|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:06:12 -0800
From: "Daniel Clarke" <daniel.clarke@bbc.co.uk>
Subject: Re: BBC interview request
Dear Sir,
I'm a producer at BBC Radio 4's Today Programme - the main morning
current affairs radio programme in the UK.
I'm writing to see if I can talk to you about something I'm
working on connected to a new book about Peary and Cook.
If you email me your number I'll give you a ring - or I'm on +44
(0) 20 8624 9650
Many thanks - and I look forward to hearing from you.
All best, Dan
Dan Clarke
TODAY, BBC Radio 4
+44 (0) 208 624 9650 |
Dear Dan,
Been thinking about your Peary & Cook inquiry. You know, maybe you could
interview me about my book. I'm writing one about Sir Winston Churchill, Lord
Nelson and other British homosexual cross dressers. You do know that recent
evidence (secret diaries) has been uncovered in Iraq by Bush's armed forced?
Yes, apparently both British men had "sexual identity problems" and had Muslim
lovers--young boys in fact. Lord Nelson spoke about every man doing his duty;
apparently this meant that his officers had to sleep with him.
Churchill, the alcoholic fatty often wore a bra to support his fleshy tits and
was unable to reach his penis due to belly size. He employed a Turkish boy to
stroke it for him. Churchill's constant cigar in mouth is viewed by
psychologists as a penis substitute that he could suck in public.
As to your Peary & Cook project; yes, I would love to know more about how your
citizens on the tiny island empire have connected the arctic legend Peary with a
con artist whose stock frauds left enough money for his vindictive daughter to
create her vile anti-Peary institution with a cool US $1,000,000 at her death.
Such highly intelligent citizens, not to mention well educated and well bred,
could not possibly be taken in by the Vetters Vendetta. Therefore I assume your
interview would be about the great exploration achievements of Peary--the man
who made Robert Scott look like an utter ass when Amundsen used Peary's methods
to make reaching the South Pole look like a stroll in Piccadilly Circus (is that
what you blokes say?).
In fact, Peary had planned to nail the South Pole as well as the North until the
nasty Cook fraud threw everything into a tizzy. Have you read Peary's diary
notes about the plans? Would have been an easy accomplishment for Henson & Peay
since that Pole is on dry land! Not the challenge the North Pole was at all, eh?
So please send me your written proposal of the interview; what questions you'd
like to ask me, etc.
Sincerely yours,
Verne Robinson
-----------------------------------------------------
PREVIOUSLY:
Peary and who?
How about Queen Elizabeth and Jack the Ripper?
Or Churchill and Hitler?
In other words; what does a great historical figure have to do with a common
criminal?
Please send me a sample chapter of this book so I might fathom your real
intentions.
Verne |
Ah, Dieu svp, svp, m'a svp mis sur votre liste polaire de Débiles
! Votre esprit est acéré et piquant, et I tellement longtemps pour
être la victime de votre langue malveillante!
D'abord, concernant Shackleton, je voudrais préciser que vous
minimisez la signification de son (et le cuisinier) sens de
showmanship ! Ils (ou n'a pas fait) il avec un tel modèle !
L'histoire de Shackleton est si bien connu dans la culture
nonchalente du jeu vidéo de l'état uni (le jeu vidéo dégage mon
correcteur orthographique en tant qu'un mot - a obtenu d'aimer
l'anglais, au moins), dû à la paresse et à l'indolence mêmes que
vous dépleurez en répondant aux goûts de moi. Je veux dire,
Shackleton ai filmé son désastre qu'impressionnant, type !
Dennoch ist Englisch erstaunliche Leute. Außer für einem Engländer
konnten Sie Messwert und Reaktion (I Hoffnung) auf dieses email
auf französisch sein! Sie sind größter nationaler Held konnten ein
kurzes cuckold sein, das durch eine außerordentlich heftige
Richtung von Self-aggrandizement betrübt wird. Außer für einem
Engländer konnten Sie Messwert und Reaktion (wieder, hoffe ich),
auf dieses email auf Deutsch sein! Sie sind größter nationaler
Held konnten ein maniacal coprophagocyte mit einem Hang für
Genozid und einem sterilen Auge für Architektur sein.
Tatsächlich wird Ihre gesamte Web site auf englisch geschrieben.
Ich weiß, behaupten Sie, daß das beste Teil Englisch mit den
Kolonisten verließ, aber Waterloo, Trafalgar, die Schlacht von
Großbritannien und andere fanden nach (viele von) den Kolonien
waren verloren statt. Schließlich unterstreiche ich, daß Peary nur
folgte, wohin ein Engländer gehen würde. Daß er zuerst folgte, ist
eine Laune der Geschichte (wenn tatsächlich er zuerst folgte). Wie
jeder möglicher Frömmler kennzeichnet die Giftigkeit Ihrer Arbeit
nur Ihre Vorspannung und Unwissenheit.
Dort! Ich ließ den Spellchecker auf alles laufen, und ich denke,
daß ich einen Anspruch in eine Position anband, die von Ihrer
Verachtung angemessen ist! OH- und könnte Sie die Vollendungen
eines Zubehör zusammenfassenpearys in 500 Wörtern oder in kleiner
übrigens bitte zurückbringen (und alle copyrightfotographien in
einer einzelnen Zip Datei bitte mit einschließen). I ein majjor
Buch für ein nationales audence schreibend und ich ziehen möchten
falsch zitiert werden an.
Stephen Ärger Bewunderer von Houston, Texas Ps - Genossen Sie das
Wort ' coprophagocyte '? Es ist eine sehr angenehme Weise des
Sagens ' des Scheiße-Essers ', nicht Sie zustimmen? |
Vos lieux sont défectueux : "néanmoins, les anglais sont des peuples merveilleux."
Toutes les personnes sont merveilleuses ; Chinois, Pymies, Texans égaux.
Mais Scott et Shackelton étaient simplement des exemples de la planification
faible. Peuplez qui seulement l'élasticité une merde au sujet des perdants tout
en jetant la merde sur les gagnants sont elles-mêmes, bien, merde. Les abrutis
aiment Hitler, cuisinier, et Ben Laden distraient toujours des débiles de ces
membres de nos espèces qui font réellement les avancements qui rendent la vie
moins difficile pendant d'autres.
