logo
What Really Happened to Amelia Earhart?

What Really Happened to Amelia Earhart?

Epoch Times10-05-2025

Amelia Earhart began her famous flight around the world on May 20, 1937. Departing from Oakland, California, in her Lockheed Electra, she traveled east across the United States. Her flight path took her south to South America, across the Atlantic Ocean to Africa, over Asia, and to Australia.
On July 2, 1937, she left Lae, New Guinea. There were only three more stops to make. She would land at Howland Island to refuel before proceeding to Honolulu, Hawaii, and then back to Oakland.
Out of a total of 28,595 miles, she ended up completing more than 24,000 miles, or 85 percent, of her journey. She was close to the finish line. But she never made it to Howland Island.
American aviator Amelia Earhart smiles May 22, 1932 upon arriving in London, England having become the first woman to fly across the Atlantic alone.
Getty Images
Competing Theories
What happened? The most commonly accepted explanation is that Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, ran out of fuel and crashed somewhere in the central Pacific Ocean. Other theories, however, suggest that she didn't die at all. Eyewitnesses say that a nurse matching Earhart's physical description popped up a few years later on Guadalcanal.
Another story goes that she made her way back to the United States and lived out her days under an assumed identity.
As biographer Doris L. Rich put it, 'No one has been able to prove beyond doubt how why, where, and when Amelia Earhart disappeared'
The Japanese Capture Hypothesis
The most provocative theory about Earhart's whereabouts asserts that the Japanese captured her during an espionage mission ordered by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This was the assertion of journalist Adela Rogers St. Johns in her 1974 book 'Some Are Born Great.' According to St. Johns, Earhart's around-the-world flight was just a cover story to discover how far along the Japanese were in their plans to attack Pearl Harbor.
Related Stories
11/2/2016
6/2/2013
St. Johns met with Earhart only a few minutes before she left Oakland on her final flight. 'Don't worry about me,' Earhart told St. Johns. It was the last thing she said before taking off.
St. Johns was a friend of Earhart's. Knowing her as she did, she considered the statement strange. 'I knew this couldn't be just another flight,' St. Johns wrote. She thought Earhart seemed to be telling her, 'This one is different, but always remember: I know what I'm doing.'
St. Johns' suspicions were confirmed when a Marine officer later showed her 'secret files of the United States Navy.' She claimed to have seen the orders from President Roosevelt 'with my own eyes.' St. Johns also claimed that the Navy has kept these files under lock and key.
A counterargument to this hypothesis is that Earhart was too high-profile to ever carry out such a mission successfully. Her around-the-world flight was widely broadcasted, and the public was tracking her every move. Everywhere she landed journalists were greeting her. Earhart's celebrity status would have jeopardized the secrecy that a spy mission required.
But is the Japanese capture theory so unbelievable? Earhart's great contemporary, the author and aviator Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, suffered a fatal crash several years after Earhart. He was on a reconnaissance mission over German-occupied France. His fame was no detriment to his spying.
President Roosevelt, a friend of Earhart's, denied ever sending her on such a mission. It is a fact that politicians cover up government secrets all the time, and some 'conspiracy theories' end up being conspiracy facts in hindsight.
Amelia Earhart and her navigator Fred Noonan before their disappearance in 1937. Their fates are still unknown.
Public Domain
Numerous Eyewitness Accounts
Other firsthand observers support St. Johns's Japanese capture theory. A New York Times article dated July 2, 1960 reported that, according to eyewitness accounts, Earthart and Noonan were taken prisoner on the island of Saipan. Natives of the island claimed seeing the famous pilot being held captive there before she was, apparently, executed.
