“A check of Lloyd’s of London’s accident records by the editor of Fate in 1975 showed that the triangle was a no more dangerous part of the ocean than any other. U.S. Coast Guard records confirmed this and since that time no good arguments have ever been made to refute those statistics. So the Bermuda Triangle mystery disappeared, in the same way many of its supposed victims had vanished.”Fact 1
This is completely false. Lloyd’s does not insure the smaller stuff, so all yachts and aircraft go unreported in statistics. Lloyd’s also seldom insures the smaller charter and private aircraft, so likewise for them. Lloyd’s obviously does not insure military craft either. Thus their stats would have no mention of them. Lloyd’s is not the ultimate source. It is not a marine investigation bureau. It reports on sailing news relevant to insurance.
The Lloyd’s information, aside from being incredibly obsolete, is also a false comparative. The enigma of the Bermuda Triangle is that more ships and planes vanish in fair weather than other seas. Lloyd’s reported for Fate’s editor that 428 vessels were reported missing between 1955 and 1975 around the world, and this did not show a greater concentration in the Triangle than anywhere else. Yet there is no breakdown how many vanished in fair and in foul weather. No one remotely familiar with the Triangle’s actual enigma would even see relevance in the number since the comparative must be between the number of vessels lost in fair weather.
Nor do the unqualified stats tell us anything of individual circumstances. It is actually these more than mere stats on paper that have built up the Triangle’s enigma. To dismiss the Triangle on shallow stats and broad numbers would be as irresponsible as investigators dismissing intriguing murder cases such as Jack the Ripper or The Zodiac’s spree because London and San Francisco did not have a higher percentage of murders than other cities.
Those who still use this 36 year old unqualified stat reveal that they cannot even handle properly the first 2 Process Skills of Scientific Inquiry— Observe & Classify.
US Coast Guard SAR (Search and Rescue) statistics for all districts are published yearly in a thick voluminous report. This details the statistics for calls of assistance, causes of accidents, weather, deaths, conditions, whatever. These are far more accurate in determining the danger of each specific area of ocean. The 1st Coast Guard District (off New England) is particularly tumultuous. The Coast Guard answers about as many calls for assistance there as in the 7th District (the Triangle). But the number of disappearances are vastly disparate. To be honest to scientific classification we must differentiate between an accident, which implies wreckage, and a disappearance, which implies none.
“Missing vessels” are not even included in Coast Guard stats for a very good reason. None of them are sure if the boat really vanished, was stolen, or is merely full of boatniks who cannot fathom the importance of keeping in touch with land bases. In some cases they may be in a far-flung port partying it up oblivious to the fact they have been reported to the Coast Guard as missing.
In reality, the designation Overdue Vessels is more important. But because it is hard to determine the number of people on board and exactly where the vessel last was, stats cannot be maintained with any reliability. Even “overdue” cannot be easily calculated. They may be categorized under “aused by other factor,” if at all. The last time I received a full printout of “overdue vessels” from the 7th District was 8 years ago (as of July 28, 2011). It covered the 2 fiscal years of 2001 -- 2002. About 300 vessel names or types were on the list. It was up to me to start a search to see which reported back to port, what the weather conditions were like, etc. This is a daunting task, and it is certain neither Lloyd’s nor the Coast Guard has done it. It is not negligence on their part. It is something merely beyond practicality to do. I myself received this list after 12 years of asking for and being denied missing vessel statistics, always receiving the reply “Nobody tracks such statistics.” When I wanted more, the Coast Guard was ready to charge me out the wazoo to cover man hours. I declined. There are better and cheaper ways to track missing vessels, especially with other boaters reporting friends and acquaintances overdue at sea. Thus I never bothered to get such overwhelming and tenuous lists again.
The Coast Guard is not even capable of accurately determining the numbers, and therefore could never have conducted a study. Part of Myth Number 1 probably originates with a Coast Guard comment on the popular notion that 20 aircraft and 50 ships are missing in the Bermuda Triangle in the last 100 years, as of the 1970s. That number was bandied about incessantly since the 1970s and it is still in the Encyclopedia Britannica. This number is not extraordinary for 100 years, though it is more aircraft than elsewhere over seas.
NTSB database searches reveal that in the 1990s alone only a handful of aircraft disappeared off New England while over 20 have happened in the Triangle. These are American statistics only, and do not reflect other nationalities. Altogether, probably about 150 aircraft have vanished since World War II.
