From: "Fabian Canas" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
|"I am in fact a student, and I was, as you
suggested, being lazy. The laziness however, came from having
spent two hours looking through the internet trying to find a
simple answer in the form of an article..."
Subject: RE: Polar Controversy website comments
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002
I apologize for having offended you with my request for help. I
understand your reaction, and it is completely in line, but let me
explain: I am in fact a student, and I was, as you suggested, being
lazy. The laziness however, came from having spent two hours looking
through the internet trying to find a simple answer in the form of an
article, just as the one you have kindly referred me to. I told myself
I’d read one more thing and move on, because I still had hours of
reading to go before I could even start writing my paper, which is in
no way concentrated around Cook or Peary. I read the article, and it
was very informed, however due to the forceful language, I decided I
could better spend my time reading about Parry’s expeditions. (You
see, my paper is more closely concerned with naval exploration of the
arctic.) So I admit I was being lazy and looking for a quick answer,
and also that you had provided me with the document I needed before I
even requested it, but please understand that due to my topic, Peary
will only get a handful of paragraphs of focus at the most (completely
based on his records from before the controversy even started) and the
controversy won’t even be mentioned since Cook is a fraud. After
wasting the time I already had on the subject, I was much more
inclined to drop the whole thing than to spend any more. I should have
persisted just a few minutes more to see and follow the links to the
National Geographic and Scientific American links.
And lighten up.
Now get to work and visit a library. Read
some books instead of emailing strangers to argue over the veracity of
|"...your article is clearly biased from the
beggnining, and does not follow a scholarly approach to presenting
the case "
I found your article about the polar contreversy while looking for a
simple answer to the question "Did Cook, and/or Peary reach the north
pole." I am writing a research paper about particular methods of
arctic exploration, and do not want ot get involved researching the
polar contreversy. I am, for a portion of my paper, analyzing their
methods, but since I am no expert on artic exploration, I cannot make
any conclusion for myself. I'm not asking of you an answer to my
question, I can already see what it would be by looking at this
website and reading the article, I am instead asking you for a helping
hand. If you could point me in the right direction to a paper, perhaps
by the National Geographic Society, which I could site as an analysis
of the two sides, I would very much appreciate it. I cannot merely
accept your article as such a source for various reasons, which I am
sure you will understand: Internet sources are not wonderfully
reliable, since anybody willing to make a web page or site may express
any opinion, and claim to hold any position they wish. Additionally,
your article is clearly biased from the beginning, and does not
follow a scholarly approach to presenting the case. It seems a
wonderful article for people who merely want to know what happened,
but I am writing a paper, and hence find difficulty trusting such an
article. If it were within the realm of possibility I would research
the whole ordeal myself, but I already said, it is hardly of
censequence to my work, and so a relatively reliable source pointing
one way or another would be a godsend.
Thank you. Fabián Cañas
You said polarcontroversy.com is
"...a wonderful article for people who merely want
to know what happened..."
But that is not good enough for you?
Is "what happened"
(your phrase) truly not sufficiently backed up? Or were you too
fast to email me as the lazy way to get free research help?
1) Are you being paid to perform research?
2) Are you a student?
If the first then you are being lazy and should pay me. If the second,
then you need to stay in school to complete your education--you'll
need it. In either event you are of the class of lazy people who ask
questions of experts rather than expend the intellectual effort to
read, study, learn, and then ask the expert a worthy question. You
have not asked a worthy question.
Here is what you missed, lazy butt, just on
Page 1 alone:
• hyperlinks to readable images of 1909-1910 newspapers and
the Scientific American (that condemn Cook as a fraud),
• the 26 page Congressional record speech of S.D.Fess (that lists
extensive authoritative refutations of Cook and authoritative
acknowledgement of Peary's success),
• the text of a speech (condemning Cook, affirming Peary) by noted
historian Jill Lepore, Ph.D (Yale),
• reviews of books written by the son of Admiral Davies and Peary's
great grandson (both men are highly educated, respected authorities
quoted by the media, etc. ),
• a review of Dr. Washburn's book, The Dishonorable Dr. Cook, that
proves Cook was a fraud (Dr. Washburn has "...a 59-line list of
accomplishments in Who's Who... a trustee of Smith College .. a member
of Harvard's board of overseers), etc., etc.
• But most importantly you missed the link to exactly the document you
asked me for in your letter. http://www.northpole1909.com/davies.html
This provides the scientific proof Peary reached the Pole; a complete
text reprint of the 1990 National Geographic Magazine article.
And, dear Fabian, all of the above is on
the first page.
Please supply your address so that i may invoice you for wasting my
time, and for stupidly putting down a website that actually contains
more authoritative research sources than you would ever know what to
do with. However, I will waive my fee if you humbly write me an
apology for approaching me with this insulting preconception. Next
time you ask for help, leave out that bullshit and first do your
homework. Then ask the expert a worthy questions. Class dismissed.