Thomas E. Devine, a U.S. Army postal sergeant, says he witnessed Earhart's Electra being burned on Saipan in July 1944, following the capture of the island by American forces. He argues the plane was destroyed on the orders of the U.S. Secretary of the Navy.
Also during this time, a Marine, Pvt. Robert E. Wallack, discovered a locked safe in one of Saipan's administrative buildings. Inside it was a 'brown leather attaché case' containing maps, permits, and reports related to Earhart's final flight. Wallack turned the case over to a naval officer.
Critics of this hypothesis point out that Saipan is geographically remote from Earhart's intended destination of Howland Island. How would she have gotten there? One theory is that Earhart and Noonan crash-landed in the Marshall Islands and were later transported to Saipan. Scraps of metal discovered on the Milli Atoll may offer a clue. The corroded metal could be part of Earhart's landing gear that broke off during the crash.
Since the Japanese never made an official report of their capture, and the American Navy has supposedly covered theirs up, these eyewitness accounts are all we have to go on. While far from being proof, the sheer number of independent eyewitnesses make the hypothesis difficult to dismiss outright.
George Palmer Putnam talks on the telephone with the White House asking for aid in the search effort for his missing wife, aviatrix Amelia Earhart, in Oakland, Ca., on July 2, 1937. Navy commander V.H. Ragsdale, Naval reserve, Oakland airport, stands by. Earhart disappeared during her flight over the Pacific.
AP Photo
The Castaway Hypothesis
Another theory is that Earhart and Noonan overshot Howland Island and landed on the Nikumaroro Atoll, formerly Gardner Island. Although the island is uninhabited, a partial human skeleton was discovered there, along with a sextant box, skincare products, and a shoe matching Earhart's size.
While the whereabouts of the bones are unknown, some of their measurements were recorded. Using a computer program, forensic anthropologists at the University of Tennessee compared the bone measurements to Earhart's known measurements. That included her height, shoe size, tailoring measurements. The program computed that the bones were more similar to Earhart than to 99 percent of other individuals.
Among the skincare products were five fragments of a small glass jar. When reconstructed, it matched the size and shape of 'Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment,' a brand dating from the 1930s. Earhart had freckles and disliked them. While the translucent glass the jar is made of doesn't match the opaque glass in other samples of that brand, the jar's interior contained traces of mercury, the active ingredient in the freckle ointment.
Additionally, Earhart's last-known radio transmission was sent from the vicinity of Nikumaroro. Did Earhart and Noonan become castaways there and die from a lack of fresh water?
Final Comments
On each stage of her final flight, Earhart sent her letters, diary entries, and charts to her husband, G.P. Putnam. 'When I go,' said Earhart in her book 'Last Flight,' 'I'd like best to go in my plane. Quickly.'
Hopefully she got her wish. It's painful to imagine Earhart awaiting execution in a prison camp or dying of thirst on a desert island.
An aerial view of the island of Nikumaroro, which may be Amelia Earhart's final resting place. The "Seven Site" in the image is where human bones and evidence of habitation were found.
Public Domain
All things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one. That's what Occam's Razor suggests, anyway. Running out of fuel remains the most likely scenario, and it's hard to dismiss the bone measurements and freckle cream.
But the human mind will always be attracted to mystery. Simple explanations don't capture the imagination like an exciting theory about undertaking a spy mission. Until Earhart's physical bones are recovered for DNA analysis (likely never), conjectures will continue to swirl.
What arts and culture topics would you like us to cover? Please email ideas or feedback to

