|Date.| Miles | OBSERVATIONS, ETC.
| |Covered.| (Exact copy from original Field Papers)
-----+-----+--------+-------------------------------------------------
March| 18 | 26 | Svartevoeg. Made cache here for return.
1908.| | | Supporting party goes back. Noon start;
| | | 4 men, 46 dogs, 4 sleds; 26 miles. Ice heavy,
| | | wavy; little snow; crystals hard; land
| | | screened by drift. Camp on old field. Night
| | | uncomfortable; air humid, penetrating.
| | | Snowhouse of hard snow imperfectly made.
| | | (Other notes of this date so dim that they
| | | cannot be read. _Compass directions, unless
| | | otherwise noted, are true._)
| | |
| 19 | 21 | Clearer, overland thick; -56 deg. F.; Wind 2 W.;
| | | sun feeble; blue haze. On march, ice smaller;
| | | use of axe; crossings troublesome. Camp lee of
| | | big hummock. Cannot send supply back; must
| | | follow for another day.
| | |
| 20 | 16 | Land more clearly visible; sky overcast; wind
| | | W. S. W. 1; ice worse. Small igloo. The last
| | | feed men return.
| | |
| 21 | 29 | Awoke, sun N. E.; orange glow; -63 deg. F.;
| | | bar. 30.10, steady; no clouds; sky pale purple.
| | | More snow (on ice); groaning sledges; mirages,
| | | lands, mountains, volcanoes. Air light; wind
| | | sky N.; Grant Land a mere line; -46 deg.. Torture
| | | of light snow; march 14 hours.
| | |
| 22 | 22 | A. M.; wind E. 3; -59 deg.. Start 12 (noon); sky
| | | clearer; wind 2; water sky N. Grant Land visible
| | | P. M. (Later) Temp. rose to -46 deg.. Wind tolerably
| | | high; pressure lines; the big lead. Camp on old
| | | field on bank; ice noises; search for the
| | | crossing. Young, elastic ice.
| | |
| 23 | 17 | Cross the big lead. Young ice elastic and
| | | dangerous; western sky again threatening; ice
| | | movement east; fields small; narrow open lanes.
| | | Course for 85th on 97th; -40 deg.; march 11 hours;
| | | 23 miles, credit 17 miles. Ice noises; night
| | | beautiful; sun sank into pearly haze. (Later)
| | | Orange glow; pack violet and pale purple blue;
| | | sky late--partly cl. appearance of land W.
| | |
| 24 | 18 | Observations 83.31--96.27; -41 deg.; bar. 29.70.
| | | West bank of fog and haze. Start afternoon;
| | | no life; old seal hole and bear tracks; long
| | | march; ice improving. 10 h.; pedometer 21 m.;
| | | camp in coming storm; rushing clouds; signs of
| | | land W. 18 m. (credited on course).
| | |
| 25 | 18 | Early awakened by dogs. Storm spent soon;
| | | sunrise temp. -26 deg., later -41 deg.; west again
| | | smoky. Back to the bags; cracking ice; the
| | | breaking and separating ice and the crevasse
| | | episode; in a bag and in water; ice-water
| | | and pemmican; masks of ice. Good march over
| | | newly-fractured ice; ice in motion.
| | |
| 26 | 17 | Still windy; some drift snow; another storm
| | | threatening. How we need rest! Strong wind
| | | during the night. Position D. R. 84.24--96.53.
| | |
| 27 | 16 | In camp until noon. Strong winds all night;
| | | eased at noon; clearing some; sun; weather
| | | unsettled. Short run; squally en route; made
| | | early camp. Bar. 29.05.
| | |
| 28 | 0 | Weather still unsettled. Temp. -41 deg.; Bar. 29.15;
| | | west ugly. No progress. The drift. In camp.
| | | Anxious about stability of igloo. The collapsed
| | | camp. Midnight; north cloudy, but ice bright;
| | | many hummocks.
| | |
| 29 | 9 | Start early P. M. A little blue in the west; sun
| | | bursts; pack disturbed; hard traveling, due to
| | | fresh crevasses. Camp midnight; only 9 miles.
| | |
| 30 | 10 | Land, 9 A. M., cleared; land was seen; westerly
| | | clouds settled over it. Observations 84.50,
| | | 95.36; bearing of land, southern group, West by
| | | South to West by North true. Other bearings
| | | taken later place a coast line along the 102
| | | meridian from lat. 84 deg. 20' to 85 deg. 10'. There
| | | must be much open water about the land, for
| | | banks of vapor persistently hide part. A low fog
| | | persistent; cannot see shore; for days we have
| | | expected to see something W., but never a clear
| | | horizon. Probably two island S. like Heiberg,
| | | 1,800 ft. high, valleys, mountains, snow N.,
| | | table 1,000, thin ice sheet, bright nights.