Quand tout est dit et fait le Q.I. moyen est 100. Seulement 2% de la population
sont enought lumineux pour traîner la race humaine hors de l'obscurité.
 |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
|
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Hi, i just came across
this site and am not surprised at the negative comments made about British Explorers and Brits in general. To call Scott a bungler is
the obvious truth. Being the first man to the South Pole was the primary objective of Scott's expedition--he
was a fool to ignore the work of Robert Peary. But Scot wasn't
trying to carry out important scientific work. Its obvious, from
the success of Amundsen, that they should have taken dogs. The main cause of death was because they
were short on intelligence, lacked skill, lacked proper clothing,
lacked dogs, and ran out of fuel. They suffered far more severe weather then was expected on the return journey
because they were so naive about the Antarctic. The return weather from the pole limited their progress. Secondly, the terrible conditions those explorers had to face only goes to show their
idiocy and not really endurance and bravery. Full credit to Amundsen for getting their first. However,
his ease of the trip does make Scott look stupid. A lot of the negative remarks about Brits seem to stem from
the arrogance of an entire country in decline, and comments from
that beer company slurs about Henson. No Brit has earned the right
to speak about Henson. But its really the view of the entire country. What do you think the rest of the world would think if
they took every word coming out of our Queen's mouth as that of every
Brit?
As for the negative comments about Brits and British Explorers, they deserve it
after the negativity they have expressed for the polar winners. Otherwise, i feel sorry for
Scot, Shackelton, Fiennes, et al - having a site exposes to public
scrutiny their failed deeds or ignorant remarks.
Jack the Ripper, London, England. |
Jack, Well said! You are not a "Polar moron". Are there more sane people like
yourself in England? |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Rebuttal
From: "Tom Avery" <tom@tomavery.net>
Subject: RE: In the footsteps of Peary and Henson
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004
Hi Verne,
Paul told me you were a unique character but that was not the
response I was expecting! You obviously have a chip on your
shoulder about the English – what can I say, we live on an obscure
island, we drink tea all day, have some pretty disastrous polar
expeditions in our history and are rubbish at all the sports we
invented. So maybe you have a point.
I am surprised at the aggression of your email. I have as little
belief in Wally’s book as you do. Like you, I am trying to show
what a great man Peary was and restore some of the damage done by
Herbert’s and other books over the years.
Our goal is simple – to try to reach the Pole in 38 days with
Eskimo dogs and “Peary” sleds. Our expedition isn’t concerned
about Peary’s notebook, clothing, communications and navigation.
All we are concerned about is the speed – and if we can match the
38 days then it will show that Peary COULD have reached the Pole
in the time he claimed. Paul (who I believe you have a lot of
respect for) helped put the logistics of this trip together and is
of the firm opinion that until someone tries to match Peary’s
time, questions will still be asked of his travel speeds. You even
go so far as to say on one of your websites that his 42-day trip
to the Pole in 2000 “resolves a popular criticism by "arm-chair"
experts who disputed Peary's achievement by citing "impossibly
fast" sledging speeds”. All we are trying to do is go one step
further. Wearing polar bear furs or sleeping in igloos will have
no effect on the speed. Give me a break, Verne!
You can say all you like about our expedition Verne, but you’re in
no position to judge my character. I am not for one moment trying
to compare my experience, equipment, leadership qualities, dog
driving abilities with Peary and Henson. They were truly
remarkable men and if they were on our expedition, they would kick
our ass. I have said this in all my interviews with the press. But
we all have some useful experience and are determined to see this
through. Besides, if polar travel is so easy these days Verne,
then why don’t you head up to the Pole and give it a crack
yourself!
Peary’s expedition is “disputed” because there a millions of
people all over the world who dispute whether or not he actually
got to the Pole at all. We are hoping to show them what really
happened. If we fall into the water on day one and go crying back
to our Mummies when we get cold, then you’ll be the first to know.
I would still believe Peary even if we fail hopelessly.
I’m quite enjoying this now – I hope we get to speak one of these
days!
Tom
-------------------------------
Tom Avery
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7630 0958
Mob: +44 (0) 774 775 0157
www.barcapultimatenorth.com
www.tomavery.net |
| Return of the North Pole! |
| By the Kingdom that brought
you Lord of the Rings |
 |
|
|
Sponsored
by--
|
 |
|
|
| And by-- |
 |
|
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
First email: Rebuttal is above
From: "Tom Avery" <tom@tomavery.net>
Subject: In the footsteps of Peary and Henson
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004
Dear Verne
My name is Tom Avery, I am a 28-year old Englishman and I have been
given your name by Paul Landry. Paul and I skied to the South Pole
together in 2002 and this coming spring I am setting off to the North
Pole with 4 companions (including his ex-wife Matty McNair) and 16
husky dogs. Paul was hoping to come with us but sadly has had to pull
out.
You may have read about our expedition in the press. If not, then I
think you may be interested! We are setting off in early March with
the aim of recreating Peary’s journey to the Pole. Peary got there in
just 38 days – a time which has not been beaten to this day (Paul and
Paul managed 42) – and is the main source of the controversy. Unlike
Wally Herbert and most people in the UK, we are very much of the
opinion that Peary was the first man at the North Pole and we intend
to prove it! We spent 3 weeks in Baffin Island in February training
and we are making final preparations at the moment.
We're basically recreating Peary's disputed
expedition to the North Pole, same route (Cape Columbia), small
teams of Canadian Inuit dogs, sleds built on exactly the same design
as Peary's, and 4 food and fuel caches placed at exactly the same
point as Peary's support parties turned back (Goodsell/MacMillan Camp
at 84.29N, Borup Camp at 85.23N, Marvin Camp at 86.38N and Bartlet
Camp at 87.47N). One of the big question marks over Peary's journey to
the Pole was the 5 days it took him to reach the Pole from Bartlett
Camp - a journey of 133 miles. If we get favourable ice and weather
conditions, we will try to match Peary's sprint for the Pole. Peary
will be the star and the main focus of the expedition – not us. You
can read more about me and the trip at the 2 websites below.
It would be great to have a more in-depth conversation with you about
the great man – Paul has told me you are one of the world’s experts on
the subject. Do you have a telephone I can contact you on?
I look forward to hearing from you Verne
Cheers for now
Tom
-------------------------------
Tom Avery
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7630 0958
Mob: +44 (0) 774 775 0157
www.barcapultimatenorth.com
www.tomavery.net |
| Crazy Brits stole Pole! |
|
|
Even crazier Brit now wants to
prove it wasn't theirs to steal!
 |
"We're basically recreating Peary's disputed
expedition to the North Pole, "
 |
Robert Falcon Scott is a perfect example of the
British refusal to use dogs ("man's best friend") as Henson &
Peary did. They all died from exhaustion where dog sledge teams succeeded. |
|
Disputed expedition?