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Don't buy fancy butter to make great pie. Here's why
Don't buy fancy butter to make great pie. Here's why

Los Angeles Times

time6 hours ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Don't buy fancy butter to make great pie. Here's why

When it comes to the fat in pie dough, there are no kings. In terms of its ingredients, pie dough couldn't be more straightforward: For the most part, it's flour, butter and water. With so few ingredients, it begs the question: Does the quality of the butter make a difference? Typical American butter — brands such as Land O'Lakes, Cabot, Challenge and supermarket private labels — contains 80% butterfat. Many of the brands also offer extra-creamy lines. These 'European-style' butters have a higher butterfat content. Kerrygold from Ireland has a butterfat content of 82% to 83%, and Plugra, which is made in the U.S., is 82% butterfat. Ironically, European-style butters with the highest percentage of fat are from small American creameries: Straus Family Creamery in Marin County makes a European-style butter with 85% butterfat, and Vermont Creamery has a whopping 86%. Some sources say that European-style, higher-butterfat butter makes a difference in baked goods, but speaking strictly for pie dough right now, how could it? At least in any noticeable way. What isn't butterfat in butter — that other 14% to 20% — is water (with an insignificant amount of milk solids, and in the case of salted butter, salt). And you add water to pie dough anyway. (In my pie crust, I substitute heavy cream for some of the water, a 'trick' I learned from pastry chef Nancy Silverton, who does so because, she says, in addition to hydrating the dough, the cream brings with it fat and flavor.) The water in butter evaporates in the baking process, creating steam pockets in the dough, which is what forms the layers and translates into flakiness. So it wouldn't make sense that less water (fewer steam pockets, fewer layers) would be superior. I did a test of Land O'Lakes vs. Kerrygold. The one thing that Kerrygold added to the dough was color. Kerrygold has a bright, rich yellow hue that comes from the grass the cows graze on, and that makes for a buttery-colored dough. But that color didn't translate to the baked crust. I baked the dough off into little crackers. The Land O'Lakes crackers were light and flaky. As hopeful as I was about the Kerrygold, what with that beautiful buttery-colored dough, the crackers were flat. Barely a flaky layer in sight. Of course, both were delicious. Butter is butter. There's no question that butter, any butter, does reign supreme when it comes to contributing flavor to pie dough. For flakiness, there are still those who swear that shortening makes for the flakiest pie crust, which, more widely known by the brand name Crisco, is a solid fat made from primarily soybean and palm oils. Crisco is so popular in baking that, previously offered only in small tubs, the product is now sold in sticks, so it can be used in a recipe without making a mess stuffing it into a measuring cup. Lard (rendered pork fat) — specifically 'leaf lard,' which comes from the fat around the kidney and loin of the pig — is also said to make for a flaky pie crust. And when I worked at a bakery in a billionaire enclave in the Hamptons, we made the dough with — gasp! — margarine. To my knowledge, nobody complained, or even noticed. The crust was light and flaky and reasonably flavorful. The fruit was juicy and jammy and delicious. It was summertime in one of the most beautiful corners of the earth, and our customers, it would seem, were just happy to have pie. So what do I suggest? Use regular butter. If you want to experiment with Crisco or lard, use that in combination with butter. And if you are entering a pie contest that you really want to win, experiment with combinations of Crisco or lard and European butter. Yes, I might use Kerrygold for that small possibility that it might make a smidgen of difference in the flavor or the color. And if I were baking something that didn't involve piles of stewed fruit, like biscuits, I might splurge. But I guess it would depend on who I was making them for; for the kings and queens in my life, then yes. Absolutely. Ray Garcia, chef of the now-closed beloved modern Mexican restaurant Broken Spanish, calls for European-style 83% butterfat in these biscuits. The butter is frozen and grated, a trick that allows you to mix the butter in with the flour while keeping it as cold as possible. That way the butter melts in the oven, creating those coveted light, flaky the recipe. Cooking time: 1 hour. Makes about 12 biscuits. This pie has the best of both worlds: a crispy, flaky bottom crust and a crunchy crumble topping. This topping is unusual, as it has an egg in it, so it's like crunchy cookie dough dropped in clumps on the pie. For the filling, I cook the sugar first and then add the blackberries, to give them a head start. If I start with raw blackberries, I find that even after over an hour of baking, they don't break down and still look like whole blackberries. I add the cornstarch here too, to make sure the fruit filling sets. The pie is baked on the lowest rack to ensure a browned, crisp bottom crust. If you have a pizza stone, use the recipe. Cooking time: 2 hours. Makes 1 9-inch round pie. From the L.A. Times' long-running Culinary S.O.S. column, this recipe comes courtesy of Koreatown's historic Cuban restaurant El Colmao. Writer Astrid Kayembe highlighted the restaurant's popular ropa vieja dish in her guide to the city's best Caribbean spots, but the signature pollo al colmao translates the classic stewed chicken dish through a family the recipe. Cooking time: 1 hour 40 minutes. Makes 1 9-by-13-inch pie.