| | | From observation paper: Bar. 30.10, had risen
| | | from 29.50 in 2 hours; wind 2-3 mag. S.;
| | | clouds mist, East, water-bands W.; shadow
| | | (of 6 ft. pole) 39 ft.
| | |
| 31 | 10 | Land screened by mist; wind W. 2-0. Ice
| | | fracture; no sign of life--none since 83.
| | |
April| 1 | 18 | (Time of traveling) 9 to 6; ice better; fields
1908.| | | larger; crevasses less troublesome; temp. -32 deg..
| | | There is no more darkness at night.
| | |
| 2 | 12 | (Start) 9.30; (stop) 8. Smooth ice; hard snow;
| | | ice 28 ft. and 32. Night bright but cloudy.
| | | Temp. -35 deg.; bar. 30.10; leads difficult.
| | |
| 3 | 10 | 8.30 to 6.30. Temp. -39 deg.; bar. 30.12; sky
| | | clearing at noon, but low clouds and frosty haze
| | | persist in the W. and N. Night bright; sun at
| | | midnight under cloud and haze.
| | |
| 4 | 14 | 8.45 to 6.10. Snow softer; used snowshoes; have
| | | crossed 11 crevasses; much chopping; brash and
| | | small hummocks.
| | |
| 5 | 14 | 9 (A. M.) to 5.45 (P. M.). Snow better.
| | | Ice larger. Oh, so tired! Snowshoes.
| | |
| 6 | 14 | 8.10 (A. M.) to 6.15 (P. M.). Snow hard. Ice
| | | flat. Few hummocks. Less wavy. Snow (shoes).
| | | Sun faces.
| | |
| 7 | 14 | 11 to 10. Beautiful clear weather; even the
| | | night sky clear. Midnight sun first seen.
| | | Ice 36 ft. (thick). (Another measurement gave
| | | 21 feet.)
| | |
| 8 | 9 | Observation before starting, 86.36, 94.2. In
| | | spite of what seemed like long marches we made
| | | only 106 miles in 9 days. Much distance lost in
| | | crossings. (From field paper) bar. 29.50,
| | | rising; temp. -37 deg.; wind mag. N. E., 2; clouds
| | | St. 3; shadow (6 ft. pole), 32 feet.
| | |
| 9 | 14 | 9 A. M. to 5.30 P. M.; snow hard; ice about the
| | | same; wind cutting; frost bites. Clothes humid.
| | |
| 10 | 16 | 10 P. M. to 7 A. M. Working hours changed; big
| | | marches and long hours no longer possible; snow
| | | good; ice steadily improving; bodily fatigue
| | | much felt; wind 1-28 W.
| | |
| 11 | 15 | 10.30 to 8 A. M. Observation end of March,
| | | 87.20, 95.19; the pack disturbance of B. Ld.
| | | lost; farthest north; little crushed ice;
| | | old floes less irregular; anxious about food;
| | | wind 3 W. (true); 300 miles in 24 days; work
| | | intermittent; too tired to read instruments.
| | | (From other field notes, Temp. -39 deg.;
| | | bar. 29.90 deg..)
| | |
| 12 | 21 | 11 P. M. to 7 A. M. Thoughts of return. Food
| | | supply reduced. Hope to economize in warmer
| | | weather. Very heavy ice. Much like land ice.
| | | Wind 2 W. S. W. The awful monotony!
| | |
| 13 | 17 | 12 P. M. to 7 A. M. The same heavy glacier-like
| | | ice.... The occasional soup. Hummocks 15-20 ft.
| | | Ahwelah in tears at start. W. black. Sun under
| | | rushing vapors. Ice changes. Leads.
| | |
| 14 | 23 | 11 P. M. to 7.10 A. M. 88.21, 95.52. Wind light
| | | but penetrating. Off the big field, ice smaller.
| | | Some open leads. Little sign of pressure. Snow
| | | soft, but less precipitation. Dogs get up
| | | better speed. 100 miles from Pole. (From other
| | | observation papers: Bar. 29.90, falling;
| | | temp., -44 deg.; shadow (6 ft. pole) 301/2 feet.)
| | |
| 15 | 14 | 10 P. M. to 7 A. M. Ice same. Wind -1, S. W.
| | | Working to the limit of muscle capacity. So
| | | tired and weary of the never ceasing tread!
| | |
| 16 | 15 | 10.30 to 8 A. M. Ice passed. Several heavy old
| | | floes. Made 6 crossings. Wind 1-3, W. S. W.
| | |
| 17 | 13 | 10.15 to 8 A. M. Ice same. Crevasses new.
| | | 7 crossings. Saw several big hummocks. Ice
| | | less troublesome. Temp., -40 deg.; bar., 30.00.
| | | Sled friction less.
| | |
| 18 | 14 | 9 P. M. to 6. Ice, though broken, smooth. The
| | | horizon line not so irregular as that of more
| | | S. ice. Sky and ice of a dark purple blue.