The only morons who assert that are the
polar failure English who historically never
used dogs, or
frauds like Crook and his nut case British counterpart
Hayes. Disputed? Disputed?!!
|
"...the Royal Geographical Society of Great Britain
accorded Peary
the highest honor
within their power...on May 4, 1910...In conferring upon Peary at that
time the special gold medal of the society, President Darwin, son of
the great scientist, Charles Darwin, extended to him, in the
presence of its members, the fullest assurance of their conviction
that he was "the first and only human being who has ever led a party
of his fellow creatures to a pole of the earth," for it will be
remembered that at that time the South Pole had not as yet been
reached. He said:
"I stand here to-night as the representative of the Royal
Geographical Society, and, armed with the full authority of its
council to welcome you, Commander Peary, as the first and only human
being who has ever led a party of his fellow creatures to a pole of
the earth." |
Britain's dismal history of
killing polar explorers (Franklin, Scott, etc.),
sinking ships (Shackelton) contributed nothing but misery to history. The last UK
polar attempt by Fiennes led him to
cut his necrotic finger tips
off
with a fret saw. That is 150 years of polar idiots from the UK. Enough!
Oh, not enough?
My web published evidence that
Wally Herbert was a friend of Cook's
daughter, and his outright lies concerning Peary's diary in his
money-making 1986 book leave England in absolute shame.
England awarded Peary the gold medal in 1910;
then 3 generations later your queen knighted Herbert for concocting a
self-serving pack of lies to usurp Peary! Herbert claimed this made him
the first to reach the North Pole and a "Pole starved country of polar
disgraced Brits bought it." The English! Thank God you
snotty lunatics are confined to an obscure island.
Tom, do not disappoint me for I expect your expedition to prove again
that the UK can't reach the Pole without airplanes everywhere. Oh, and
with a website, press coverage, donations, etc. Book and TV
special...yeah, yeah. We both know all you will do is get air
rescued.
Disputed! Ha!
If you and your entire crew were to have your experience, equipment, and
leadership put on a balance scale against Peary & Henson you would be
revealed as a joke. It is hubris and shear arrogance that you can even
qualify for the task you propose. What an ego you must have running
your body.
You know nothing about Peary & Henson and the secrets of their success.
But please, by all means, email me again after you fail and have made a
fool of yourself. I'd love to publish the photos and pathetic story for
the benefit of those who continue to dispute the Peary polar
achievement. Give me photos of your team members being rescued from the
water, frostbite pictures, eating your dogs, and any final scenes of
death. A few deaths would boost web traffic.
Since you plan to "recreate Peary's disputed expedition" that must mean
that you are NOT going to take any form of radio equipment, cell phones,
satellite phones, etc. Correct? You have no plans to have any air rescue
standing by, eh? You are not going to take any GPS equipment, will you?
And we must all wait for you to return from the complete round trip in
order to learn if anyone survived, right?
What a brave, brilliant man you must be!
And you will have no proof that you reached the Pole other than your
notebook, correct? Damn! I admire your courage to "recreate Peary's
disputed expedition to the Pole..."
|
|
|
193.128.128.29
Friday, January 23, 2004
For good reasons you don't
think much of the British in polar exploration, and neither do I!
Your very appropriate quote "Just because a beer company prints a book that declares recent British polar adventurers the "Greatest in the world" does not mean anything outside of their tiny island."
is hilariously true! You call the UK a "tiny island", and
it really is--in mentality as well. British explorer nonsense like
the "rescuer" Shackleton is an example. He never explored, he
just fought for survival and yet the Brits have used him to over
shadow the truly great Polar Explorer Roald Amundsen! Shackelton may have not achieved his aim, his 1914-1916 expedition was
only a success in that he managed not to kill his men, which is no mean feat in the history of polar exploration
for British now is it! Scott killed all of his!
You site Scott as a "bungler", yet that was something historians
did--so I appreciate that you are mearly amplifying what was said
for decades. Scott is an important lesson in ego, stupidity and
failure to learn from those more experienced. If Scott had spent a
month with Matthew Henson and Peary in the Arctic he could have
saved not only his own dumb ass but that of his pathetic team who
followed him to an agonizing, horrible death. Obviously this is
what Peary & Henson avoided in all of their expedition. Bravo!
Keep up the great website!
Regards,
Simon Nattrass, Britain |
About time we had a visitor who was not a moron.
Thank you for restoring my faith in British intelligence. |
"...It is the Peary
camp that has turned his mother's supposed fondness for
dressing the little Peary in dresses INTO a "criticism"...
|
From: mycatsapunk@aol.com
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003
A fanatic is someone who, losing sight of his goal, redoubles
their effort. And speaking of absurd criticisms, you need to do
better than Cook came back from a hunt with no meat and
accidentally discharged a gun. There isn't a hunter alive who is
successful on every hunt and with gunplay, "careless" discharges
are not uncommon. Of course you are not so stupid as to not know
better (tho perhaps that simple). You may be just a political
stooge and have lost sight of your goal like the fanatic.
In any case and as always, it is fun to watch you flail away,
zealously trying to convince yourself of the Peary integrity. It
is the Peary camp that has turned his mother's supposed fondness
for dressing the little Peary in dresses INTO a "criticism". I
suspect you and the rest of the Peary fanatics have a self
ordained vuneralbility that is the difference there! Do you feel
criticized? Heh Heh. Peary's main problem was excessive Hubris and
it is his loudest exhorters main problem as well. Good luck with
your upcoming lobotomy. :) |
|
"...Cook's
Texas fraud and polar/Mckinley hoaxes seem relatively harmless in contrast
to Peary's crimes against humanity..."
|
From: mycatsapunk@aol.com
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003
There is no doubt that Cook was a crook, but Peary's character was
far worse. It is unbelievable that the Peary and Cook camps still
insist on the absurd claims of these explorers. It is very
possible that there was a power struggle between Dedrick and Peary,
but who cares. Peary's record of destruction and exploitation
speaks for itself. Cook's Texas fraud and polar/Mckinley hoaxes
seem relatively harmless in contrast to Peary's crimes against
humanity, not to mention his gold brick! In any case, I think
these guys are fascinating and I enjoy your listings and your
editorials (tirades? heh heh). Obviously we disagree on Peary, but
I hope you won't hold that against me if I bid on any of your
items at some point! :) Sam |
|
"...Cook was always charming, and was an
accomplished explorer..."
|
From: mycatsapunk@aol.com
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003
You haven't researched your history well. Peary was nothing more
than a sniveling exploiter who damaged everything and everybody he
ever came into contact with. At least Cook did not kill and
destroy and abuse the peoples of the north. Peary never made the
pole and his hoax was greater than Cook's. He can only brag about
lying better. In the many hours of research I've put into this
matter, I have yet to find any redeeming quality for Peary. He was
simply a pathetic, narcisistic man who was crushed by his mother
years before he got his start crushing others. History is catching
up to Peary's Tour-de-Force deception and his legacy will soon
mirror the true weasal he was. Cook had some character and
integrity, although as he got older these qualities eroded. Cook
was always charming, and was an accomplished explorer. During his
adventures he always proved himself a compassionate and
self-sacrificing compatriot. Peary possessed nothing but his own
fat head.