Then there are those who claim the disparity is due to the Triangle’s greater amount of traffic. In reality, the 1st Coast Guard District answers about just as many calls for assistance as the 7th, but the number of disappearances is still remarkably different. Similar traffic and trouble, but a disappearance is still a different matter.
“Investigations to date have not produced scientific evidence of any unusual phenomena involved in the disappearances. Thus, any explanation, including so-called scientific ones in terms of methane gas being released from the ocean floor, magnetic disturbances, etc., are not needed. The real mystery is how the Bermuda Triangle became a mystery at all.”
Not only utterly false, but actually stupid. One would have to witness a disappearance in order to determine what was directly involved. This has obviously not be done, and such a comment, as a result, is a lame one. There have been NO scientific expeditions to investigate the overall Triangle. Independent people, often possessing degrees in one of the sciences, have made their own, sometimes truncated study. Most have produced some very interesting discoveries. Dr. A.J. Yelkin’s study revealed unexplained magnetic deviations during phases of the Moon. Dr. Zink’s observations at Bimini revealed unexplained magnetic variations in the compass at the precise time each year in early August (consistent in some ways with Yelkin’s theories). Wilbert Smith’s studies revealed areas of “reduced binding” in the magnetic field that came and went. Dr. David Pares of the U of Nebraska, is currently gathering data. But as for any scientific expeditions into the Triangle to take readings or tests or to see if something would happen, none has ever been done.
Questions and Hypotheses are mandatory steps in the Process Skills of Scientific Inquiry which together comprise Scientific Method. Therefore no hypothesis can be considered unnecessary if it is based on genuine observations and comparative analysis . Q&H are required before the final two points can be engaged in: Experimenting and Model Building. Anybody who employs the term “science” as in Myth 2 is really only using some concept of established order to bolster their own uninformed popularist point of view.
“In short, the mystery of the Bermuda Triangle became a mystery by a kind of communal reinforcement among uncritical authors and a willing mass media to uncritically pass on the speculation that something mysterious is going on in the Atlantic.”
Wrong. And the acrimony is hypocritical since that is how the first 2 myths above became established, usually by debunkers spreading “communal reinforcement” that they have evidence by having no evidence or that the status quo as experienced by suburban America is the ultimate interpreter of experiences.
In 1492, shortly before making land in the West Indies, Christopher Columbus recorded in his ship’s log that he and his crew had observed a large ball of fire fall into the sea and that the ship’s compass was behaving erratically.
False. That happened shortly after leaving the Canary Islands. The erratic compasses readings were recorded thrice while in the Sargasso Sea and Triangle.
“The Bermuda Triangle mystery is answered with latest science- - static electricity is the culprit, not 4th dimensional hogwash— that a severe electrostatic charge on the human body and in turn in the central nervous system and the brain is the cause for the human pilot to lose consciousness. This unconscious state happens both in astronautics and aeronautics and has also been observed and recorded in the Bermuda Triangle aviation disasters. The Bermuda Triangle is a static electricity exchange place. The Bermuda Triangle is on [sic] of Earth’s places where natural electricity is neutralized.’
False. The effects of the Earth as a weak driver is interesting and the subject of some studies, as well as over water locations where it might affect electromagnetism. But there is absolutely no evidence for static electricity in the Triangle cases, as claimed above. The claim that there was is utterly untrue. No pilots have been reported to pass out. How could you tell in a disappearance anyway? This originates with a man named Peter Staheli. He accepts the old and defunct lines attributed to Charles Taylor, the leader of Flight 19, “everything is strange, wrong” etc., and so forth. This gives you an idea of his research methods. Electromagnetic and electrical effects in the area are being studied by others right now, with far better research methods than those that sponsored Staheli’s strange dogma.
Since Staheli never really gave reasons for his conclusionary comments, his views cannot even rate the level of natural logic, which is defined as conclusions that are supported by the reasons one gives.
Lt. Charles Taylor, the leader of Flight 19, was actually a lazy slob, a drunk, and a careless navigator.
This rubbish stems from Larry Kusche who was all over the place in his 1980 book The Disappearance of Flight 19 which he wrote between two of his other stellars on how to scientifically pop popcorn. I cannot answer for what was in Kusche’s mind, but I would consider the result akin to clear victimization, as well as misrepresentation. I suggest the reader delve into my tome They Flew into Oblivion (shameless plug). As far as I am concerned there is nothing worthwhile in his book. I have criticized his methods in The Bermuda Triangle Mystery— Solved, but still recommend it. However, with Disappearance I see no reason. There is no mystery why in the last 31 years it was never republished.