| | | (Bar. 30.02.)
| | |
| 19 | 16 | 11 P. M. to 8 A. M. (Position) 89.31. D. R.
| | | 94.03. Camp on an old field--the only one on
| | | the horizon with big hummocks. Ice in very large
| | | fields; surface less irregular, but in other
| | | respects not different from farther S. Eskimos
| | | told that in two average marches Pole would be
| | | reached. Extra rations served. Camp in tent.
| | | (Bar., 29.98; Temp., -46 deg..)
| | |
| 20 | 151/2 | 8 P. M. to 4 A. M. An exciting run; ice aglow in
| | | purple and gold; Eskimos chanting. Wind, S. 1
| | | 89; 46.45. (D. R.) 94.52. New enthusiasm; good
| | | march. Temp., -36 deg.; bar. (not legible on notes);
| | | course set for 97th.
| | |
| 21 | 131/2 | 1 A. M. to 9 A. M. Observations noon: 89; 59.45;
| | | ped. 14. Camp; sleep in tent short time; after
| | | observations advance; pitch tent; (also) made
| | | camp--snow--prepared for two rounds of
| | | observations. Temp., 37.7 deg.; bar., 29.83. Nothing
| | | wonderful; no Pole; a sea of unknown depth; ice
| | | more active; new cracks; open leads; but surface
| | | like farther south. Overjoyed but find no words
| | | to express pleasure. So tired and weary! How we
| | | need a rest! 12, night. Sun seems as high as at
| | | noon, but in reality is a little higher, owing
| | | to its spiral ascent. The mental elation--the
| | | drying of furs, and (making) photos--Eskimos'
| | | ideas and disappointment of no Pole--thoughts
| | | of home and its cheer. But oh, such monotony of
| | | sky, wind and ice! The dangers of getting back.
| | | (From other observation papers: Temp, ranged
| | | from -36 deg. by mercury thermometer to -39 deg. by
| | | spirit thermometer; clouds Alt. St., 1; wind
| | | mag. S., 1; ice blink E.; water sky, W.; shadow
| | | (of 6 ft. pole) 28 feet.)
| | |
| 22 | 0 | Moved camp 4 m. magnetic S. Made 4 observations
| | | for altitude; S. at noon, W. at 6, N. at 12M, E.
| | | at 6 A. M. Ice same; more open water; wind 2-3;
| | | temp., -41 deg.; (from field paper) W. S. W., 1 to
| | | 2. There are only two big hummocks in sight.
| | | (Made a series of observations for the sun's
| | | altitude, 2 on the 21st at the first camp, 4 on
| | | the 22nd at W. M. camp, and another midnight
| | | 22-23. Before we left deposited tube.)
| | |
| 23 | 20 | Start for home. 12.30 to noon. Fairly clear--ice
| | | smooth, but many new crevasses. Temp., -41 deg..
| | | Course for 100 mer.
| | |
| 24 | 16 | 11 P. M. to 9 A. M. These records, being made at
| | | the end of the day's journey, give the doings of
| | | the day previous--this note for the 24th is in
| | | reality written on the morning of the 25th, when
| | | comfortable in camp. Wind 1-2 W. Temp., -36 deg..
| | | Ice smooth--fields larger; 5 crossings; the
| | | pleasure of facing home.
| | |
| 25 | 15 | 8-8. Temp., -37 deg.; Wind 1-2 W. S. W.; ice same.
| | | The worry of ice breaking up for me, signs of
| | | joy for the Eskimo.
| | |
| 26 | 14 | 9 to 7. Still much worried about return;
| | | possibility of ice disruption and open water
| | | near land; wind light; ice shows new cracks,
| | | but few have opened; seems to be little
| | | pressure; few hummocks; snow hard and
| | | traveling all that could be desired.
| | |
| 27 | 14 | 9.30 to 8. Ice same; wind S. E. 1; good going;
| | | crossings not troublesome; dogs in good spirits;
| | | Eskimos happy; but all very tired. Temp., -40 deg..
| | |
| 28 | 14 | 9.15 to 7.45. Ice same; wind 1 W.; snow
| | | moderately hard; few hummocks and no pressure
| | | lines.
| | |
| 29 | 13 | Midnight to 8.45 A. M. Ice more active; fresh
| | | cracks; some open cracks but no leads. Wind 1 S.
| | |
| 30 | 15 | Midnight to 8 A. M. Ped. registered 121 m. from
| | | Pole; camp by D. R., 87.59-100; observations
| | | 88.01, 97.42. Course half point more W.
| | | Temp., -34 deg.. Start more westerly.
| | |
May | 1 | 18 | 12.30 to 9 A. M. Much color to the sunbursts,
1908.| | | but the air humid; the temperature persistently
| | | near -40 deg., but considerable range with the
| | | direction of the light winds and mists when
| | | they come over leads. Much very heavy smooth
| | | ice--undulating, not hummocky like S.
