Arctic Diaries

[deandddd]

Here is something which I am re-posting from Jan Lamprecht.

Dharma/Dean wrote:

Hi Everyone,

Just a note. I've been pondering the problem of polyanas, fault-
lines, Green-house effect, etc.

While in the middle of this, I happened to converse with a fellow
whose done a lot of Arctic travelling - been up to Alaska, Canada
and even the North Pole several times. He concurred with what the
Australian scientist said, and added observations of his own.

However, he launched a tirade of attacks against Lt Cmdr Green,
US Navy, who said he saw Crocker Land. (Green, as you will
remember, murdered the eskimo, and nobody knows why. The
Government of Denmark apparently went ballistic over the incident
demanding to know why). The excuse given by MacMillan and
Green is pretty lame - so I feel there's more to it than meets the
eye. I think Green shot the eskimo for a good reason. I think the
Eskimo saw "something" and went crazy. I think Green shot him
before he spread panic to the other eskimos in the Crocker Land
expedition. But what did the eskimo see? (A UFO maybe?)

And this brings me to a curious fact which seems to defy
coincidence. Green wrote articles for Popular Science, about
Crocker Land and mentioned that he'd seen it. Green was with
Capt. MacMillan at the time (1914). I have MacMillan's book (1918)
which has a beautiful description of the hills and valleys of Crocker
Land.

Now, here's the kicker. According to this guy I was chatting to,
whose extremely knowledgeable about the Arctic, he has Green's
Diary, and for the day(s) in question, there ARE NO ENTRIES for
anything to do with Crocker Land.

Strange? But not as strange as this: I know for a fact, that on the
DAY(S) when Peary said he saw Crocker Land - you will also NOT
FIND ANY ENTRIES IN HIS DIARY EITHER. All Polar scholars
have vouched for this.

So all these Polar Scholars say: Peary is a liar, Green is a liar
(just as they've been saying Cook is a liar).

But wait! I have seen newspaper articles - Dr Gohnert and I were in
the basement of one of Wits University's libraries and we saw a
detailed article from the early 1900's where Peary spoke at length
about the REALITY of Crocker Land.

I have Capt MacMillan's 1918 book with a very detailed description
of the amazing Crocker Land.

Is MacMillan ALSO a liar?

What of Cook? Cook took photographs of the outlying hills of
Bradley land - and his photos were sitting in the Library of
Congress in the USA - and then, THEY DISAPPEARED.... Who
took them?

Well, let me tell you something else. The Peary Club's records
were CLOSED for 75 years. They were only reopened just over a
decade ago.

So I'm sitting back and thinking how these Arctic explorers have
ALL been made out to be LIARS, and how strange things
happened to Cook, and to Cook's photographs, and to Peary's
testimony, and to Green's testimony, and so forth.

You know what? I think the same people who STOLE Cook's
photographs from the Library of Congress, may be the same
people who possibly TAMPERED WITH PEARY'S DIARY and
GREEN'S DIARY. Both of them were Naval Officers remember.

I'm starting to wonder what happened to those diaries and the
Peary records during the years they were closed. How do you
know that someone has not gone back and rewritten a bit of Arctic
history so to speak?

I have made the case that Dr Cook was framed, and it was
apparent to me that a smear campaign was aimed at Peary, but
now, Green also must be sucked into it. Now if everyone is to be
made out to be a liar, then it follows that before long, MacMillan
(who BTW, later became an ADMIRAL - just like Peary), must also
then be smeared. Eventually, in order to keep the whole Crocker
Land thing a secret, EVERYONE relating to it must be smeared.
Funny. The greatest Arctic explorers in history all have to be made
out to be COMPLETE LIARS, or else, people will realise that they
all saw something which I say, must remain, to this day, as
CLASSIFIED - and that is: Crocker & Bradley Lands...

One further area of study worth keeping an eye on, is polyanas, the
large-scale melting of ice in the polar sea. This may well be related
to the existence of Crocker & Bradley Lands, AND even to the
FAULT LINE - which Green said existed there. (BTW, Green was
the PHYSICIST on the Crocker Land expedition and had a
MASTER'S DEGREE IN SCIENCE - he was no idiot). Already, in
the past few days, as I perused a National Geographic from the
1990's, I saw that one polyana was seen, in the region which
interests me.

There must be OTHER weather effects which are not being
reported as well, which all relate to this island, volcanic activity and
the fault line. (e.g. like Peary's 1892 observation of volcanic ash
falling in Greenland. Too bad we don't know the prevailing winds at
the time).

In this regard, not enough is being said about the high sulphur
content of the air north of Alaska - sulphur comes from volcanic
activity... and there is lots of it in the air up there. Now that would
be something fantastic if one could measure sulphur content in the
air. That could lead you DIRECTLY to the island...

It seems as if viewing conditions in this region are very poor
because of all these natural phenomena which may be obscuring
the existence of this island.

If any of you see any articles of interest, PLEASE forward it to
me. I want to keep my ears to the ground.

But the thing which really hit me like a sledge-hammer today, was
the possibility, that the DIARIES, of TOP NOTCH Arctic explorers
MUST have been tampered with - I would assume by CIA/NSA
types. This must be the case. For example, how else can we
explain the disappearance of KEY PHOTOGRAPHS from the Cook
Collection in the Library of Congress? Oh please!? Surely, only
Govt Officials could walk in and remove it with blessings from on
high as part of NATIONAL SECURITY. Why was this theft never
reported? Why didn't it make media headlines? Surely, with the
technology of this last century, going to a diary and maybe
replacing ONE PAGE, can be done? If they can put men on the
moon then I'll bet they have the technology to fake a couple of
pages in a diary.