“ The majority of disappearances can be attributed to the area’s unique environmental features. First, the “Devil's Triangle” is one of the two places on earth that a magnetic compass does point towards true north. Normally it points toward magnetic north. The difference between the two is known as compass variation. The amount of variation changes by as much as 20 degrees as one circumnavigates the earth. If this compass variation or error is not compensated for, a navigator could find himself far off course and in deep trouble.”
False. The Agonic Line— the area of no difference in calculation— moves over time as the axis of the magnetic field slowly changes in response to the Earth’s rotation. It is now approaching the middle of the Gulf of Mexico— as far as debunkers are concerned far outside of the Triangle. Disappearances, however, continue to occur in the same areas within the Triangle as they have for decades— i.e. the Bahamas and off the east coast of the US. Compass variation was, obviously, never a factor. Myth 7 above, taken from the old Coast Guard opinion circa 38 years ago is obsolete. They have now updated it and removed the above statement.
You receive money to do this. You are not a professional researcher, nor do you have a degree in Bermuda-Triangleology. Since you are not a “who” according to this standard, all of the evidence you present must be dismissed.
ED. All right, maybe a little bit of that is tongue-in-cheek, but it captures the acrimony of one detractor on the web who calls himself Tobias Gibson, a man who seems to promote himself and his degree in Research as giving him an edge on the Triangle, though he seems to have little knowledge of what has transpired in the last 35 years. His research, degree or no, translates down to having watched a couple of PBS videos and to having read a couple of 35 year old books, as his bibliography testifies.
Fact 8 Suffice it say, I am usually not paid for my appearances on TV. A couple of times I’ve received an honorarium of 500 bucks. Wow! My web site has cost me over $8,000 smackerals since I put it up in March 1999. There is very little paid advertising, no pop-ups, and these are only in the last year (as of July 28, 2011). At the time of the above comment I had none whatsoever. I’ve estimated that my web site has cost me over 8,000.00 dollars. One BBC reporter basically implied I was stupid in how I managed my value. He’s probably right. The $8,000.00 bucks above is compounded by travel and research coasts. To give you a small idea of what my actual costs ultimately amount to, the documents relating to the USS Cyclops cost me $500.00 dollars alone, and that is only one case out of hundreds that I have official documents on.
ED. Another myth perpetrated by this spinmeister about me, a man who propagates many falsehoods on his web site, conjures up a frightful picture of what his reading comprehension must be like. The following myth is courtesy of this man and his inability to realize people take their reputations seriously.
Bermuda-Triangle.Org description according to Tobias Gibson:
“is by far the best and most comprehensive site that purports the myths around the Bermuda Triangle. The journalist who does the page claims to do it as a hobby but seems to have connections with many cable channels that continue to purport the myth. The author also likes to trash this site and Larry Kusche’s book. Still, it is a very useful site. He has sections devoted to all the major theories. Unfortunately, the theory that weather and nature are the culprits is the one section he has yet to develop (as of March 27, 2001).
He has a low opinion of this site because it is on Tripod and I don't pay for it to be on the web (I’m not sure how this makes my site inaccurate or flawed). He also claims it is easier to just debunk a myth rather than support or create one. The site has lots of pretty pictures, many of which are glorified icons for sponsors (I’m not sure how this differs from a Tripod Banner Ad) and may load slow but is definitely worth a look, despite the difference in opinions.”
ED. Senator Alan Simpson once publicly declared: “An attack unanswered is an attack believed. Let people know who you are and what you stand for.”
For over a year I have not taken this sound advice. I have refrained from replying to his innuendoes or directly correcting the numerous outright errors his site contains for the reason he seems eager to promote my website’s purpose as designed to “trash” his opinion site. By yielding to a rebuttal I was afraid this might help him promote the idea he likes to cultivate: that he is the reigning expert on the subject warring against the mass of sensationalists and mythmakers. This unenviable image would be relatively inoffensive were it not for his weak attempt to create it at my expense. Mercifully, he does not seem to impress a large audience, as his sluggish odometer previously testified before, like the missing in the Bermuda Triangle, it recently mysteriously vanished as his site underwent a move from near defunct status to another server, befitting its move downward in the search rankings. This site claims to have been up since 1995, but its odometer never reached 100,000 hits.