:) -Sam |
|
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
| Note: We requested (read previous messages
below) a proposal on letterhead from this particular Polar
Moron. That is a normal response
from any organization when a stranger requests time and
resources. Instead of mailing us a letter, Roger sent another
email, with the text below. |
ROGER EMAIL #3
8606 East San Felipe Drive
Scottsdale, AZ 85258
October 5, 2003
Mr. Russell R. Robinson
Peary & Henson Foundation
203 ½ Granada Drive
Mountain View, CA 94043
Dear Russell R.:
I am writing you to obtain information on background on Adm Peary
for an article I doing for a major newspaper in this country. I am
aware he attended Bowdin (I went to Middlebury). He was
commissioned in the Navy directly as lieutenant, apparently
skipping two grades. What did his father do? I believe he came
from an affluent family. Is my assumption correct? In this article
I want to deal with facts. I don’t want anything in print under my
name unless I can back it up with facts. This is the reason I am
writing you, to avoid suppositions.
To explain where I am coming from – the Cook-Peary controversy has
been a hobby of mine over many years.
In your office file I bet you can find a short biography (more
detail than on the web) of the Admiral. I’d be glad to pay for
reproduction costs.
From your perspective, what is the best book on Cook and Peary? I
may already have it or I’ll have to buy it. I just ordered Mirsky.
What do you think of her book?
If you wish to call me, my telephone number is 480-922-1534. Your
help on this project will be greatly appreciated.
Yours sincerely,
Roger L. Freeman
|
(Reply not sent to Roger. Shhhh...)
Dear Roger,
Now you are becoming pathetic and I hate that. You will make me
seem the bad guy here. But what can I do? You leave no options:
1) You can't mail a letter? All you can do is fire off emails? Then how are
you ever going to be published in "a major newspaper" as you claim? Is the
Arizona Cattle Bulletin a "major newspaper" to you?
| "...an article I doing for a major
newspaper in this country." |
|
 |
|
AWARD:
Roger L. Freeman,
<rogerf67@cox.net>
is Polar Moron of the month for October, 2003. |
2) You cannot write a sentence without leaving out words or misspelling them.
Yet you claim in every email "I doing for a major newspaper..." but in fact you
have only been published in the dark pages of the obscure Vetters Vendetta newsletter. Therefore you are
delusional, or trying to con me.
3) You cannot spell Peary's college, have his military rank incorrectly stated,
admit you are making assumptions without facts, and
otherwise indicate a sub-high school level of scholarship.
4) Your most absurdly patronizing request is for a recommendation "...what is the best book on "Cook
and Peary."? Roger, there is no such book. Crook has nothing to do with
Peary except that Crook was caught trying to steal Peary's life work. Crook's
preposterous attempt to steal fame from Peary ended on December 22, 1909 when "major newspapers" all over
the world proclaimed Crook a fraud. That was 94 years ago. Only you and
your fellow Vetters Vendetta pals are beating this very dead horse with Vetters
million dollar trust fund as the only known source of motivation.
I know perfectly well who you are; the son of the man conned by Cook's
vindictive daughter to publish one of the classic anti-establish books on Crook.
In fact, your dad's The Case for Dr. Cook is hilarious because it is
simply proof that Crook and his daughter Helene could infect others with their delusional
con game.
The Crookies have warmed you in the past with their campfire. What happened? Did
they kick you out? Won't they let you be a member of their gang anymore Roger?
Please forward a clipping of your article when a major newspaper publishes it.
Thank you so much for writing.
Sincerely,
Dr. Frederick A. Crook
Milkman, Explorer of Public Gullibility & Famous Con Artist
C/O Leavenworth Federal Prison |
ROGER EMAIL #2
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003
From: "Roger Freeman" <rogerf67@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Yes, the IRS should look at the Vetters Vendetta
Russell R.:
I don't have much of a letter head; I'm just a working troop. I've
been both in the Arctic and Antarctic, in more or less secondary
roles. The Cook-Peary controversy is a hobby.
I'll mke up a letter and send it to you on Tuesday.
roger freeman
|
(Reply not sent to Roger. Shhhh...)
Dear Roger,
You do not have stationary? Then how would ever realize the intention to have
your work published, as you stated, "...in an article for
a major newspaper."?
Were you trying to impress me? If so you blew it with the follow up email. You
should have snuck off to Kinko's and asked them how to fake an impressive
letterhead. Better idea--sneak into the offices of your local "major newspaper"
during lunch hour. Grab a sheet of stationary or business card off an editors
desk. If security tosses you out try the dumpster around the back of the major
newspaper." Then scan the artwork into your computer and make nice phony
letterhead stationary.
I'd say for a guy of your ambitions, one who wants to revive the fraud
perpetrated by a delusional con artist over 90 years ago, that any "journalist"
title on your phony (a la Crook) stationary would do fine. Remember that guy at
the New York Times who was making shit up about the Iraq war? Use his title. He
has no use for it now.
Oh, and don't tip you hand! Don't say totally dumb-ass shit in a follow up email
such as "The Cook-Peary controversy is a hobby. I'll
mke up a letter and send it to you..."
Roger, that immediately exposes your IQ, motives, and, well, just everything we
needed to know about you. In fact, why don't you send that letter you promised
to "mke up" and mail it to the Crook Society
instead of me? "Birds of a feather", you know?
Please send us a clipping of your finished article when a "major newspaper"
prints it. I can't wait to see that.
Thank you so much for writing.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
Dr. Frederick A. Crook
Milkman, Explorer of Public Gullibility & Famous Con Artist
C/O Leavenworth Federal Prison |
ROGER EMAIL #1
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003 13:50:45 -0700
From: "Roger Freeman" <rogerf67@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Yes, the IRS should look at the Vetters Vendetta
Russell R.:
I'm trying to get some factual information on Adm Peary's
background. I believe he came from a very good family. Could you
please give me any information you have on that. He went to Bowdin
in Maine. That's one of America's finest schools. My objective is
a small research project ending up in an article for a major
newspaper. I intend to call the shots as I see them, facts only.
Your support would be greatly appreciated.
roger freeman
rogerf67@cox.net |
Roger,
Please send your proposal on letterhead. Thank you.
|
RE: Inuit or Eskimo
I appreciated your sensitive dissertation on Eskimo vs. Inuit.