| | |
| 2 | 12 | 2 A. M. to 11 A. M. Fog, clouds and wet air.
| | | Temp., -15 deg.. Hard to strike a course.
| | |
| 3 | 13 | 1 A. M. to 10 A. M. Thick weather; wind E. 2;
| | | ice friction less; occasional light snow fall.
| | |
| 4 | 14 | 3 to 11 A. M. Air clear but sky obscured; ice
| | | very good, but hummocks appearing on the
| | | horizon.
| | |
| 5 | 11 | 11 P. M. to 6 A. M. Strong wind; occasional
| | | breathing spell behind hummocks; squally with
| | | drifts.
| | |
| 6 | 0 | In camp. Stopped by signs of storm; tried to
| | | build igloo but wind prevented; in a collapsed
| | | tent for 24 hours; eat only half ration of
| | | pemmican.
| | |
| 7 | 10 | 8 A. M. to 3 P. M. Wind detestable; ice bad;
| | | life a torture; sky persistently obscured; no
| | | observations; pedometer out of order, only time
| | | to gauge our distance.
| | |
| 8 | 12 | 2 A. M. to 10. Weather bad; windy, S. W.; some
| | | drift; heavy going.
| | |
| 9 | 13 | 1 to 8 A. M. (Weather) thick; wind easier; ice
| | | in big fields; snow a little harder, snowshoes
| | | steady.
| | |
| 10 | 13 | 11 P. M. of the 9th to 6 A. M. Heavy going but
| | | little friction on sled; some drift; see more
| | | hummocks.
| | |
| 11 | 0 | May 11. In camp. Strong wind; heavy drift;
| | | encircle tent with snow blocks.
| | |
| 12 | 11 | 12.30 to 8.30 A. M. Wind still strong; cestrugi
| | | troublesome, but temperature moderate; sled
| | | loads getting light.
| | |
| 13 | 12 | 11 P. M. of 12th, to 7.30 A. M. of 13th. Wind
| | | easier, S. S. W.; snow harder; ice very thick
| | | and very large fields; fog.
| | |
| 14 | 9 | 3 A. M. to 9 A. M. No sky; strong wind compelled
| | | to camp early.
| | |
| 15 | 13 | 1 A. M. to 10. Fog; ice much crevassed; passed
| | | over several cracks--some opening.
| | |
| 16 | 14 | May 16. 11 P. M. of the 15th to 6 A. M. Cl. 10;
| | | wind again troublesome; light diffused, making
| | | it difficult to find footing.
| | |
| 17 | 11 | 2 A. M. to 10. Thick; ice more and more broken;
| | | smaller and more cracked--cracks give much
| | | trouble.
| | |
| 18 | 11 | 1 A. M. to 9.30. Wind more southerly and strong;
| | | ice separating; some open water in leads.
| | |
| 19 | 12 | 11 P. M. to 7.30. Wind veering east; fog
| | | thicker; ice very much broken, but snow surface
| | | good.
| | |
| 20 | 6 | Midnight to 9 A. M. Open water; active pack;
| | | almost impossible.
| | |
| 21 | 8 | 11 P. M. to 9. Conditions the same; our return
| | | seems almost hopeless; no observations--cannot
| | | even guess at the drift.
| | |
| 22 | 0 | In camp. Gale N. E.; temp, high; air wet;
| | | ice breaking and grinding; worried about the
| | | ultimate return; food low.
| | |
| 23 | 5 | 3 A. M. to 7 A. M. Still squally, but forced a
| | | short march.
| | |
| 24 | 12 | 12 noon to 8 A. M. Short clearing at noon; the
| | | first clear mid-day sky for a long time; west
| | | still in haze. Water sky W. and S. W.; no land
| | | in sight--though the boys saw the land later
| | | when I was asleep; ice much broken.
| | | 84 deg. 02'-97 deg. 03'.
| | |
| 25 | 14 | 10 P. M. to 6 A. M. Ice better; no wind; thick
| | | fog; snow hard. Temp., -10 deg..
| | |
| 26 | 12 | 11 P. M. to 7.45 A. M. Ice in fields of about
| | | 1 M. somewhat hummocky; crossings hard; no wind.
| | |
| 27 | 11 | 11.30 P. M. to 9.30 A. M. Ice same; thick fog.
| | |
| 28 | 13 | 12 m. night to 10 A. M. Ice still same; fog;
| | | wind 3, shifting E. S. E. and S. W.
| | |
| 29 | 11 | 11.30 P. M. to 9.30 A. M. As we came here the
| | | water sky in the southwest to which we had
| | | aimed, gradually working west, led to a wide
| | | open lead, extending from north to south, and
| | | almost before knowing it, in the general plan
| | | of the ice arrangement, we found ourselves to
| | | the east of this lead. Temp. rose to zero. Ice
| | | much broken; air thick; light vague; impossible
| | | to see irregularities. Food 3/4 rations; and
| | | straight course for Nansen Sound.