In this regard, and I need to check some more, do you know, that
some of these very important diaries, like that of Peary CONTAIN
SEVERAL BLANK PAGES AT KEY POINTS IN TIME??

Do you know, that Peary's diary, WHILE HE WAS AT THE NORTH
POLE, CONTAINS MOSTLY BLANK PAGES!!!!?? Think about it.
The man has reached his life-time's goal, he sits there for more
than a day and - HE WRITES NOTHING....

OR: Were these diaries tampered with and "blanked out/censored"
by the CIA/NSA to remove evidence which would suggest that
Crocker and Bradley Lands (and maybe other people) existed up
there? How much else has then been removed from Arctic diaries?
I am very curious now. Even a review of BLANK PAGES, could
itself become a most interesting pass-time, since one would know
WHERE they were at the time they "stopped writing" (were
censored), and that alone, could be KEY in indentifying areas
worth visiting and investigating.

Folks, I don't think anyone has ever advanced the theory before
that Polar Diaries have been tampered with by Government Agents
but as I ponder this, I'm saying to you, this MUST be the case.

And of course, if that is so, then I want to try to lay my hands on
the diaries of these people.

There is something very very strange, going on there...

Its on days like this that I get sick and tired of listening to 2nd-hand
and 3rd-hand accounts of the Arctic sea north of Alaska. Man, if I
had the money I'd be there in a FLASH. I'm telling you, there's
more than enough evidence here to justify mounting a good
expedition and do some serious flying covering several thousand
miles of the Arctic. With the kinds of planes around these days I
say that within a few weeks a person could solve these damned
mysteries for once and for all. I say there's something out there,
exactly where I mapped it in my book. EXACTLY THERE... and it
must be bloody AWESOME...

[norlan2000]

Congratulations. Others are starting to discover that there is a much bigger
picture to the "play stupid" attitude of our "see, hear. and speak no evil"
government.
The lengths and expense that our government is willing to spend on
fabricating lies and false explanations of UFO phenomena is startlingly
obvious. No one goes to these great lengths or is willing to look so
absolutely foolish if it isn't for a very intentional reason. Conceal the
truth at all costs. Which raises the question, "What is so important and so
critical that it requires this kind of top priority mis-information campaign?"
This is only the tip of the iceberg. Peary's notes and diary do reveal the
rather amazing anomoly of the polar opening. As Peary made his all out push
to reach the North Pole, his sextant readings indicated his distance of
travel. This is based on the relationships of the stars to that of the
earth. The bearings are based on what is expected to be this relationship
compared to the curvature of the circumference of the earth. But when Peary
was taking and recording his readings he was nearing the pole and
circumventing the lip of the opening. This greatly increased his angles and
thus the calculations of his distance. The main reason Peary's account and
honesty has been suspect, is because of the distances he claimed to have
traveled in the last few days of his polar push. What Peary claimed, was
that whereas he had been struggling to gain only a few miles each day in this
push for the poles, however, his readings on the last day before reaching the
supposed pole, indicated that he traveled nearly 400 miles the last days of
his drive! There are several other instances of altered or tampered with
accounts of polar encounters. There has been a massive organized effort to
eliminate or alter these references. But why? What are we hiding? What is
so worth such an extensive effort? There's much more to all this than meets
the eye. Later.
Norlan

[deandddd]

Norlan,

Nice points.

Jan Lamprecht fels that Peary's fast progress at the end of his drive was
principally due to the fact that the ice in the region of the pole becomes
smooth, although the ice around that region is simply jagged.

But I ask, whay does the ice become smooth? Why I used to live, the snow
would smooth out when the temperatures rose- otherwise, the snow and ice
would remain in pointd, jagged drifts. The fact that the ice smoothed out
suggests, in and of itself, that Peary was approaching the opening and the
warmer air that the opening would bring with it.

It naturally follows that proximity to the opening means that Peary's
calculations of distance traveled were influenced by a flattening of the
curvature. Hence, 400 miles was covered rather quickly. Nansen also
experienced similar curvature anomalies, approaching from the other side.

When Jan refutes that curvature anomalies were involved in the distances
covered by Peary, he doesn't seem to be taking into account the
foreshortening of the horizon reported by Lt. Greely, from the same region,
even further away. If there was foreshortening/curvature flattening reported
from further away, then why not from closer to the Pole, from where Peary
was? Greely's foreshortening was reported from around 80* near Ellesmere
Island, and Nansen had his many confusing encounters with the same, starting
from about 80* on the other side, above Siberia, at around 138* East
Longitude. So from 80* degrees latitude, going all around, heading
polewards, there is already an inward slope.

Therefore, Peary's speeds are embarassing to anyone trying to hide the
truth, and he was criticised until he took a few statements back, especially
about the land mass which he reported.

I think it is hard to look at the hollow Earth picture and not include the
conspiracy angle, although a few people are going to think that that is
oversimplistic and such.

Dharmapada/Dean

[norlan2000]

Agreed, on all aspects. Also, there is now technical evidence that shows
this phenomena of the north polar seas. Very accurate technical readings
show that the north polar sea tilts downward toward the north pole. An
impossibility with the idea that the earth is nearly perfectly spherical,
since water is a self-leveling medium. Just another anomalie that can't be
explained away with any other logical argument other than the HE Theory.
Norlan
PS. If someone could relate the source of this information if you know of
which I speak. I think it was part of the geophysical program discoveries.
Thanks.