What Are Emoji?
What Are Emoji?

Atlantic

time6 hours ago

  • Atlantic

What Are Emoji?

In the arenas of ancient Rome, the thumbs-up was a matter of life and death. So scholars have extrapolated from the elusive history of ancient gestures. The fates of defeated gladiators were determined by an emperor or another official, who might heed the wishes of the crowd: Thumbs hidden within closed fists were votes for mercy; thumbs-ups were votes for death. Today, the 👍, now flipped into a gesture of approval, is a tool of vague efficiency. Deployed as an emoji—as a hand summoned from a keyboard, suspended between literalism and language—it says 'okay' and declines to say more. But lately the crowds of the internet have found new ways to channel the old dramas. On the matter of the 👍, the arbiters of our own arena—internet-savvy young adults—have rendered their verdict: The 👍 is no longer definitive. It is no longer, for that matter, necessarily positive. 'Gen Z Has Canceled the Thumbs-Up Emoji Because It's 'Hostile,' ' one headline put it, citing data gathered in surveys and in the wild. Particularly as a reply to messages that contain words, Zoomers say, the 👍 is dismissive, disrespectful, even 'super rude.' It's a digital mumble, a surly if you say so, a sure but screw you. It is passive aggression, conveyed with pictographic clarity yet wrapped in plausible deniability. News of this emoji revisionism spread for the same reason so many of Gen Z's pronouncements do: Young adults, speaking internet with native-language ease, have an air of authority. But the news also spread because it was a warning of sorts about online communication at large. The double-edged 👍 meant that you could mean 'yes' or 'sounds great' while saying 'no,' or even 🖕. In online conversations, you can think you've said one thing and be read as having said another. Some have argued that the internet is creating a new kind of Babel. Here, in a cheerfully cartoonish form, were intimations of just that. Different groups of internet users—in this case, generations—can speak the same language and a different one. From the May 2022 issue: Jonathan Haidt on why the past 10 years of American life have been uniquely stupid Emoji (derived from the Japanese for picture and written character) were meant to bring humanity to conversations conducted across digital distances—to introduce a warm splash of color and expressiveness into a realm of text. Emoji are common property: Anyone can use them. Any group can define them in its own quirky way. But the resulting ambiguity can fuel tensions as well. Emoji have given rise to new codes of bigotry (🐸👌🥛) that allow their users the same plausible deniability that the 👍 does. Emoji can be cute, and they can also permit hatred to hide in plain sight. Have emoji enhanced communication, or abetted chaos? If emoji belong to everyone and no one, who gets to say what the default meaning might be? Emoji are less a language than they are 'insurgents within language,' Keith Houston writes in Face With Tears of Joy: A Natural History of Emoji. As his lively exploration of the form usefully puts it, they are the 'lingua franca' of the web, and the route they have traveled is more complicated than you might think. Their antecedents are ancient (Egyptian hieroglyphs, Chinese characters, Mesoamerican pictograms), though the journey from their modern birthplace (Japan circa the turn of the millennium) to their current ubiquity has been quick. That doesn't mean it has been smooth. Houston is contagiously enthusiastic about 'vibrant, vital emoji.' 🤗 He is also alert to the mixed blessings of the icons' versatility, their 'many-splendored entanglement with the written word.' Emoji, he writes, are 'a colorful and symbiotic virus whose symptoms we have only haltingly understood.' 