Such misrepresentations as he makes in these comments, couched as a bibliographical statement of his sources, are hardly surprising considering the quanta of inaccuracies and misrepresentations he makes in his site altogether. Most of what he claims as myths are the result of poor reading comprehension, a limited scope of knowledge on the subject, and a predisposition to berate anything outside his own personal suburban experience. His “facts” in response to these “myths” are either bumbling error or pure exaggeration and fabrication. It is time, I think, that I finally respond to this mythmaker.
My site is loaded with actual pictures of people, the vessels, planes, and of the Triangle. Out of 180 pages or so, I have about 4 banners on the whole site. His statement shows he did not browse the site at all, or he is an outright prevaricator. As far as I can tell, he saw some of my answers in answering confused surfers. Their questions reflect their confusion after browsing his confused site. I was correcting the mistakes quite unaware of their origin. He translates this as trashing his site. His site was not mentioned.
I do not create myth, nor do I support it. I have stated it is easier to mock a subject (debunk) than it is to do the actual research, expend time, money and effort to locate documents and interview people.
Myth 11: According to Gibson: The latitude and longitude of the Triangle are “Before ‘creative license’ takes over”:
NW edge, Bermuda: 32.20 N, 64.45 W.
SW edge, San Juan: 18.5 N, 66.9 W
NE edge, Miami: 25.48N, 80.18 W
As most of you noticed, who are neither brain dead nor had the one-day-lobotomy operation, Bermuda is not in the NorthWest of the Triangle, nor is Miami in the SouthEast, nor is San Juan in the SouthWest. Bermuda is NorthEast edge of the Triangle, Miami is SouthWest, and San Juan is SouthEast.
According to Gibson: The Sargasso Sea has nothing to do with the Bermuda Triangle. It is entirely east of Bermuda, just “take a peek at any globe.”
It is hard to image such cross-referencing having as its provenance a Masters in Research. After reading my correction in Q&A he apparently modified the above statement: “The Sargasso Sea has really little to do with the Bermuda Triangle except a portion of its boundaries lies within the Triangle.”
ED. When reading Gibson it is clear that analysis does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with research.
Most myth supporters like to plot Bermuda as centrally located within the Sargasso; this is not the case. However proponents of the myth will then expand the dimensions of the Triangle to include the area of the Sargasso Sea, having the uninformed assume that the two are synonymous. In reality, by doing so they have more than doubled the size of the triangle, while still leaving one with the impression that everything occurred within the original boundaries.
Fact 13: Complete exaggeration. I know of no such “most myth supporters.” I know of only one map, and that is on my site, courtesy of the National Geographic. We must assume that the NG are “myth supporters” since they show the Sargasso Sea encompassing Bermuda, as it does in reality, though this may not be reflected on Gibson’s household globe.
The Sargasso Sea and the Island of Bermuda, courtesy of the
ED. His comment shows his style of exaggeration— one map on my site becomes “most myth supporters.” No writer, whether Berlitz, Winer, Spencer, Gaddis, Godwin, Sanderson, or Burgess, ever left their reader in doubt about the fluid shape of the “Triangle,” and always clarified the differences in opinion before discussing the missing. All their books are still available in used book stores or online at ABE, etc., and the surfer can buy them cheaply. One wonders what “creative license” Gibson is using when, to bolster his claim of authority on the subject, he makes the nebulous statement he “lived in and about the area for 10 years” but does not say where— and considering his unusually pedantic view on the strict shape of the Triangle, he would have to have lived off shore Miami or in the Bahamas to have qualified. “About” or “around” the area does not count to him if it’s a disappearance, but he uses this same generalization when trying to give himself an edge as an authority on the “Triangle.”
One may assume this “creative license” was responsible for his claims of having investigated the Triangle for 20 years, which he now admits started when he was a kid; of having lived in the area for 10 years, though by his own criterion for disappearances he probably did not. What constitutes “investigate” also seems subject to his “creative license.” His site bibliography proves he has done nothing in excess of having watched a couple of videos and believed word-for-word Larry Kusche’s 36 year old book.
Being unable to explain people’s encounters with electromagnetic phenomena and weird atmospheric aberrations, he once again misrepresents these as “paranormal” experiences, and then fabricates a scientific response.