| | |
| 30 | 10 | 12 to 11 A. M. Ice in heaps; open water; brash
| | | the worst trouble; little fog.
| | |
| 31 | 11 | 11.15 P. M. to 9 A. M. Ice little better; snow
| | | hard; sleds go easy; much helping required
| | | (over pressure lines).
| | |
June | 1 | 12 | 10.45 to 8. Ice in large fields; many hummocks;
1908.| | | few heavy fields.
| | |
| 2 | 12 | 10 P. M. to 9 A. M. Ice steadily improving.
| | |
| 3 | 11 | 10 P. M. to 8 A. M. Ice begins to show action of
| | | sun. Temperature occasionally above freezing.
| | |
| 4 | 10 | 9.30 P. M. to 7.30 A. M. Fog; ice offering much
| | | trouble, but friction little and load light.
| | |
| 5 | 11 | 9.45 P. M. to 7 A. M. Hummocks exposed to sun
| | | have icicles.
| | |
| 6 | 0 | In camp. Strong N. W. gale.
| | |
| 7 | 0 | In camp. Gale continues, with much snow; the ice
| | | about breaks up; anxious about map. (Not knowing
| | | either drift or position, were puzzled as to
| | | proper course to set.)
| | |
| 8 | 14 | 1 A. M. to noon. Ice bad, but snow hard, and
| | | after rest progress good; wind still blowing
| | | west.
| | |
| 9 | 10 | 11 P. M. to 9 A. M. With thick ice and this kind
| | | of traveling it is hard to guess at distances.
| | |
| 10 | 0 | 10.30 P. M. to 8. Bad ice; open leads; still no
| | | sun.
| | |
| 11 | 14 | 10 P. M. to 8 A. M. Large smooth ice; little
| | | snow; wind S. W., 1; no fog, but sky still of
| | | lead.
| | |
| 12 | 15 | 10.30 to 5. Small fields but good going;
| | | sky black to the east.
| | |
| 13 | 14 | 10 to 8 A. M. Fog cleared first time since last
| | | observation. Land in sight south and east.
| | | Heiberg and Ringnes Land; water sky; small ice;
| | | brash and drift eastward. We have been carried
| | | adrift far to the south and west, and
| | | examination of ice eastward proves that all
| | | is small ice and open water. Heiberg Island
| | | is impossible to us. What is our fate? Food and
| | | fuel is about exhausted, though we still have
| | | 10 bony dogs. Upon these and our little pemmican
| | | we can possibly survive for 20 days. In the
| | | meantime we must go somewhere. To the south
| | | is our only hope.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE.--_June 14_ and thereafter to _September 1_, all notes were briefly
jotted down in another diary, a collection of loose leaves in which the
observations of the return were made. This diary was left with the
instruments at Etah with Mr. Whitney. The data, however, had been
rewritten at Cape Sparbo, so that the notes had served their purpose and
were of no further value when no pretentious publication was
anticipated.
Other notes were made on loose sheets of paper or on leaves of the note
books. Many of these were destroyed, others were rubbed out to make room
for recording what was regarded as more important data, and a few were
retained quite by accident.
QUESTIONS THAT ENTER CALCULATIONS FOR POSITION OF THE NORTH POLE.
By FREDERICK A. COOK.
Much abstruse, semi-scientific and academic material has been forced
into the polar discussions about proofs by observation. The problem
presented is full of interesting points, and to elucidate these I will
ask the reader to go back with me to that elusive imaginary spot, the
North Pole. Here we find no pole--and absolutely nothing to mark the
spot for hundreds of miles. We are in the center of a great moving sea
of ice and for 500 miles in every direction it is the same hopeless
desert of floating, shifting crystal. I believed then that we had
reached the Pole, and it never occurred to me that there would be a cry
for absolute proof. Such a demand had never been presented before. The
usual data of the personal narrative of the explorers had always been
received with good faith. But let us reopen the question and examine the
whole problem.
Is there any positive proof for a problem of this kind? Is there any one
sure shoulder upon which we can hang the mantle of polar conquest? We
are deprived of the usual landmarks of terrestrially fixed points. The
effort to furnish proof is like trying to fix a point in Mid-Atlantic.
But here you have the tremendous advantage of known compass variation,
sure time, reasonably accurate corrections. Not only by careful
observation at sea of fixed stars and other astronomical data, but by an
easy and quick access to and from each shore, and by reliable tables for
reductions gathered during scores of years of experience.
