Fact Checking Nelson's "Doors Of Death" light aircraft near death experience

[kairos]

Is it time to email SD and ask the golden question- would you please tell us the sources you used for the ghost flight story?
I believe that would scare the hell of her to get such an email- particularly if it is signed The Washington Post.
On another note - do you think Rusty’s first wife would have recorded the incident in her journal!
Somebody please check the records of the volunteer fire department of Delta and Cedar City Utah for November 1976.
In years gone by I warned the buy paper that they had published an erroneous account of DU’s role in a plane hijacking incident- the daily universe ? In an email
Said it relied on the official “resume” of the church!

k

Onward to 100 pages!!

[dastardly stem]

I think Physics guy pointed this out, the story in your link doesn't implicate Nelson as the story teller. If he were, then you'd have a point, I suppose.

It sort of does, in that Nelson and his personal records are cited as sources for the biography written by Sheri Dew. I find it incredulous that she just made stuff up about Nelson herself to make anecdotes more dramatic. Also, Tom has started a thread about that particular controversy.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=753

Tom's added information is interesting. Acknowledged.

[Lem]

.... All other things being equal, I find it best to rely on the earliest available account as being the most accurate.

I would agree. Just to play Sagan's Advocate (I know, I know, very bad pun-- autocorrect made me do it ), the earliest version we have so far doesn't mention "Utah" or "fire", either of which could unnecessarily limit the potential of your proposed FOIA to find the originating incident:

1979: “The final nudge came as I was a passenger in a small airplane plummeting earthward with one of its two engines exploded. I realized then although the spiritual and material needs for my family had been provided, I had not left for them a reasonable recapitulation of my life that they could review. The safe emergency landing of that disabled aircraft provided me with the change I needed.”

Purported source: Russell M. Nelson, From Heart to Heart: An Autobiography (Salt Lake City: Nelson, 1979) (note: website quotation should be checked against original; original should be checked for any other references to incident).

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=709&start=

Since he was called as SS President in 1971 and traveled worldwide, the incident that prompted the initial story could have happened anywhere on the planet. For example, here's a quote from his 2018 book:

I’ll never forget an experience that Sister Nelson and I had about three decades ago with President Spencer W. Kimball and his beloved Camilla. We were in Hamilton, New Zealand, for a large conference with the Saints. I was not a General Authority at that time. I had been invited to participate in this and similar meetings in other Pacific Islands while serving as General President of the Sunday School.....

https://www.ldsliving.com/4-Miraculous- ... 612?page=2

[Dr Moore]

...the earliest version we have so far doesn't mention "Utah" or "fire"...

Oye...you could be right that his first recollection, being years after the fact, was of some other random flight. While this allowance might be fairest to the actual, original event, it also means subsequent tellings have been unnecessarily (and disingenuously) embellished. So we're even further into Dunn-land if this allowance is made.

[Lem]

...the earliest version we have so far doesn't mention "Utah" or "fire"...

Oye...you could be right that his first recollection, being years after the fact, was a random flight. While this allowance might be fairest to the actual, original event, it also means subsequent tellings have been unnecessarily (and disingenuously) embellished. So we're even further into Dunn-land if this allowance is made.

Exactly. Well said.

[Res Ipsa]

Lem, Sagan’s Advocate!! I love it!!! Is there some way that we can add it to your official title at Cassius? I think you should ever be known as Sagan’s Advocate!

I’ve wrestled with the very point you raised. How should we we treat that first mention? The use of explosion instead of fire doesn’t worry me that much, as he seems to use both terms and we can look for fire and explosion in the records.

The preface gives us no clue as to the location. But it also doesn’t purport to offer anything resembling an account or story about the event. It appears to be offered as the last part of an explanation for why he wrote the book. Given that context, I don’t think I can reasonably expect much in the way of details in the Preface. That’s why I’m trying to suspend judgment until I can get a look at the book.

So, my thinking is to not treat the Preface as an account of the incident or version of the story. I think that’s the most reasonable way to approach it, but I could be persuaded otherwise.

Although you and I have disagreed about the application of the Sagan’s Dragon problem in this case, I do appreciate being reminded of it, as it’s always something to be aware of. I’ve expressed concern over the fact that the guy flew a lot and that he could have misremembered the flight, I think I just have to note that as a possibility that I don’t have the time to investigate. (What’s that section in a published study that lists the qualifiers called?

[Gabriel]

Onward to 100 pages!!

"Inch by inch, row by row, we can make this garden grow."

(I can't remember who sang that song).

But, in the process of reading this fascinating thread, I keep recalling that old Paul Simon tune where he sings of "incidents and accidents" and "hints and allegations". So, every time I read about "incidents and accidents", that little jingle pops into my head. Usually, it's the reverse: I hear a song that I like (or don't like for that matter) and it takes me back into the milieu of when I first heard it. For example, that old Enya song "Orinoco Flow" -- I distinctly remember when I first heard it: I was at jump school at Camp Wainwright in Alberta. I was sitting on a cot in a Quonset hut. The weather outside was pretty darn cold and it was only a little bit warmer inside the hut. So, you good folk have nothing to go on but my word that my story is true. If pressed, however, I could upload a photo of the certificate I received when I got my jump wings (it's written in French and English). It has the date when I completed jump school, which could be cross-checked against the year that that particular song came out, etc. etc. Granted, this PROVES nothing, but I think that it renders my tale at least plausible.

