Before anyone bothers to send me a link to the piece of silliness that National Geographic has just put up on its website, please consider the following response that Ric Gillespie has posted on the same site. I used to think that National Geo had some commitment to being factual and maybe even checking its sources, but no....
Correction: No one has claimed that Earhart's bones have been discovered and no one has made any wild claims. TIGHAR has said only that bone fragments have been recovered that, based on the archaeological context, may be human and, if they are, could conceivably be Earhart's. The bone fragments and other material that may contain human DNA are being examined at Oklahoma University's Molecular Anthropology Laboratories. If human mitochondrial DNA can recovered and sequenced it will be compared to a reference sample of mitochondrial DNA provided by an Earhart relative in the direct female line. The reference sample should be virtually identical to Amelia's.
We welcome Mr. Long's efforts to recover Earhart DNA but without a way to be sure whether AE licked a particular envelope it would seem that any result would be open to question unless it matched the reference sample we already have.