Man Washes up in Marshall Islands 'After 16 Months Adrift'

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by Andrew Troup

"I guess 'late stooges' is code, but I'm not sure what for. Maybe it's code for people who wait until the smoke starts to clear and the facts are in ....

.... before rushing to assassinate the character and credibility of a defenceless person who's had the misfortune to come to world attention.

I say, Horatio.

Yes, Hamlet?

Do I hear the bleeding heart of a small violin so tiny and small from the mouth of Andrew Troup in that pit, the same self righteous priest and born again astronaut who believes he is the voice of morality for all?

Nay, it is your indigestion, for in this world, showing up to this thread only after post 427, he matters knot.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

Last i read he is still recovering in the hospital...

No - He’s in “remarkably good physical health”, at home (since Feb 18) in El Salvador.

➥ Salvadoran sea survivor leaves hospital after days of treatment, says faith kept him alive | CTV News

[SaltyMonkey]

@ Gordo:

From Feb 26th:

Salvadoran castaway back in hospital with swollen feet | GlobalPost

"Perlera said Alvarenga's liver will be tested, and he has been diagnosed with a parasite as a result of having consumed raw fish and birds during his time at sea."

[dannc]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

He only survived cos he ate Bob Redford......

Originally Posted by Coops

Bet he puked.

Coops.

Of course he did not puke! You know Bob is organic!

Or is that tasteless?

Later,
Dan

[senormechanico]

Maybe the mods should move this thread to Sailing Anarchy.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

Really? Are you their priest? You don't look or smell like a priest? Why don't you have them arrested while you're at it?

Nah.. just wondering if there's any dignity left, and that would be the right thing to do.
But I don't wan't to argue about it. Have a nice day
BR Teddy

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

Have a nice day
BR Teddy

U2!

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Andrew Troup

There's no compulsion on anyone to back down from a strongly stated opinion which turns out to be wrong, provided they don't care for their declining reputation for integrity and fairness.

It's a cost-free action, which some might see as self indulgence, to publicly mount strong and premature attacks on the reputation of someone who has become a public figure (in this case, through no fault of his own), on weak pretexts, from behind the safe shelter of a screen name.

Anyone who does this sort of thing routinely will inevitably earn the scorn of his or her fellow humans, whether or not their real identity is knowable.

I don't think anyone was setting themselves up as a priest, let alone contemplating an arrest.

I don't think that being initially very skeptical about what this guy apparently survived was attacking him at all. It was only common sense. The early reports were contradictory and none of us could even understand what he was saying, no facts had yet been confirmed, and for the story to be true, he would had to have done something nobody had ever done before, by quite a large margin. He was in an open boat not designed for traversing oceans and he had no food or water and initially it was said he survived 16 months. Doesn't that make you just a little bit skeptical? We've all read of so many others in similar situations who had much better training, much better equipment, at sea for a fraction of the time that was being claimed, and they were gaunt looking and so weak they couldn't stand and many died and NONE looked anything like this guy did after more than a year at sea. I was VERY skeptical at first and gradually became less so, to the point where I reluctantly accept that his explanation is the only one I can think of that fits. As we've learned more about him and his situation and others have confirmed the circumstances that got him into this situation, it's much easier to accept that he actually might have done something that nobody else has ever done and by such a large margin but that's not the sort of thing most people accept the first time they hear the rumor of it.

I don't think that everyone who happened to notice this thread when it was new news and expressed an opinion based on incomplete information has any obligation to find their way back here and publicly eat crow because they once had an opinion that turned out to be wrong. It has nothing to do with fairness or integrity or is a basis for scorn, and has a LOT to do with the facts available to them when they expressed an opinion on this site and then moved on to the other more important things in their lives.

[robert sailor]

Opinions are neither right nor wrong when expressed, just opinions. Some folks suggest that opinions are like a** holes, everyone has one! Many people are so bloody uptight about being right, and when, by chance, they get lucky and get it right they want all those that were wrong to fess up. Most of everything that is said on this forum are opinions, move on!

[BandB]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I don't think that being initially very skeptical about what this guy apparently survived was attacking him at all. It was only common sense. The early reports were contradictory and none of us could even understand what he was saying, no facts had yet been confirmed, and for the story to be true, he would had to have done something nobody had ever done before, by quite a large margin. He was in an open boat not designed for traversing oceans and he had no food or water and initially it was said he survived 16 months. Doesn't that make you just a little bit skeptical? We've all read of so many others in similar situations who had much better training, much better equipment, at sea for a fraction of the time that was being claimed, and they were gaunt looking and so weak they couldn't stand and many died and NONE looked anything like this guy did after more than a year at sea. I was VERY skeptical at first and gradually became less so, to the point where I reluctantly accept that his explanation is the only one I can think of that fits. As we've learned more about him and his situation and others have confirmed the circumstances that got him into this situation, it's much easier to accept that he actually might have done something that nobody else has ever done and by such a large margin but that's not the sort of thing most people accept the first time they hear the rumor of it.

I don't think that everyone who happened to notice this thread when it was new news and expressed an opinion based on incomplete information has any obligation to find their way back here and publicly eat crow because they once had an opinion that turned out to be wrong. It has nothing to do with fairness or integrity or is a basis for scorn, and has a LOT to do with the facts available to them when they expressed an opinion on this site and then moved on to the other more important things in their lives.