Political correctness is a funny thing. Eskimo was not a European
epithet for those people, but rather the term used by the Labrador
Native Americans (Native Canadians? or does America refer to the
whole continent? How do distinguish among a Native American
Mexican, a Native American U.S.
American, and a Native American Canadian. Maybe Native Americans
don't.)
If it was demeaning, that is not to different than other Native
American tribal names that have crept into usage. As I recall, the
Adirondack tribe was so called (derogatorily) by another tribe,
and means those who eat bark. Referring to the Inuit as "those who
eat raw meat" might or might not have been derogatory, but it was
certainly accurate (although obviously it is not any longer). I am
not sure Inuit is much better. Yes, it simply means "people," but
its use to apply only to the people in question reflects their
ignorant belief, a couple of centuries ago, that they were the
only people in the world. Certainly they don't believe that any
more.
I suppose we could call Germans Volk, French people Gens, etc.,
but then we would be stuck calling Brits, Canadians, Australians
and New Zealanders (leaving aside the controversial issues of
Scots, Welsh and Irish, Northern and otherwise) all by the same
term we use for ourselves. That would never do.
Like you say, who cares? |
Wow. You are not a moron. Thank you for elevating this discussion way over
Fred's head.
Your eternal servant in Truth,Janet Vetters
|
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Email #1
Return-Path: <imageindesign@sympatico.ca>
Received: from sandy ([65.93.123.172]) by
tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32
201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with ESMTP
id <20030816201040.SWQX26593.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@sandy>
From: "Sandy Wallace" <imageindesign@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003
Another myth perpetuated, they're not 'Eskimos' but 'Inuit'...
Eskimo is a white man's version of what they thought of the Inuit,
they were 'meat eaters' or 'Eskimos'.
Email #2
Well, Duh back to ya, fuckhead... As you can tell, I'm awake now
and pissed... No, to call it a 'historical' web site as you have,
implies it is a recreation of a site from 1909... Best 'o my
knowledge Sparky, there wasn't an internet then. And they wouldn't
be called 'negroes' they'd be called 'niggers', better parallel
don't you think? Oh, and considering our beer is the best on this
planet, and your mother's probobly a moose, thanks for the
compliment. Now, crawl back under your rock, good luck with your
little project, and go fuck yourself.
Email #3
Hey Man, Sorry I hit a nerve. Take care, all the best, and I shall
try to be fairer in the future.
William Wallace
207 Harvard Road
Waterloo, ON N2J 3V7
519-883-0717
PS Ya know, I had a kid not 7 weeks ago. Am tired to the bone,
thought your site interesting-not perhaps worthy of cool site of
the day, but there you go. But I'm so fucking tired, that your
email almost made me cry. What ever happened to simple back and
forth? Take care, have a good day, and I hope not to talk with you
again.
PPS The likelihood of me reading anything you've written is pretty
well nil, even though, historical lies are a big thing for me.
C'est la vie. |
Eskimo was the modern (for then) spelling of the 1800's Esquimaux.
This
is an historical website (It is about the 1909 polar controversy) and every bit
of literature I have from that period calls them Eskimo. The term Inuit came 80
years later. I suppose if you visit a
Civil War website you would encounter the term "slaves", but would you write to
tell the owner that they were actually "African Americans"?
Crook called the Eskimos his "boreal pygmies", or the "savage children of the north",
"savages", etc. I publish three books of that period and not one of them calls
them Inuit. They were, historically, Eskimos, boreal pygmies, natives, or savages.
Inuit is only a politically correct "new term" similar to when Negroes became
Blacks before becoming African Americans before going back to being Negroes
again. You'll find that in the Introduction to My Arctic Journal Peary's grandson
writes: "...the Eskimos (the word Inuit was not yet in use)..."
http://www.myarcticjournal.com
An interesting point to consider is that Dr. Allen Counter, who himself is
Black, wrote a book about the Henson Inuits:
http://matthewhenson.com/legacy.htm. He titled it "Black, White, and
Eskimo". Maybe you should mail a letter to him at Harvard University and ask
him why he choose Eskimo instead of Inuit.
The point is that these terms are nor inherently pejorative yet many people have
knee-jerk negative reactions similar to Sandy Wallace in the belief that one has
to change even historical uses of a term. In that regard, my comments about the
Civil War are profound. Should we re-write history books to call the slaves
"freedom challenged African Americans?" You can see how potentially burdensome
this becomes.
I refer to Henson as a Negro because he refers to himself as a Negro. I use
Eskimo because Matt did, Peary did, etc.
Just so you don't forget, you visited a history website about the 1909 period.
My terminology is appropriate in that context-- in contemporary ones I always
use Inuit.
Love,
Russell R. Robinson,
Caucasian American |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Dear Mr. Claus,
I had heard recently that Santa Claus missed the North
Pole by almost 100 miles on his Christmas Expedition of
1979-1982. Could that really be true? And, if so, can it mean that
the "circumnavigation of the globe by its polar axis" trek is
still unclaimed?
By the way, I absolutely love your website, and I support
Robert Peary.
Sincerely,
Sir Rudolph The Reindeer |
Thank you for the compliment.
Santa may have
missed the Pole, but his reindeer urinated on it.
What I'd like is a shot of Rudolph pissing on the Pole. Or taking a dump.
After all, Peary and Henson shit and pissed on the Pole back in 1909.
Why do you call yourself "Sir Rudolph?"? You can knock that phony royalty
crap off with Santa—damn deer either pull their weight or they go into the oven
for dinner.
Santa |
From: "Julian Baggini" <editor@philosophers.co.uk>
Subject: RE: if I cannot corroborate it.
Date: Mon, 26 May
Of course you are right. I'm looking for one anecdote which I
could replace with another if I need to and instead of asking a
few people who might know something about it, I should go and
spend months reading the whole literature on Peary, perhaps only
to discover that the anecdote is false so I can't use it, because
that's "proper research". (It wasn't in the diary - which I read
before I emailed you - but that's only a small part of the
literature.) I will also, if asked about any area of my own
expertise in the future, tell people to go away and do their own
research because although it costs me no effort to say "Yes, you
should look here" or "sorry, I can't help",
the most important thing is that someone
else doesn't benefit from my knowledge.
Please feel free to reply with the last word and abuse me some
more. I shall not bother you again.
Yours
"Phony"
---------------------------------------------
Dr Julian Baggini
The Philosophers' Magazine
98 Mulgrave Road
Sutton, Surrey
SM2 6LZ
United Kingdom
http://www.philosophers.co.uk |
... the most important thing is that someone else
doesn't benefit from my knowledge.