🦠 Ambiguity, for emoji, is both a feature and a bug. One symptom of their elasticity is that no one can agree, exactly, on how to categorize them. Ever since their emergence, they have stirred debate among linguists. On their status as a language—implicitly recognized in 2015, when The Oxford English Dictionary named 😂 as its 'Word of the Year'—the consensus is 🤔: They are language-like without being language. (Houston suggests that 'body language' is a helpful way to think about them.) They're symbol-like, yet unlike most symbols, they constantly change in meaning and number. Can they function as punctuation (❣️🤡😬🔥)? Maybe they're better viewed as tactfully ambiguous conversation-enders—useful, as the writer Katy Waldman put it in 2016, for 'magicking us out of interpersonal jams.' Exiting his own definitional jam, Houston turns to the rich story of how emoji came to be. The ones most familiar today are typically attributed to the Japanese engineer Shigetaka Kurita; in 1999, a series of images that he designed were shared among users of Japan's main mobile carrier (teenage girls were the envisioned customers). Even the origin story of emoji, though, is muddied by questions about who really made them what they are. There are other contenders for 'first emoji' honors, Houston points out—so many, he writes, that 'it is no longer possible to imagine that emoji were ever 'invented' in the strictest sense of the word.' Instead, they evolved as so many technologies do: through a combination of accident and intention. In emoji, Japan's singular aesthetic traditions—manga and anime, in particular—achieved a form of universality. Emoji made use of manpu, the genre tropes commonly understood to convey amusement, anxiety, and other emotions. Exploding in popularity as digital chatting caught on—an ascent that accelerated when Apple, Google, and their fellow behemoths became emoji adopters—the pictograms acknowledged no national boundaries. In 2011, a year after emoji officially came under the supervision of a nonprofit called the Unicode Consortium, Apple introduced an emoji keyboard to its U.S.-marketed iPhones, bringing hearts and party poppers and sun-yellow faces to text messages throughout the land. The website Emojipedia, aiming to provide an exhaustive catalog of emoji, arrived in 2013. In 2014, a campaign got under way on the digital-petition site 'The Taco Emoji Needs to Happen,' it announced. The petition received more than 30,000 signatures, and the 🌮 was born. Taco Bell had been the catalyst. Two years later, an article titled 'A Beginner's Guide to Sexting' outed another 🌮 meaning, one its corporate sponsor likely never anticipated (vagina). Emoji, the not-quite-a-language language, were becoming part of the world's linguistic—and commercial—infrastructure, importing some of the unruliness of IRL interaction into virtual spaces. People used emoji to accentuate (👏🎉😂). They used emoji to hedge (😑🤔🌤️). They used emoji to joke (😜). They used emoji to flirt (😍😉). Emoji were pictures that could extend people's voices, visual icons that could help convey intended tone. They said nothing precisely, and that allowed them to express a lot: enthusiasm, sarcasm, anger, humor. They followed the same broad arc that the internet did; having originated as quirky novelties, they were becoming utilities. By the mid-2010s, the 'staid old Unicode,' as Houston comes to call the Consortium, had discovered the headaches accompanying 'emoji fever.' The organization, launched in 1991, was composed of a rotating group of engineers, linguists, and typographers charged with establishing coding consistency across the internet's static characters (letters, numbers, and the like); its goal was to enable global communication among disparate computers. Now it found itself overseeing dynamic characters as the public clamor for more emoji mounted. The Consortium was the gateway to new emoji: It invited the public to suggest additional icons. But its technologists were gatekeepers, too. They reviewed the applications, assessing the level of demand. They were the ones who decided which images to add—and which to deny. (Durex's campaign for a condom emoji fell short.) The annual unveiling of their decisions became, in some quarters (🤓), a much-anticipated event. Each new 'emoji season' brought fresh collections of icons to users' devices. But each also stirred reminders of the icons that weren't there. Faced with feedback from users frustrated by icon selection that could seem capricious and unfair, the arbiters did their best, Houston suggests, to gauge popular support for new candidates. But lapses in the lexicon were obvious, as a mere sampling reveals. Early on, 'professions' were depicted as masculine by default. 