All this is denied in the mid-polar basins at the time when it is
possible to arrive there. There is no night, there are no stars, and the
sun, the only fixed object by which a position can be calculated, is not
absolutely fixable. It is low on the horizon. Its rays are bent in
getting to the recording instruments while passing through the thick
maze of floating ice mist. This mist always rests on the pack even in
clear days. The very low temperature of the atmosphere and the
distorting, twisting mirage effect of different strata of air, with
radically different temperatures, wherein each stratum has a different
density, carry different quantities of frosted humidity.
All of this gives to the sunbeam, upon which the calculation for
latitude and longitude is based, the deceptive appearance of a paddle
thrust into clear water. The paddle in such case seems bent. The sunbeam
is bent in a like manner, since it passes through an unknown depth of
refractory air for the correction of which no law can be devised until
modern aerial navigation brings to a science that very complex problem
of the geography of the atmosphere. For this reason, and for others
which we will presently show, this whole idea of proof by figures as
devised by Mr. Peary and the armchair geographers, falls to pieces.
Let us take the noon observation--a fairly certain method to determine
latitude in most zones of the earth where for hundreds of years we have
learned to make certain corrections, which by use have been incorporated
as laws in the art of navigation. About five minutes before local noon
the sea captain goes to the bridge with sextant in hand. His time is
certain, but even if it were not, the sun rises and sets and therefore
changes its altitude quickly. The captain screws the sun down to a fixed
angle on his sextant; he puts the instrument aside; then takes it up
again, brings the sun to the horizon, examines his instrument. The sun
has risen a little further; it is not yet noon. This is repeated again
and again, and at last the sun begins to descend. It is now local noon.
This gives a rough check for his time. There is a certain sure moment
for his observation at just the second when it is accurate,--when the
sun's highest ascent has been reached. Such advantages are impossible
when nearing the Pole. The chronometers have been shooting the shoots of
the pack for weeks. The sudden changes of temperature also disturb the
mechanism, and therefore time, that very important factor upon which all
astronomical data rest, is at best only a rough guess. For this reason
alone, if for no other, such as unknown refraction and other optical
illusions, the determination of longitude when nearing the Pole becomes
difficult and unreliable. All concede this, but latitude, we are told by
the armchair observer, is easy and sure. Let us see.
The time nears to get a peep of the sun at noon, but what is local
noon? The chronometers may be, and probably are, far off. And there is
no way to correct even approximately. I do not mean on hours, but there
may be unknowable differences of minutes, and each minute represents a
mile. Let us see how this affects our noon observation. Five or ten
minutes before local noon the observer levels his artificial horizon and
with sextant in hand lies down on the snow. A little drift and nose
bleaching wind complicate matters. The fingers are cold; the instrument
must be handled with mittens; the cold is such that at best a shiver
runs up the spine, the eye blinks with snow glitter and frost. The arms,
hands and legs become stiff from cold and from inaction. He tries
exactly what the sea captain does in comfort on the bridge, but his time
is a guess, he watches the sun, he tries to catch it when it is highest,
but this is about as difficult as it is to catch a girl in the act of
winking when her back is turned.
The sun does not rise and set as it does in temperate climes--it circles
the horizon day and night in a spiral ascent so nearly parallel to the
line of the horizon that it is a practical impossibility to determine by
any possible means at hand when it is highest. One may lie on that snow
for an hour, and though steadied with the patience of Job, the absolute
determination of the highest point of the sun's altitude or the local
noon is almost a physical impossibility.
This observation is not accurate and gives only results of use in
connection with other calculations. These results at best are also
subject to that unknown allowance for really great atmospheric
refraction. The geographic student will, I am sure, agree that against
this the magnetic needle will offer some check, for if you can be
certain that when the needle points to a positive direction, then it is
a simple matter to get approximate time with it and the highest noon
altitude; but since the correction for the needle, like that of latitude
and longitude, is based on accurate time, and since it is further
influenced by other local and general unknown conditions--therefore even
the compass, that sheet anchor of the navigator, is as uncertain as
other aids to fixing a position in the polar basin.
In making such observations an artificial horizon must be used. This
offers an uncontrollable element of inaccuracy in all Arctic
observations when the sun is low.
My observations were made with the sun about 12 deg. above the horizon. At
this angle the image of the sun is dragged over the glass or mercury
with no sharp outlines, a mere streak of light, and not a perfect,
sharp-cut image of the sun which an important observation demands.
Mr. Peary's altitudes were all less than 7 deg.. I challenge any one to
produce a clear cut image of the sun on an artificial horizon with the
sun at that angle. All such observations therefore are unreliable
because of imperfect contact, for which there can be no correction.
The question of error by refraction is one of very great importance. In
the known zones the accumulated lesson of ages has given us certain
tables for correction, but even with these advantages few navigators
would take an observation when the sun is but 7 deg. above the horizon and
count it of any value whatever.