What knowledge? Your "hearsay" variety obtained from a TV show?
Your offer to help such hypothetical "people" is based on the current fact that
you do not receive numerous daily email from lazy know-nothings. If you did
you'd quickly catch on that you can't spend 8 hours a day writing free research
material for strangers who disappear like smoke as soon as you have given them
what they want.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Dr. Frederick A. Crook
Milkman, Explorer of Public Gullibility & Famous Con Artist
C/O Leavenworth Federal Prison |
From: "Julian Baggini" <editor@philosophers.co.uk>
Subject: RE: A comment about your Polar website
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003
I am sorry you feel the need to be so
hostile. The reason I am checking this is precisely
because I will not include what I have been told if I cannot
corroborate it. The book I am writing is also not about Peary and
the incident I am interested in is little more than an anecdote
along the way. That's why I am certainly not a Peary expert and
cannot be expected to be one.
I think you must have got the wrong impression from my enquiry for
otherwise your abusive reaction is inexplicable.
---------------------------------------------
Dr Julian Baggini
The Philosophers' Magazine
98 Mulgrave Road
Sutton, Surrey
SM2 6LZ
United Kingdom
http://www.philosophers.co.uk |
Oh, now you are posturing as being indignant. You're such a phony.
You want the opinions of strangers to include in a book you will copyright? You
call that "research?" I'd expect that from a lazy college freshman and do often
get asked, in email, to write content for total strangers. Never do it.
I always, and you are no exception, recommend the library and original sources.
For Christ's sake--Peary's diary of the Pole trip is published on the website
where you found my email address. So what is your problem? Can't read, won't
read, or what?
http://dougdavies.com/diaryMAIN55.htm
You said you were doing research. Well, get to work and read what Peary said.
That is research. Then you can judge what possible need you have for what
others said about Peary who were not there or was said well after the fact by
non-participants.
Research? You are such a phony. Who do you think you're fooling?
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
From: "Julian Baggini" <editor@philosophers.co.uk>
Subject: RE: A comment about your Polar website
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003
I am researching a book and have been told that Robert Peary
reported feeling empty, a "deadweight" on the return trip from the
pole. I can't find the source for this, although I was told it
came up in the History Channel's Iceman series.
Julian
---------------------------------------------
Dr Julian Baggini
The Philosophers' Magazine
98 Mulgrave Road
Sutton, Surrey
SM2 6LZ
United Kingdom
http://www.philosophers.co.uk |
I am researching a book...
What does that mean? Are you writing one or investigating one?
...and have been told that Robert Peary reported feeling empty,
a "deadweight" on the return trip from the pole.
You have "been told"? What kind of research are you doing? Listening to
misinformation from non-experts?
What books by Peary have you read?
I will wager the answer is none.
I can't find the source for this, although I was told it
came up in the History Channel's Iceman series.
Oh, there you go! Television!
You're not doing research--you're a phony.
Get off your ass and go to a library.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:32:09 -0700
From: Asenderno23@wmconnect.com
Here are the facts:
FACTS
Monty has been convicted of criminal acts in Bay St. Louis, MS;
one count of criminal assault, one count of criminal trespassing,
and one count of criminal disturbing the peace. He appealed those
convictions and lost. This appears on the site for the Mississippi
State Court of Appeals.
Monty was arrested on Oct.31, 2001 for the beating and rape of a
20-year-oldmale. He did not deny having sex with the victim, but
claimed it was just not rape, as published in the newspaper in
link 2 below.
MaleRape Article 1 link, Little Rock (2 articles, $1.95 per
article)
MaleRape Article 2 link, Little Rock, AR, KARK-TV story with
photograph
Male Rape Article3 link, Hot Springs, AR, part-way down page
Male Rape Article4 link, Hot Springs, AR, half-way down page
Male Rape Article5 link, Hot Springs, AR, half-way down page
MaleRape Article 6 link, Bay St Louis, MS [includes photograph]
MaleRape Article 7 link, Bay St Louis, MS [includes photograph]
NOTE BENE: Your email about libel is ignorant nonsense, so do not
respond to this email as we are no longer interested in helping
you. |
Thank you for the links, but they fail to support your allegations that
Father Monty was sentenced for crimes, let alone even tried. Spanking is a
common sexual act in dominance. Don't you watch TV? Sounds to me like Monty
knows what gets him off and finds men over 18 to play games with. Sex between
adults is not a crime, even in intolerant, backward parts of the world such as
Arkansas.
Rape charge against 'priest' withdrawn... has been
withdrawn by prosecutors because they are unable to locate the alleged
victim...in the case has left the area and despite the repeated efforts of two
investigators to find him they have been unsuccessful. Given the age of the
victim, Oliver noted that prosecutors need his testimony that the sexual acts
that allegedly took place were against his will...(Father Monty) said the victim
consented to be paddled that day, but not before he first had the victim sign a
written record including his name, age, his offense, etc. "This was done
mutually," he said. "Not forced."
You still have not supplied your name, address, phone number, or
other necessary information that would allow us to direct an attorney to you for
a defamation of character lawsuit should Father Monty wish to do so.
The information you sent relates only to charges, not convictions.
"A local man charged Wednesday with rape for an
incident involving a 20-year-old man said Thursday his arrest was "a day of
degradation of the kind no human being should endure" and that he did nothing
"morally or legally improper." Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the
concept of "innocent until proven guilty"?
How do we know that man making the charges is not lying? After all, it seems to
me that a 20 year old would be able to whoop old Father Monty's ass in a fight;
have you tried to rape a 20 year old recently? Believe me, they don't exactly
stand still. Take it from me, it is hard to do and unbelievable that an old fart
like Father Monty could pull it off.
But thank you for sharing your desires to destroy the reputation of a man not
convicted of any crime. He may have only been the victim of an angry gay lover
turned vindictive. Would not be the first time.
Thank you for sharing.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 20:40:12 -0700
From: Asenderno23@wmconnect.com
Subject: Re: Matthew Henson Website
RE: The piece by "Canon White" quoted below is bogus and should be
removed from your website because "Father Monty", the author is a
convicted criminal and known sex offender to the Hot Springs
Police. Monty aka White was arrested for the brutal rape and
beating of a 20 year old man in October, 2001.
B O G U S email quoted below:
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001
From: "Rev'd Canon Henry White, M.A. (Oxon)"
Subject: The Father Monty Foundation, UK & USA.