'Couple' was a man and a woman. The woman's shoe was a ruby-red heel. Representations of food reflected the pictograms' Japanese origins and U.S. tech dominance, but not their worldwide story. In the quest for more choices—and in response to users' campaigns—the Consortium added, among many other emoji, an array of food items. (They were not always culturally authentic: In an attempted nod to China's culinary traditions, a takeout box joined the lexicon.) In 2015, the group introduced five 'realistic' skin-tone options for humanlike emoji figures. The update brought unintended consequences. Lined up next to other hues, the sunny yellow originally meant to scan as race-neutral (in the lineage of the classic smiley face, Lego mini-figures, and the Simpsons) now read, to some, as racist. Light skin tones, intended to reflect users' skin color, evoked, Houston notes, a similar reaction: Some saw the choice of those light-hued symbols as a 'white power' gesture. Complexity, when emoji are involved, will always find its way back. The Consortium's Emoji Subcommittee—a 'crack team of emoji wranglers,' in Houston's words—had its hands full. Gender updating in particular proved challenging. Early Unicode guidance on depicting emoji people had emphasized, but not required, striving for gender neutrality. To move beyond stereotypes, should equity or androgyny lead the way? Same-sex couples and same-sex parents were soon included. Women were liberated, as one peeved op-ed writer had urged, from 'a smattering of tired, beauty-centric' emoji career options: 16 professions, available in male and female versions, were added. To Houston's surprise, the 2017 gender-focused emoji season met with no political or press furor—perhaps owing to public 'emoji fatigue,' he speculates. (Androgyny lived on that year, for the most part, as fantasy—through the magical figures issued in the new batch 🧙🧚🧛🧜🧞.) How much control, at this point, the subcommittee can exert over emoji denotation and connotation isn't clear. Unicode's emoji now coexist with platform-specific icons that users can customize for themselves (think: stickers, Bitmoji, Memoji). The latest iterations, such as Apple's Genmoji, use artificial intelligence to create ever more adaptable pictograms. Meanwhile, Unicode's emoji are becoming only more protean: The 💀 has expanded from a mark of disapproval to a sign of amusement (death via laughter). The 😭 might suggest laughter too now, in addition to its sobs. When words have oppositional meanings like this, context typically helps clarify which one applies—thanks to accompanying text, you can probably tell whether the 🍑 you just received is a fruit, a body part, or a call for impeachment. The 👍 and other emoji similarly used as stand-alone replies are part of a different class: They bring ambiguity without resolution. They bring a whiff of Babel. But myths have their own ambiguities. Although the Babel story conjures the arrival of a dystopia—a people perpetually lost in translation—it's also a creation myth: an ancient attempt to explain why people with so much in common are divided by their languages. Understandably, we tend to focus on the ending of the Babel tale, but it begins with humans in community. Only later does language divide them. For most of human history, communication barriers have made us illegible to one another. Emoji float, merrily (mostly), over the barriers. And their ambiguity is essential to their buoyancy. Emoji, as images, can never be tethered to one meaning. Even if 'emoji season' ceases to yield new crops, the icons that exist will keep evolving. They will keep challenging us to evolve with them. The namesake of Houston's book, the 'face with tears of joy,' has long been the world's most popular emoji. It has also been, according to recent reports, the subject of another Gen Z pronouncement: The 😂 is cringe. What it communicates, above all, is the hopeless unhipness of its sender. I use it anyway, mostly out of habit but also because, to me, joyful beats cool every time. And my 😂 are in good company. Each day, around the planet, billions of 😂 ping across screens. Their usage might decline in the future. Their primary meaning might change. For now, though, they are what we have. For now, because of them, we can laugh together across the distance.