“While scientists can assure them that nothing strange actually happened, they will cling to their belief that something truely [sic]strange happened. For them the Bermuda Triangle is as real as the air we breathe. This isn’t actual proof in the existence of the Triangle but unfortunately their strong belief is shamelessly used my [sic] the perpetrators of the myth.”
No sailor or pilot reporting these went to any scientific personnel for an explanation except Frank Flynn. And all the oceanographers he spoke to were at a loss to explain it. No one who ever experienced unusual encounters with “electronic fog” claimed it was supernatural or paranormal. Many such stories were cataloged by the late Dr. J. Manson Valentine, but I suppose he is not a “scientific authority” since he did not debunk them out-of-hand like Gibson.
Gibson’s dictated explanation is another pure
“Most if not all of the so-called mysteries are no more than over-active imaginations.”
Gibson never spoke to any of them and has no way to determine this. His claim that scientists have done so is, again, pure myth.
“ . . .if an aircraft crashes *into the water* and then is submerged, the ELT signal will not be heard since the ELT is submerged, so the effect is, as you note, that it is quite difficult to find a plane that has crashed into the water.”
ELTs, as most any aviator knows, are designed to float. They are contained in the fuselage and jettisoned by the force of impact. His former statement that they sink with the plane because they are in the seat must have been inspired by some vague knowledge of military automatic alarms. These are contained in fighter pilot seats and triggered by ejection. Since one does not eject from the seat of a civilian aircraft, the ELT is placed in the fuselage. He altered his statement after reading my Q&A answer to a confused surfer. He now claims ELTs merely sink with the plane.
ED. What the hell is the point in having an automatic alarm that is designed to be destroyed with the aircraft?! His 20 years of aviation interest and “all things nautical” never got him near a plane or he never would not have made such an exaggeration to apply that to all aircraft.
His ideas on the size of the Triangle:
- Consider these sizes:
According to the Myth, the Bermuda Triangle is anywhre [sic]from 600,000 square miles to 1,500,000 square miles of ocean. The Sargasso which is almost entirely outside of the Triangle is over 2,000,000 square miles of ocean.
ED. Again, anything outside the shape and size he wishes to give the area, based on Gaddis’ article in 1964, is his criterion for determining “myth.”
However, the 1,500,000 square miles is directly referencing me and my article 500 Leagues of Sea. This Master in Research apparently has never read the Encyclopedia Britannica: “Bermuda Triangle, section of the North Atlantic Ocean. . . The triangle extends roughly between latitude 25 degrees to 40 degrees N and longitude 55 to 85 degrees W and covers an area of more than 1,500,000 sq miles (3,900,000 sq km).” The Encyclopedia Britannica is now a “myth supporter” one must assume.
ED. His bizarre “skepticism” has handicapped any kind of real analysis or research. He doesn’t realize that Gaddis was not the first to describe a shape, nor did he have to be the last. History of the Triangle
“There are only two longitudes in the world where Magnetic and Grid, or Magnetic, and True North align. These locations are near the center of Europe and near the eastern part of the United States.”
FALSE! They are off Japan and down the Eastern US and through the Gulf. Not even Wrong Way Corrigan made that kind of mistake! Nevertheless, he writes, with true geographical obtuseness:
“At the tip of Portugal the difference between Magnetic and Grid North is about four degrees. As you travel west across the Atlantic, the difference between Magnetic and Grid North begins to increase. This difference can get as much as 22 degrees. This increase continues until you reach the middle of the Atlantic and the Sargasso Sea, and then slowly Grid and Magnetic begin to realign so that by the time you reach the southern tip of Florida the two are only one and a half degrees different. “
Fact 19: Wrongy. Southern Florida, as any navigator knows, is about 3 degrees off. Any current chart will show that. 35 years ago the Agonic Line may have been off the eastern Florida coast. No longer. The Agonic Line is now near the center of the Gulf of Mexico. The area of increase or decrease is measured from the Agonic Line. It increases the further one travels into the Atlantic until at the Azores it is about 24 degrees (as I recall). I have no idea what he is talking about when he is mentioning Portugal and that somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic they begin to realign. That happens in the Gulf and off Japan.
“The author also likes to trash this site and Larry Kusche’s book . . . He has a low opinion of this site because it is on Tripod and I don't pay for it to be on the web (I'm not sure how this makes my site inaccurate or flawed)”
Never heard of him at the time. His site had never been mentioned— ever (until today, June 24, 2002). Any general comment about other web sites was that they are opinion sites. But the fact he immediately assumed he was being singled-out from amongst many sites (all of which have more hits on their odometers than he ever had), I find bizarre.