Dear Russell R.:
I am very pleased to inform you that Father Monty's piece titled
"Graves of Segregation," has now included a link to your fine
Matthew Hensen site. Here is Father Monty's wonderful piece on
cemetery discrimination: www.fathermonty.org/graves.htm Our
Blessings! Faithfully, Rev'd Canon Henry White, M.A. (Oxon) United
States Anglican Church House Hot Springs National Park Arkansas,
USA. From the Boyhood Home of President Wiliam Jefferson Clinton.+
Dearly Beloved, 2001. |
"Should be removed from your website..."
Your email is libel in the full legal sense. If you provide documents
substantiating your remarks, then it is factual information called "news" and I
can print it with you attributed as the source. Otherwise it is simply "some
person with no address, phone number, or documentation sent me a libelous email
and I printed it without verifying any of its assertions." What the hell do
you think this is, The New York Times?!!
By all means, mail us copies of the news clippings, and a statement from the Hot
Springs Police testifying that Father Monty is, as you say, "a convicted
criminal and known sex offender...arrested for the brutal rape and beating of a
20 year old man". A photo of a Hot Springs police officer would make a great
addition as the web is a visual media. Copies of publicly available court
records, showing the convictions, the raped 20 year-old man, etc. would be
perfect.
However, I should point out that in our free society even "a convicted criminal
and known sex offender" has the right to have their email published. There is no
law against freedom of expression that I am aware of. But there are laws against
libel.
In any event you are only known to me as "Asenderno23@wmconnect.com". Please
send a letter by USPS with your full name and contact info so that I can publish
these concerns with your name attached to it.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
From: Robert Adams <rdashopping@postmaster.co.uk>
To: judgekillits@polarcontroversy.com
Subject: Inaccurate?
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003
With your gifts of persuasion and diplomacy your views are bound
to become accepted the world over.
Why, then, are we known as a mongrel race?
I can tell the difference between Tongans and Samoans - becaues
the different genetic lines that make up those "races" cause
different features to come to the fore. BEing able to
difeerentiate between peoples is no indicatin of the "purity" of
their gene pool.
You're clearly frothing at the mouth about something that most
people really couldn't give a damn about.
You've responded to me with little other than ill-informed
racist abuse and strings of assumptions and conjectures to support
your ill-formed arguments. In short, you're an arsehole
and I hope you're happy with that, for your sake.
Goodbye,
Rob |
You've responded to me with little other than
ill-informed racist abuse ...you're an arsehole
Sure, whatever. But the facts are the same.
English people mouth off in public (Fiennes) to deny Henson his place in
history, or write a book (Herbert) to try and steal the North Pole from America!
Who are the racists? Who are the arseholes?
Peary and Henson reached the North Pole in 1909 and no amount of British
bullshit will ever change that.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
From: Robert Adams <rdashopping@postmaster.co.uk>
To: judgekillits@polarcontroversy.com
Subject: Inaccurate?
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003
To view the world so simplistically is a gift to be envied.
I'm English, I've known Amundsen got to the South Pole first for
as long as I can remember hearing stories about men going to
Antarctica.
As for the inbreeding... parts of me are Italian, Irish, French,
Scottish and Tongan....there isn't now and never has been such a
thing as ethnically English.
Your knowledge of England would seem to come from reading too many
Jeeves and Wooster books.
Rob |
Your knowledge of England would seem to come from
reading too many Jeeves and Wooster books.
Sorry, I have no idea what you are referring to. Jeeves? Isn't that a search
engine?
The point is still the same. According to a BBC producer you "people" virtually
worship polar bozos Fiennes and Herbert and hate Peary.
Whatever the problem is, the fact remains. England denies Henson and Peary
the North Pole. It is a national mental health problem of some sort. A need
to compensate for no Pole by stealing a Pole, or, failing that to deny Peary the
Pole.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
From: Robert Adams <rdashopping@postmaster.co.uk>
To: judgekillits@polarcontroversy.com
Subject: Inaccurate?
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003
Evening,
I've just stumbled across your Polar Controversy site
(thinking about getting a friend a title for her birthday and
there was a link on your page... anyhow) and you seem to have a
serious problem with English people.
I've only skimmed across the site and can't comment on much of it
but just hoped to explain a few things. In England we love a
glorious failure - that's why the base is named after Scott rather
than Amundsen (you know, the successful one who didn't actually
die). Hell, look at the way we idolise Earnest Shackleton. Don't
know why we do, but we do. And, like most other people, we do tend
to laud our own above others who may deserve it more.
Other thing was, you mention that South Africa is the last outpost
of the British Empire. Isn't true in the least. And apartheid?
read up on your South African history and you'll find out that the
countrys white population was broadly split along Dutch
(Afrikaans)-British lines... the former (under Smuts) being the
driving force behind apartheid. If it had been the british they
wouldn't have used an afrikaans word, believe me there's no love
lost between them.
And as for being a global oppressor, I'm not going to argue that
there are too many sainthoods to be handed out but just consider
that under British global hegemony the poorest nation on the earth
had an average GDP one tenth of the richest, under american global
hegemony it is one hundreth.
Not saying we're the best, but we're not and we weren't all bad.
Hope you have a good weekend,
Rob |
...just stumbled across your Polar Controversy site
Stumbled? Did you hurt yourself? Dr. Crook would never forgive himself if he
harmed you.
...you seem to have a serious problem with English people.
Problem singular? That would be great if I only had one problem! Serious?
Don't go getting all overly dramatic with me.
Don't you know that the "English people" had a serious problem with
Amundsen? Your rotten son-of-a-bitch forefathers and foremothers wrote him out
of your history books. Why? For his sin of reaching the South Pole before Scott?
Why would such fair minded, justice centered, altruistic English people condemn
him for his success? Was it because it magnified Scott's manslaughter?
You tell me who has the serious problem; you confirm English people have
condemned the success of others. We call this a "sore loser"; as in my editorial
refrain of "sore British losers." It is my duty to make readers aware of the
damage England has caused manipulating the facts of history.
...In England we love a glorious failure—look at the way
we idolise Earnest Shackleton. Don't know why we do, but we do.
Well, there you go Sherlock Holmes! Yes, you love failures, as you so
brilliantly put it. You tell me who has the serious problem. It sounds like a
British national mental health issue.
...you mention that South Africa is the last outpost of
the British Empire. Isn't true in the least. And apartheid? read up on your
South African history...
So you missed this footnote?
http://polarcontroversy.com/sorebritishlosers/sorebrits3.htm
(3) "...Anglo-Boer Wars of 1880-81 and 1899-1902.