In the Arctic the problem of refraction presents probable inaccuracies,
not of seconds or minutes, but possibly of degrees. Every Arctic
traveler has seen in certain atmospheric conditions a dog enlarged to
the image of a bear. A raven frequently looks like a man, and a hummock,
but 25 feet high, a short distance away, will at times rise to the
proportions of a mountain. Mirages turn things topsy-turvy, and the
whole polar topography is distorted by optical illusions. Many explorers
have seen the returning sun over a sea horizon after the long night one
or two days before the correct time for its reappearance. This gives you
an error in observations which can be a matter of 60 miles.
Here is a tangle in optics, which cannot under the present knowledge of
conditions be elucidated, and yet with all these disadvantages, the
group of armchair geographers of the National Geographic Society
pronounces a series of sun altitudes less than 7 deg. above the horizon as
proof positive of the attainment of the Pole. Furthermore these men are
personal friends of Mr. Peary, and the society for whom they act is
financially interested in the venture which they indorsed.
Is this verdict based upon either science or justice, or honor?
In response to a public clamor for a peep at these papers, a more
detestable unfairness was forced on the public. The venerable director
of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, who was one of Mr. Peary's jurors,
instead of showing his hand, and thus freeing himself from a dishonest
entanglement, asked his underlings, H. C. Mitchell and C. R. Duval, to
stoop to a dishonor to veil the humbug previously perpetrated. Under the
instruction of their chief, the first figures of Mr. Peary's sextant
readings have been taken, and by manipulating these they have helped Mr.
Peary by saying that their calculation placed Mr. Peary within two miles
of the Pole.
Perhaps Mr. Peary was at the pin-point of the Pole, but when he allows
his friends to use questionable methods to give a false security to his
claim, then his claim is insecure indeed.
Mitchell and Duval took the sextant readings at face value. If Mr. Peary
or his computers had frankly admitted the uncertainty of the grounds
upon which these sextant readings rested, then one would be inclined to
grant the benefit of doubt; but as was the case regarding the verdict of
the National Geographic Society, the public was carefully excluded from
a knowledge of the shaky grounds upon which these calculations are
based. The impossibility of correct time and adequate allowance for
refraction render such figures useless as proof of a position. But what
about the image of the sun upon the artificial horizon?
An important observation demands that this should be sharp and clear,
otherwise the observation is worthless. Mitchell and Duval have surely
thought of this. Perhaps they have tried an experiment. As real
scientific students they should have experimented with the figures with
which they played. If the experiment has not been made they are
incompetent. In either case a trick has been used to bolster up the
deceptive verdict of the National Geographic Society.
A dish of molasses, a bull's eye lantern and a dark room are all that is
necessary to prove how the public has been deceived by men in the
Government pay as scientific computers. With the bull's eye as the sun,
the molasses or any other reflecting surface as a horizon, with the
light striking the surface at less than 7 degrees, as Mr. Peary's sun
did, it will be found that the sun's image is an oblong streak of light
with ill-defined edges. Such an image cannot be recorded on a sextant
with sufficient accuracy to make it of any use as an observation.
Mitchell and Duval must know this. If so, they are dishonest, for they
did not tell the public about it. If they did not know it they are
incompetent and should be dismissed from the Government service.
With all of these uncertainties a course which gives a workable plan of
action can be laid over the blank charts, but there always remains the
feebly guarded mystery of the ice drift. When the course is set, the
daily run of distance can be checked by estimating speed and hourly
progress with the watches. Against this there is the check of the
pedometer or some other automatic measure for distance covered. The
shortening night shadows and the gradual coming to a place where the
night and day shadows are of about equal length is a positive conviction
to him who is open to self-conviction, as a polar aspirant is likely to
be. But frankly and candidly, when I now review one and all of these
methods of fixing the North Pole, or the position of a traveler en route
to it, I am bound to admit that all attempt at proof represented by
figures is built on a foundation of possible and unknowable inaccuracy.
Figures may convince an armchair geographer who has a preconceived
opinion, but to the true scientist with the many chances for mistakes
above indicated there is no real proof. The verdict on such data must
always be "not proven" if the evidence rests on a true scientific
examination of material which at best and in the very nature of things
is not checked by the precision which science demands. The real
proof--if proof is possible--is the continuity of the final printed book
that gives all the data with the consequent variations.
FROM A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE POLAR CLAIMS IN A FORTHCOMING BOOK
By CAPTAIN THOMAS F. HALL of Omaha, Neb.
DR. COOK'S VALID CLAIM.
Cook's narrative has been before the public nearly two years. It has
been subject to the most minute scrutiny that invention, talent and
money could give. It is to-day absolutely unscathed. Not one item in it
from beginning to end has been truthfully discredited. It stands
unimpeached. Mud enough has been thrown. Bribery and conspiracy have
done their worst. A campaign of infamy has been waged, and spent its
force; but not one solitary sentence has been proven wrong. Musk-ox
fakes, starved dogs, fictitious astronomical or other calculations may
have some effect on popular opinion; but they have none on the actual
facts. They do not budge the truth a hair's breadth and they do not make
history.
