I was talking with aguy who knows a lot about polar exploration, and who has been in the Artic-he claims that Robert Peary COULD NOT have reached the North Pole, as he claimed. The evidence against Peary:
-his calculations of his position appear to have been done AFTER the event
-no witness (except for Matthew Henson, a black American) outside ofPeary’s eskimo guides saw the alleged event
-in 1909, the Artic ocean was covered with an excessive amount of pack ice-the resultant pressure ridges would have been almost impossible to cross
However, history has accepted Peary’s claim…assuming he did not make it, who was actually the firts to arrive at the North Pole?
There was an article in National Geographic a while back where they used the position of the sun in a photo he took at the North Pole. From the position of the sun, they made a claim one way or the other. I forget which. Anyway, assuming he didn’t make it, The first people to reach the North Pole would have been the crew of the U.S.S Nautilus, when they went under the pack ice in 1958.
The National Geographic article in question claimed that he did make it.
The first person (if Perry didn’t make it) to actually set foot on the North Pole (as opposed to either flying over or sailing under it) would be a member of the 1968 expedition, but I forget who lead that one or the identity of any of its’ members.
All the sites I researched suggest it was Santa Clause.
:rolleyes:
North Pole
*Discovered by Pooh
Pooh found it*
Umm, what does Matthew Henson’s ethnicity and country of origin have to do with any of this?
BTW, IIRC it’s common knowledge that they were about a mile off. Within reasonable error for the measuring equipment (or whatever they used) they had at the time, but they didn’t hit it exactly.
Peary didn’t get THAT close. He didn’t even claim to have “made it” until later. Peary’s log is reticent and seems “backwritten” in places. No one has ever logged those kinds of miles, and my Father- who was an expert “musher” also said it was impossible.
National Geographic- great though they may be- were hardly an unbiased judge, as they heavily backed Peary and pushed his claims for decades.
So, since Peary (and Cook) lied, it was that 1968 expedition- whom we (Quinn & I) don’t remember- nor does anyone else. Which is why it is so unfair to give Peary the credit- as he didn’t make it- because he COULD NOT have made it. Impossible. Picture or no picture (and of course, the whole "angle of the sun bit only is good evidence if you assume the time and date.
As to Henson- it is important to note that Peary had a chance to(and it was expected he would) take along several other Offciers- all of whom could have checked Peary’s readings & such and confirmed reaching the Pole. Instead he took along Henson- who altho undeniable a hero and useful member of the expedition- had no navigational skills at all. Some think Peary took Henson as Peary planned all along to “fake it” if he had to, but I disagree. Peary was a great man, and a true hero, but he was egotisical- as were just about all such expedition leaders of that era. I think Peary took Henson as that way Peary didn’t have to share the glory- and it took decades before Henson was given even “also starring” credit.
Why did Peary fake it? IMHO- he did get as close at it was possible in that day&age to get- and he knew it. He knew he did his very best, and he couldn’t get any closer (note it took 60 years to duplicate a surface run). He had to deal with Cook’s claim- and Peary thus also knew Cook was (also) a fraud (which Cook was, mind you, but the Peary forces made sure to blacken poor Dr Cooks name as much as possible). Thus, if Peary had admitted “not making it”- some would give credeance to Cook- which Peary couldn’t stand. Thus, Peary claimed the Pole.
I looked it up, the first uncontested expedition to reach the North Pole on land (well, frozen ice) was led by Ralph Plaisted in 1968. Wally Herbert reached the North Pole in 1969 by sled (Plaisted used ski-doos).