There were many contradictory pieces of information and although at this point it does seem that he likely made the trip somewhat as described, there are many things we'll never know. Not saying we have a right to know, incidentally. I know the father of the passenger does want to talk to him in person. Also, he now says he doesn't want to discuss the trip anymore. A lot of missing parts of the story before and during and an odd statement even now that he knows he can't stay home. Again, there were reports that his family, seen embracing him now, had not seen him in 8 years. His health has seemed contradictory to the journey as well, although there may be health issues yet to fully uncover themselves as he's now returning to the hospital.

All I said at the start was that I didn't think we had all the facts yet. Well, clearly we didn't. The times and dates changed. Information about family. Even read one place that he said the other boy died after four months and yet the father indicates he was told one month. Is any of this surprising? Of course not. Who would expect all the facts accurate immediately. I don't remember lunch yesterday.

So, basically for me, I'm accepting that there's a very high probability he did make the trip somewhat as stated. I don't feel anything wrong about initial skepticism however. And I'm accepting that beyond that there's a lot we don't know, never will know, don't have to know. Now, if I was a parent of the dead companion I would want to know more and talk to him face to face just as the father does.

I also don't feel any initial skepticism was defaming him. I believe prior to the trip he probably would have had the same skepticism. Probably still hard for him to believe he made it.

[SaltyMonkey]

Just remember, many people who were in the press and knew him expressed strong doubts that did not change for quite a long time.

I believe the longest time before this point was 133 days - poon lim
Poon Lim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[rockDAWG]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I don't think that being initially very skeptical about what this guy apparently survived was attacking him at all. It was only common sense. The early reports were contradictory and none of us could even understand what he was saying, no facts had yet been confirmed, and for the story to be true, he would had to have done something nobody had ever done before, by quite a large margin. He was in an open boat not designed for traversing oceans and he had no food or water and initially it was said he survived 16 months. Doesn't that make you just a little bit skeptical? We've all read of so many others in similar situations who had much better training, much better equipment, at sea for a fraction of the time that was being claimed, and they were gaunt looking and so weak they couldn't stand and many died and NONE looked anything like this guy did after more than a year at sea. I was VERY skeptical at first and gradually became less so, to the point where I reluctantly accept that his explanation is the only one I can think of that fits. As we've learned more about him and his situation and others have confirmed the circumstances that got him into this situation, it's much easier to accept that he actually might have done something that nobody else has ever done and by such a large margin but that's not the sort of thing most people accept the first time they hear the rumor of it.

I don't think that everyone who happened to notice this thread when it was new news and expressed an opinion based on incomplete information has any obligation to find their way back here and publicly eat crow because they once had an opinion that turned out to be wrong. It has nothing to do with fairness or integrity or is a basis for scorn, and has a LOT to do with the facts available to them when they expressed an opinion on this site and then moved on to the other more important things in their lives.

When the missionary first came to my village to spread the words that God created the world, Adam and Eve, I laughed. The next day, we beat the sh*t out of him and told him never return, poisoning our minds hurting our love for our Buddha. . It is the most insult to our intelligence.

I didn't found that Alvarenga's story is hard to believe at all. After all, he did not drift to Caribbean sea. His boat followed trade wind and current. Drifting in an empty desert like ocean, his 24' boat would attract lot of attention for many sea creatures and sea plants. One turtle could feed him for a long time.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by rockDAWG

I didn't found that Alvarenga's story is hard to believe at all. After all, he did not drift to Caribbean sea. His boat followed trade wind and current. Drifting in an empty desert like ocean, his 24' boat would attract lot of attention for many sea creatures and sea plants. One turtle could feed him for a long time.

...if he had a refrigerator to keep it in for a long time. In a very warm, moist environment like the one he was in, flesh quickly begins to rot and eating rotten meat will make you sick and that will rob you of the nutrients you hoped to gain as well as dehydrate you.

"... an empty desert like ocean."
Think of your favorite place on the ocean and then think of the worst weather you would see in a typical year at that spot and then try to imagine if anyone would be likely to survive in an open, 24' boat out there, keeping in mind that person would be badly fatigued and weakened and without equipment to steer or sail the boat or even change its orientation to the wind/waves.

You REALLY don't find it hard to believe?

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

...if he had a refrigerator to keep it in for a long time. In a very warm, moist environment like the one he was in, flesh quickly begins to rot and eating rotten meat will make you sick and that will rob you of the nutrients you hoped to gain as well as dehydrate you.

Sun-dried salted turtle - yummmm

time for a gin fizz

[Littlechay]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

...if he had a refrigerator to keep it in for a long time. In a very warm, moist environment like the one he was in, flesh quickly begins to rot and eating rotten meat will make you sick and that will rob you of the nutrients you hoped to gain as well as dehydrate you.

I've never sailed an ocean crossing in a boat with a fridge or freezer and we ate meat all the time. 32 days is admittedly my longest passage, and not all tropical but I have been in warm and moist and fresh fish keeps quite well. Also as the OP said he most likely had plenty of sun and jerky is a pretty good way to quickly preserve meat. He quite likely was better than most of us at catching fish and had good reason to concentrate - I reckon he would have had plenty of fresh.