Cook's claim to the Discovery of the North Pole is as sound and as valid
as the other claims of discovery, or the achievement of any one
preceding him in the Arctic or the Antarctic.
VERDICT OF GEN. A. W. GREELY, REAR ADMIRAL W. S. SCHLEY AND OTHER ARCTIC
EXPERTS
Dr. Cook is the discoverer of the North Pole.--GENERAL A. W. GREELY.
No one familiar with the Polar problem doubts Dr. Cook's success. Peary
never tried to get to the Pole. He copied Cook's data and then, by
official intrigue tried to "put it over." A study of Peary's deception
on compass variation will prove that.--CLARK BROWN.
You can prove the discovery of Northermost Land. The Eskimo talk is
nonsense. The Polar discussion should be settled by an International
Commission--PROF. OTTO NORDENSKJOLD.
Dr. Cook was the first and only man to reach the North Pole--CHAS. E.
RILLIET.
I have gone over all of Dr. Cook's data, and, in spite of the statements
to the contrary, I believe he reached the Pole.--MAURICE CONNELL.
It has always been my pleasure to support Dr. Cook. I can see no reason
for doubting his success. Who are his accusers, surely not Arctic
Explorers?--CAPTAIN OTTO SVERDRUP.
I am convinced that if anyone reached the Pole, Dr. Cook got
there.--ANDREW J. STONE.
From first to last I have championed Dr. Cook's cause, and after going
over the printed records of both claimants I am doubly convinced that he
reached the Pole.--CAPTAIN EDWARD A. HAVEN.
Dr. Cook reached the Pole, I doubt Peary, his observations bear the
stamp of inexcusable inaccuracy and bunglesome carelessness. One cannot
read Peary's book and believe in him.--CAPTAIN JOHN MENANDER.
Washington, D. C.,
Jan. 7th, 1911.
Dear Dr. Cook:
... I would assure you that I have never varied in the belief that you
reached the Pole. After reading the published accounts, daily and
critically, of both claimants, I was forced to the conclusion from
their striking similarity that each of you was the eye witness of the
other's success.
Without collusion it would have been impossible to have written
accounts so similar, and yet in view of the ungracious controversy
that has occurred since that view (collusion) would be impossible
to imagine.
While I have never believed that either of you got within a pin-point
of the Pole, I have steadfastly held that both got as near the goal
as was possible to ascertain considering the imperfections of the
instruments used and the personal errors of individuals under
circumstances as adverse to absolute accuracy.
Again I have been broad enough in my views to believe that there was
room enough at the Pole for two; and never narrow enough to believe
that only one man got there.
I believe that both are entitled to the honor of the achievement.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) W. S. SCHLEY.
POSITIVE PROOF OF DR. COOK'S ATTAINMENT OF THE POLE
BY CAPTAIN EVELYN BRIGGS BALDWIN
METEOROLOGIST PEARY EXPEDITION, 1893-4, SECOND-IN-COMMAND WELLMAN
EXPEDITION 1898-9, AND ORGANIZER AND LEADER OF THE BALDWIN-ZIEGLER
POLAR EXPEDITION, 1901-2, ETC.
I can prove the truth of Dr. Cook's statements in regard to his
discovery of the North Pole from Peary's own official record of his last
dash to the Northward.
So far as I can learn, Dr. Cook has never made a "confession" in regard
to his trip to the Pole in the sense that he denied his first
statements. He has merely said that, in view of the great difficulty in
determining the exact location of the Pole, he may not have been exactly
upon the northernmost pin-point of the world. Peary, under pressure at
the Congressional investigation, was forced to admit the same.
For three hundred years there has been a rivalry among civilized men to
be the first to reach the North Pole. I believe that the honor of having
succeeded in the attempt should go--not to Peary--but to the man who
reached the Pole a year before Peary claims to have been there.
Dr. Cook is now in New York City, and I have talked with him several
times recently. With the information that I myself have gathered, I
believe that he really did reach the Pole, or came so close to that
point that he is entitled to the credit of the Pole's discovery.
[Illustration: THE LAND-DIVIDED ICE-PACK REPORTED BY PEARY PROVES COOK'S
ATTAINMENT OF THE POLE]
Bradley Land is located between latitude 84 and 85. It was discovered by
Cook in his Poleward march. The land ice, or glacial ice, which Cook
also discovered, is located between latitude 87 and latitude 88.
Cook's line of march carried him thirty or forty miles to the east of
Bradley Land and then upon the glacial ice. The proximity to the new
land gave Cook a favorable land-protected surface upon which to travel,
and also afforded him protection from gales and from the consequent
movements of the pack-ice westward of the new lands. Cook traveled in
the lee of the groups of islands and over ice floes more stationary than
the ice farther to the east, over which Peary traveled.
EVIDENCE OF COOK'S TRAVELS