23 Budget-Friendly Things To Transform Your Yard
23 Budget-Friendly Things To Transform Your Yard

Buzz Feed

time8 hours ago

  • Buzz Feed

23 Budget-Friendly Things To Transform Your Yard

A standing weeder (without the chemicals!) in case you've found your dream home, but, unfortunately, it came with a grass full of dandelions. Unwind after a busy day at the office with some therapeutic weeding that won't hurt your back. 👍 And a crack weeder tool to add to your yard clean-up arsenal — it has a head specifically designed to rake through the thinnest cracks and pull out all those unwanted weeds right from their roots. A dog spot repair to help restore your lawn to a lush, green state even if Fido has focused on a specific spot right in the middle of your lawn to *~do his business*~. And "no-dig" fencing to place along your garden beds to prevent small animals from digging up your prized petunias — it doesn't need any tools to be installed (woohoo!) and will effectively protect your flowers and vegetables so they can *actually* grow this year instead of being eaten by your friendly (but hungry) neighborhood squirrels. A Hori Hori Japanese weeding knife with a dual-sided blade you can use for digging, weeding, cutting, and planting — not to mention you'll look pretty badass whipping this bad boy out to fight off some dandelions. A grass gauge you can count on to remind you when your lawn needs a lil' trim — and not without a sense of humor. 😉 Can someone make one of these for my actual hair? TYSM. A plant supporter that'll give your tomato plants and bushes a bit more support so they can grow big and tall — since they're powder-coated in green they wont' ruin your garden's *~aesthetic~*. A row of colorful flower pots with draining holes and hooks that'll brighten up your deck with very minimal effort. A pack of Miracle-Gro water-storing crystals that'll get your outdoor plants in tip-top shape by ensuring you don't under water (or over water!) 'em. Mix the crystals into your soil and let them work their magic (and by magic I mean they absorb water and keep the soil at a perfect moisture level). Or (!!!) Miracle-Gro tree and shrub plant food spikes to give all of the color coordinated flowers you planted in beds along your back fence the *~oomph~* they need to really take off and flourish. Looking out your sliding patio door is about to be a lot more enjoyable. Liquid Fence deer and rabbit repellent that'll make your beloved outdoor garden smell absolutely disgusting to the precious lil' creatures that frequent your yard. While we love you, Sir Hops A Lot, we'd prefer you snack on something other than our flower beds. A variety of sunflower seeds to revive that boring patch of dirt in your yard into a photo shoot–worthy garden without the stress of hand selecting which flowers to plant. Alexa, play "Sunflower" by Harry Styles. Or a pack of wildflower seeds packed with 30,000 seeds (jeeeez) to transform that boring patch of dirt in your yard into a photo shoot–worthy garden without the stress of hand selecting which flowers to plant. A vibrant bee-watering station that'll double as a piece of art in your garden — it'll provide a buzz-worthy haven for your fave pollinators to hang in and recharge before they get back to work. They're called "busy bees" for a reason! A programmable timer to work some Fairy Godmother-like magic on your hose and transform it into a sprinkler. Bibbidi, Bobbidi, Boo-tiful lawn! Pruning shears, for anyone who has successfully created their own magical rose garden in their yard. Better get yourself a glass jar too to display it like in Beauty and the Beast. A cordless grass trimmer that'll help you tackle hard-to-reach areas in your garden bed or simply get the job done if you are the proud owner of a tiny patch of grass. And a long-handled lopper to help you trim any overgrown bushes or trees in your yard, a must-have for anyone who isn't Edward Scissorhands. A garden dibber to make planting bulbs, sowing seeds, and breaking up clumps of dirt easier than ever — every gardener should have one of these babies! A seeding square kit, so planting your lil' sprouts won't turn into a game of guess and check. You'll know *exactly* what pattern you planted your basil seeds in this year. A soaker hose you can attach to the hose you already own to provide your bushes, plants, and trees with the shower they've always dreamt of. A ready-to-spray bleach-free outdoor cleaner to help you tackle stubborn stains without having to break out a pressure washer (phew). It's made with a fast-foaming formula that's safe for plants (double phew). Fare thee well, backyard filth! And solar powered light-up flowers to make your boring old garden beds feel like Alice's Wonderland once night falls. Your friends won't be able to resist taking aesthetic Insta pics of them — imagine how whimsical they'll look with a cool filter added to them???

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store