ED. As it stands today, Gibson has retired in favor of a protégé who will not only keep the torch of debunkery alive but do so with equally nebulous claims to authority. “While Tobias lived in the area for ten years, I have not. I do however visit the area frequently (four times in the last three years) and without incident. I call these visits, Summer Vacation and/or Spring Break.”
The a la mode upon Gibson’s frivolous claims of authority is now promoting cruising the bars and party hotspots of Daytona Beach or Miami (or other Spring Break meccas) as investigating the Triangle. Both imply that since nothing has ever happened to them (presumably along these drags), there is little chance anything mysterious has happened to those 500 miles out at sea. But she reasserts she is his pupil and that he lived in and around the area for 10 years while growing up and has been “researching so-called [Myth 21 warning] paranormal activity, particularly the Bermuda Triangle, off and on, for over two decades. He did this as a hobby and not for pay.”
The Bermuda Triangle is not a paranormal pursuit. It is a tangible investigation of missing aircraft and ships, vast tonnages of both, and the possible theories of what might have caused it. There are no ghosts, demons or angels involved.
ED.His comment about receiving no pay seems to be another hatchwork based on his impression there is money where TV walks! In his bibliography of my site he describes me thusly:
“The journalist who does the page claims to do it as a hobby but seems to have connections with many cable channels that continue to purport the myth.” (Ed. On the other hand, his pupil brags about him being a “Professional Researcher.”)
A lame inference. One, I am no journalist. In actuality I am not paid for appearing on TV, nor do I receive money for doing my research. I have received an honorarium on a couple of occasions. I don’t knock people who have learned to make money at their hobby. I have simply failed to do so. My hobby has, in fact, cost me thousands because I bothered to get documents and travel in the Triangle, because I bothered to enter the subject tangibly and not just stew in my own conceited second guesswork. I have been doing this since 1990 and until 1999 I received no public recognition. For this tenacity and for the evidence I can present I get on TV. They approach me.
ED. Gibson’s obvious failure in the area of which he had once bragged of self-expertise might be sponsoring his new denigration of the whole subject. His pupil writes of his farewell: “However the Bermuda Triangle was never his only interest in life and he doesn’t have time to focus, in his words, on "debunking half baked theories that could easily be explained away with more complete research in the first place".”
But his site claims to have already presented the facts to debunk it, has it not? After 20 years is he admitting he never researched it completely? Theories need more research or the incidents? It’s often hard to follow his illogical progressions.
I must assume this webmaster’s apparent lack of reading comprehension has also prompted his basic mistakes and also his overall glowing appraisal of his meager research. His mistakes above have not been the only ones. But it is not practical or possible to critique his entire site. It may not be necessary either. As the surfer of his guestbook discovers, he is not taken too seriously anymore. This seems haunted by equally immature approaches to the topic. The comment of one high school girl, left on June 21, 2002, reflects the outlook of those who find his site interesting enough to leave a message: “My toilet is my Bermuda Triangle. Large objects keep disappearing daily.” But such an attitude is not surprising in the guestbook of a website whose webmaster originally approached the subject from behind such an impressive pseudonym as Bubba, the Salty Dog.
In short, this webmaster’s claims and approach have no merit. All those “in and about the Triangle” in aviation or nautical authority are not familiar with his name, nor are any family members of the missing, friends or other researchers. His web site shows he has gotten no documents, not even an old newspaper article, despite his claim he backworked most of Kusche’s bibliography. Though he claims to have lived “in and about the area,” he is completely unaware of its most basic geography. His claims and reputation, in essence, have no cross-reference in reality outside of the cyber reality of the world-wide-web and what he wishes to represent of himself. His conclusions seem based on nothing more than a few videos and Kusche’s 1975 book. This lack of serious approach to the subject is befitting the moniker “Bubba, the Salty Dog.” And such a flippant nomen befits 3rd grade intros like his typical exaggeration: “Okay Let me tell you right off that the Bermuda Triangle is a myth that started off as old-time stories that sailors used to tell new ship mates to give them the heebie-jeebies.”
Well, it’s time to go on. It’s unfortunate such things must be written. Gibson should not have taken the reputation of another person so lightly. It is well his site has a sub-page devoted to Spatial Disorientation, for his entire site is a mastery of spin, of exaggerations of what the “myths” are, and outright error takes the place of his facts.