British forces prevailed in the conflict, and the republics were incorporated
into the British Empire. In May 1910, the two republics and the British
colonies of the Cape and Natal formed the Union of South Africa, a
self-governing dominion of the British Empire. The Union's constitution kept
all political power in the hands of whites. ...the government continued to pass
laws limiting the rights and freedoms of blacks. [http://www.worldrover.com/history/south_africa_history.html]
You tell me who has the serious problem. It sounds like a British national
mental health issue of denial and justification for anything the British Empire
ever did no matter how cruel, oppressive, or racist.
.. under British global hegemony the poorest nation...had
an average GDP one tenth of the richest, under american...it is one hundreth.
First, the problems of today ("...average GDP...") are uniquely the result
of very serious overpopulation. 6,000,000,000 humans in an age of industrial
deflation is pure insanity. We don't need that many humans to slave away in
agriculture or industry now that these have been automated. Yes, it is true that
without enslavement by the British Empire entire populations such as India are
no longer forced to provide a gross domestic product (GDP) to the Queen.
Secondly, my remarks are sarcastic but have absolutely truthful historical
roots. "They once ruled an imperial realm known as "The
British Empire", upon which the sun never set. Britain sailed all over the globe
spreading imperialism, mating with locals and giving them venereal diseases.
They used Australia for a prison. But then the sun did set as local people woke
up and killed the British to have freedom. America had to battle Britain twice;
once during the Revolutionary War, then again during the War of 1812 when they
burned down the White House. India had a hell of a time kicking the British out,
until Gandhi united the people. Hong Kong was British ruled after they lost the
Opium Wars (2). That was because the Queen wanted Chinese tea and porcelain. She
wanted gold & diamonds, too, so Britain enslaved most of southern Africa (3)"
...we weren't all bad.
England is all bad in the sense that inbreeding has created a
population that leans heavily towards upper class snobbery. Those who wanted
freedom fled the country and are now known as Americans. Those who opposed it's
rulers were killed or exiled to Australian penal colonies. Right? And those who
stayed in England were obviously brown-nosers of the ruling class. So there you
have it.
After all you are writing me because of the actions of your fellow countrymen to
deny two Americans their rightful place in History. Your
Fiennes denied Henson's
place on the event of the Hubbard medal award. Your
Herbert tried
to steal the North Pole from Peary in a book based on delusions and/or lies.
You tell me who has the serious problem.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003
From: wayne <patrickstuart81@go.com>
Subject: 10" seconds of arc needs some form of repetition
Greetings, may I start with a quote...
Although I do not use copyrights for a very good reason, thoughts
and ideas are free, I would have expected some courtesy from your
part, especially in advising of the usage of some of
my images
and text...
Dr Cook has seen the sun at -4 to -5 degrees below the horizon
while on his way to the pole, this has been repeated,
mathematically and physically (at other sites, one of which is
Novaya Zemlaya). Although I still find 6-7 minutes of arc
compressions very difficult to prove at low elevations, Peary's 10
seconds of arc (notice always 10 seconds of arc, no variations)
measurements unprovable.
I really appreciated your criticism, it is healthy to do so.
Although your thinking too much in terms of atmospheric pressure
rather than following a light path.
And Finally, I noted your bias in favor of Peary, while you think
I have one in favour of Dr Cook. These sentiments are irrelevant,
what matters is the truth found in nature. At this time, I am not
convinced that 6' of arc compressions are to be found in nature at
sun elevations but I'll be doing a great deal more of observing in
cold air (whenever it returns) , I would encourage your own
research to continue on this subject, a challenge would be for you
to repeat Peary's measurement, a Peary elevation sun compression
of 10" of arc, measure it in your neighboorhood with a similar
sextant if you wish. I think that you'll find it an interesting
and compelling challenge. Lack of magnification of a sextant is
not limited to the vertical.
Wayne PS Davidson
Resolute Bay |
Listen here you preposterous ASS!
1) Read up on copyright at the Library of Congress (as in dot com, jerk-off).
They have a tutorial for morons you might grasp.
2) Read the Associated Press Style book and Libel Manual. That will explain the
"fair use doctrine" and non-commercial uses so that even you can understand it.
Point is, anything published can be used ("Fair use doctrine") in commentary,
review, etc. without anyone's permission. No credit is necessary you idiot. When
the publication has NO COMMERCIAL PURPOSE, then you can double that.
The 160 pixels width derivative screen shot of your ice-hole website is credited
to the asshole who owns it (one Wayne Davidson) AND HAS A FUCKING LINK TO SAID
ASSHOLE'S WEBSITE. None was required by any law.
My advice is to take down your website so the link will fail. After all, it is a
smoking gun to your stupidity.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003
From: wayne <patrickstuart81@go.com>
Subject: would like to link, but...
I forgot to mention, would like to link your critical
review, but I am compelled not to do so, because of the language
used, especially against Dr Cook. You can get your point accross
stronger if while not using the usual Cook vs Peary slang words,
or prop pictures which can be used any which way one chooses. Some
segments of your work have merit and deserves attention, but the
usual Cook vs Peary language dilutes the quality of your web page
a great deal. Then again if you are a 'believer' of Peary, a
religious attitude, an act of faith, then your web page should say
so, I will then eventually definitely link in that case, while
saying that your page is a perfect example of why history
sometimes gets confused by a blend of emotional faith and science.
I would link like this:
Here is a critical review.... Warning he is a Peary apologist, and
the language used is unfortunately at times inappropiate.....
If (by miracle, knowing that for Peary apologists this is a hard
thing to do) you would remove the offensive language:
Click here for a critical review ...especially with respect to the
Cook vs Peary debate. He defends Peary's sun disk measurements at
the Pole in an objective structured way, while questionning Dr
Cook's data quite effectively.
It is a shame that I can't link like the latter way.
Wayne |
God! What a weasel you are. You are a manipulative ass on top of
everything else.
Get with reality: Dr. Crook was a vicious criminal. His name and the events
associated with it should be erased from the history books, not debated 90 years
later.
Stop drinking so much beer and lay off the home grown Canadian pot.
Your eternal servant in Truth,
Frederick A. Crook |
|
Your comments |
(with your spelling) |
|
Our
reply |
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003
From: wayne <patrickstuart81@go.com>
Subject: Re: Solid evidence proves Cook was a con artist
Dear Fake name
I never said Cook made it to the North Pole, therefore your brain
is not reading well, try to read more than call names like an
angry spoiled teenager, that will do you good.
Wayne |
Hi Wayne!
Thank you so much for writing, once more. Glad you have not forgotten us. The
rest of your asinine mail is on page two, Wayne.
[Wayne, for those who don't know and probably don't give a
shit anyway, takes pictures of the sun. These (he believes) prove something or
other to Wayne, but are used as an insomnia cure for the rest of us.]
http://www.eh2r.com/mp/frame_pages/differ_main.html |
|