But with Russell, we have this strange situation where he recounts an experience so profound that it should, at the very least, be equal in magnitude to a choir of Enya's in sheer memorableness. Yet, it's already being conceded that, although the details of his story may have changed over the years, the "core" of his story is true. We are told that somehow the context of his story was irrecoverably changed when his first biographer, Spencer Condie, through a combination of over-preparedness and a Svengali-like persuasiveness, was able to implant the suggestion into Russell's mind that his memorable experience of peace happened on November 12, 1976, on his way to participate in a function at Dixie College. Was this implant a one-time shot? Or does it need to be reinforced periodically over the years with midnight phone calls suggesting that Russell sit down and play some solitaire?

It's strange - is it not? - that Russell's latest account of his story is not to be considered the last word, but that we must search ever deeper into his past to find the "true" context of his story. On the other hand, we have the First Vision account, where the final 1838 version is considered THE definitive account and all earlier versions are just preludes with minor extraneous details thrown in.

[Dr Moore]

It's strange - is it not? - that Russell's latest account of his story is not to be considered the last word, but that we must search ever deeper into his past to find the "true" context of his story. On the other hand, we have the First Vision account, where the final 1838 version is considered THE definitive account and all earlier versions are just preludes with minor extraneous details thrown in.

Excellent point.

[DrW]

Whether it was an accident or an incident, it will have data entered in the Accident Type cell in the Table. More information about the event is often included in the narrative as it was for the hard landings.

So then if I get your message, certain events such as one engine failing, landing gear damage, and light damage to the skin were all categorized as accident types before 1978 and then as incident types from 1978 onward?

I do not know what was done before or after 1978 in terms of record keeping or destruction of records according to policy.

Again, the use of the Accident Type cell to categorize the events does not mean that they were categorized by the FAA or the NTSB as accidents. The transcribers could just as well have labelled the cell Mishap Type. As I mentioned, in this data base one sees everything from hard landing to a runway collision to aircraft demolished.

This data base (FAA and NTSB versions) were transcribed from hardcopy records and they happened to use the Table format you see. These are not the original official records, and do not claim to be. They are a convenient and accessible way to get to transcriptions of official records starting in 1973.

With a fairly consistent average number of entries per year, and pretty much the kind of aviation events one would expect to see in Utah, I would be very surprised if the curator decided that an in-flight fire on a commercial flight, with a forced landing in a farmers field, didn't rate inclusion, especially when two hard landings did.

My view is that the Russell M. Nelson story has little, if any, basis in fact (except possibly on movie screens). And if it did, the embellishments that appear in the later versions of the story certainly cross the line. This view comes from operating aircraft in controlled airspace, according to a flight plan, and understanding the close eye that ATC keeps on aircraft with radar transponders.

It comes from knowing how serious the FAA and the NTSB considers in-flight engine fires and forced landings, especially of commercial aircraft, and especially on civilian property, to be. The number and types of alerts and notifications that would have promulgated through the ATC and NTSB systems had such an event occurred do not magically disappear from all the places they would have been recorded. All this is not to mention the human interest story that the pilot, Russell M. Nelson and the other passengers would have had to tell.

Yet, nothing.

[Res Ipsa]

Onward to 100 pages!!

"Inch by inch, row by row, we can make this garden grow."

(I can't remember who sang that song).

But, in the process of reading this fascinating thread, I keep recalling that old Paul Simon tune where he sings of "incidents and accidents" and "hints and allegations". So, every time I read about "incidents and accidents", that little jingle pops into my head. Usually, it's the reverse: I hear a song that I like (or don't like for that matter) and it takes me back into the milieu of when I first heard it. For example, that old Enya song "Orinoco Flow" -- I distinctly remember when I first heard it: I was at jump school at Camp Wainwright in Alberta. I was sitting on a cot in a Quonset hut. The weather outside was pretty darn cold and it was only a little bit warmer inside the hut. So, you good folk have nothing to go on but my word that my story is true. If pressed, however, I could upload a photo of the certificate I received when I got my jump wings (it's written in French and English). It has the date when I completed jump school, which could be cross-checked against the year that that particular song came out, etc. etc. Granted, this PROVES nothing, but I think that it renders my tale at least plausible.

But with Russell, we have this strange situation where he recounts an experience so profound that it should, at the very least, be equal in magnitude to a choir of Enya's in sheer memorableness. Yet, it's already being conceded that, although the details of his story may have changed over the years, the "core" of his story is true. We are told that somehow the context of his story was irrecoverably changed when his first biographer, Spencer Condie, through a combination of over-preparedness and a Svengali-like persuasiveness, was able to implant the suggestion into Russell's mind that his memorable experience of peace happened on November 12, 1976, on his way to participate in a function at Dixie College. Was this implant a one-time shot? Or does it need to be reinforced periodically over the years with midnight phone calls suggesting that Russell sit down and play some solitaire?

It's strange - is it not? - that Russell's latest account of his story is not to be considered the last word, but that we must search ever deeper into his past to find the "true" context of his story. On the other hand, we have the First Vision account, where the final 1838 version is considered THE definitive account and all earlier versions are just preludes with minor extraneous details thrown in.

Memory is what it is. Elizabeth Loftus did impressive work in showing how easily our memories are changed. It doesn't require a Svengali. It only requires a conversation, and it doesn't require an intent to manipulate. It can be as simple as asking a leading question like: You gave the invocation at an event at Dixie college, didn't you? Could that have been the flight to St. George that your near-death experience happened on? Siblings who hear and tell stories about family life have memories of events happening to them that actually happened to a sibling. The older the memory, the less likely it is to be accurate.

https://www.apa.org/research/action/spe ... anipulated

And the funny is that we only recall what we really right now. When we think about a memory, our brains erase the old one and rewrite it with the current one. So, while others can notice changes in a story that we tell over time, the story teller has no memory of the previous memories and is blind to it. So, once a memory is altered in some way, there is no need to reinforce the change. The altered memory is the only memory -- there is no former version to revert to.

Brains are weird.