manufactured dialogue claiming
to be from the official record. It is not.
·
Manufactured dialogue from
men who lost their lives. Despicable.
·
Claims of intrigue and
mystery where there are none.
·
And now, a fake source
created in novelistic form, complete with gestures and shakes of the head to
lend some sort of personal patina of reality to the BS “Captain Jimmy” will
spew.
Let’s hear from this
fake “Captain Jimmy.”
"There are a
great many things about this old world we don't know yet. Some- times when
you're way up there alone you get to thinking about it and you almost feel you
don't have a right up there, knowing as little as you do about things. A lot of
pilots have seen a lot of strange things they can't explain. If they attempt to
talk about them or report them, it damages their reputations. More than one
pilot has wished he'd kept quiet about what he saw."
“He shook his head.
"It's a sad state of affairs when you have to pretend you've seen nothing
unusual when you've actually seen things that've raised your hair…
“He looked up sharply.
"Let me tell you something. There are plenty who don't believe it and who
can't understand why it's considered such a loss of face to admit something has
happened that we can't comprehend and have no control over. But, we just keep
on flying and hope we won't be next for whatever it is."
Boy, this fake captain
Jimmy---What a guy!
All fake, all bullshit.
Cobbled together to
sell an article.
To put cash in pocket.
Lies on the backs of
the lives and memories of dead men.
The author of this
piece that spawned a thousand dishonesties: Allan W. Eckert.
The Frontier Combat
Research Connection
Eckert went on to
become the author of several books of frontier history.
The titles include The
Frontiersmen, The Wilderness Empire, The Conquerors, Gateway to Empire, Twilight
of Empire, The Dark and Bloody River, Blue Jacket: War Chief of the Shawnees,
and A Sorrow in Our Heart: The Life of Tecumseh.
Why do these titles
matter to our exploration of the originator of The Bermuda Triangle lies?
Each of these volumes
opens with the following Author’s Note:
“This book is fact,
not fiction.
“In ferreting out the
truth of history, the researcher finds that some of his most important sources
are documents of any nature written during the historical period of which he
intends writing. And when, on rare occasions--more rare the further back in
history he digs--he encounters material written and dictated by the very people
about whom he intends to write, it is indeed a windfall.
·
Hmm, so our manufacturer
of lies ensures us that this time he’s telling the truth.
·
This time he’s got his
facts correct.
·
This time he’s playing
above board.
[Recall our resort to novelistic
techniques in the American Legion piece? Eckert goes on to say…]
“In order to help
provide continuity and maintain a high degree of reader interest, certain
techniques normally associated with the novel form have been utilized. but in
no case has this been at the expense of historical accuracy.”
·
Really?
·
This all sounds familiar
somehow.
·
How close does the
author tend to hew to the truth?
“It should be borne
in mind, then, that where the dialogue takes place in this book, it is actual
quoted conversation from another source, or dialogue constructed in the matter
above described, or in a few scattered instances--historical fact utilized in
the form of conversation to maintain the dramatic narrative pace. In no case
has there been any “whole cloth” fabrication or fanciful fictionalization.”
·
We are further assured…
“Equally, every
incident described in this book actually occurred; every date historically
accurate; every character, regardless of how major or minor, actually lived in
the role in which he is portrayed.”
So, Did the Bermuda Triangle
Myth Perpetrator Turn Over a New Leaf?
Did he change his ways
from the Bermuda Triangle Myth he concocted in 1962 to 5 years later when he
takes on the monumental task of being “historically accurate” for thousands of
pages of “history”?
Well, I am a historical
researcher myself and I avidly inhaled Mr. Eckert’s “historical” work decades
ago and marveled at how he could marshal such resources.
I thought to myself, I
need to be as comprehensive.
My first step in being
comprehensive in my own work is to make sure it is accurate. I must confirm my own
work only AFTER attempting to Disconfirm it.
That is how science is
done.
That is how real history
is done.
I took the confirmation/disconfirmation
tool to Mr. Eckert’s work to assemble a collection of his marvelously exact resources
to have as treasures in my own library.
What I discovered is… Well,
you can guess, much like the Bermuda Triangle work, much of it is non-existent,
and that which does exist, very little of the details in Mr. Eckert’s work
match the selfsame sources he touts.
Much like the Naval Board
of Inquiry records, if you have the spare time, you can check.
I checked.
Not the First to Notice
I am not the first to notice
Mr. Eckert’s prevarications, there are researchers Larry Kusche, Jerome Clark
and a host of book reviewers offering such observations as Kirkus Reviews
calling his “narrative biography” “an apparent euphemism for poetic license”
and "in its interpretative zeal … strays from … the historical record
to the point of being suspect."
It seems, the Kirkus
Reviewer was being kind.
What they chalk up to
zeal, we know from examining Eckert’s Bermuda Triangle work are not mistakes of
zeal but pure OD fabrication of the lowest order.
Historical Research
To be a credible researcher
one should read much, gather much, visit sites, marshal experience, synthesize
material and before we confirm, we must seek to disconfirm.
Mendacious ones such
as Mr. Eckert lead many down wrong paths through sheer deceit.
Others who follow Mr.
Eckert down paths do less so out of deceit than placing trust in the wrong
guide.
To that I offer my
signature sign-off in bold:
Resources for Livin’
the Warrior Life, Not Just Readin’ About It
All historically accurate and viciously verified!
The
Black Box Warehouse
https://www.extremeselfprotection.com/
The
Indigenous Ability Blog
https://indigenousability.blogspot.com/
The
Rough ‘n’ Tumble Raconteur Podcast
