| Revision as of 20:58, 18 May 2004 editTothebarricades.tk (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,005 edits =antarctica=← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:31, 11 December 2004 edit undoGene Nygaard (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users90,047 edits Major problems with "miles"Next edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| Could we get more on the geologic history, as opposed to the history of exploration? --] 20:58, 18 May 2004 (UTC) | Could we get more on the geologic history, as opposed to the history of exploration? --] 20:58, 18 May 2004 (UTC) | ||
| ---- | |||
| == Miles == | |||
| I've corrected some of the problems with distances in this article, and have a few observations: | |||
| *If you don't know what miles are, don't use them. | |||
| *When you do use miles in articles like this, be sure to identify them, no matter which ones you use. | |||
| *When you do identify them, be damn sure you have identified them correctly. | |||
| With regard to that last point, before I edited it this article, it said | |||
| "The National Antarctic Expedition (1901 - 1904), led by Robert Falcon Scott, came to within 480 statute miles of the South Pole." | |||
| However, the linked article ] tells us: | |||
| "Scott, ] and Dr ] reached 82° 1<nowiki>'</nowiki>s on ] ]." | |||
| That's 7 degrees 59 minutes from the South Pole? How many minutes of arc is it? 7×60 + 59 = 479 minutes of arc. So where did this "within 480 statute miles" come from? That's barely within 480 nautical miles. Coincidence? I think not. That latitude was indeed their closest approach, was it not? | |||
| I also identified—correctly—and converted Shackleton's 97 miles. | |||
| ] 02:31, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:31, 11 December 2004
The statement that Bransfield discovered the continent requires amplification/qualification. Traditionally the discovery is disputed between Bransfield (UK), Palmer (USA) and Bellingshausen (Russian Empire). Life in the Freezer accepts Bellingshausen's claim as the most credible. -- Alan Peakall 15:15 Dec 2, 2002 (UTC)
This idea of Terra Australis needs some clarification and references asap Vera Cruz
- It looks bogus to me. What is the Turkish Caliphatic Library? "Caliphatic Library" gets zero hits on google and Caliphatic alone gets only a few.
- I agree it needs a lot of work, but it's not totally bogus. I've heard the theory in several sources, and I know there is an old Turkish map that is often used as proof, though I don't know what the Turkish Caliphatic Library is. Tokerboy
It probably belongs in a separate article, or small print footnote, if anywhere:
The most ancient maps show a Terra Australis. These show bays, rivers and towns labelled in peculiar terms, and were thought notional until the late 1980s, when under-ice maps of the continent (generated by seismic echography) were first compared with fair copies of ancient maps from the Turkish Caliphatic Library (one of the most ancient sources known). Allowing for some hand-copying errors, there is a close correspondence between ancient maps and known under-ice features of the continent. Some people believe that this means Antarctica was mapped and perhaps settled at some time in prehistory when it was not covered with ice. Some investigators have said that Antarctica may have been the lost continent of Atlantis.
Could we get more on the geologic history, as opposed to the history of exploration? --Tothebarricades.tk 20:58, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
Miles
I've corrected some of the problems with distances in this article, and have a few observations:
- If you don't know what miles are, don't use them.
- When you do use miles in articles like this, be sure to identify them, no matter which ones you use.
- When you do identify them, be damn sure you have identified them correctly.
With regard to that last point, before I edited it this article, it said "The National Antarctic Expedition (1901 - 1904), led by Robert Falcon Scott, came to within 480 statute miles of the South Pole."
However, the linked article Robert Falcon Scott tells us: "Scott, Ernest Shackleton and Dr Edward Wilson reached 82° 1's on December 31 1902."
That's 7 degrees 59 minutes from the South Pole? How many minutes of arc is it? 7×60 + 59 = 479 minutes of arc. So where did this "within 480 statute miles" come from? That's barely within 480 nautical miles. Coincidence? I think not. That latitude was indeed their closest approach, was it not?
I also identified—correctly—and converted Shackleton's 97 miles. Gene Nygaard 02:31, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)