The Detroit times., 1910-11-30

uecu all the tcstb pio'iucu W 49,
learning OF mankind.
In the matter OF the north pole
science I'm many OF her departments
provides such tests. Astronomy Is
branch OF science that of right must
be permitted to apply its tests 10 the
data furnished by DR.. Cook. Lieut.
Peary or any other man who may
claim 10 have discovered the geo.
graphical pole.
have taken the best information
| could secure as 10 DR.. Cooks data.
and | have undertaken an analysis oi
what his observations really show
Annatoak Is situated In ~ degrees
81 minutes of north latitude, ana Is
therefore IL degrees % minutes or
100 miles from the north pole. Inc
sun rose at this place on Feb. IL, lSos'
after having been below its horizon
during 1l6 days. or since the 24th Oh
the preceding October. 1t was from
this place that DR.. Cook started on
his polar expedition at sunrise FEB.
10, 1908. He reports that on March
80 he was in latitude 81 degrees ~
minutes, which IL degrees IL min
utes or 1862 miles from the pole.
might Of April Made Notable
On March 80, at midnight, the suns
declination was 4 degrees o minutes
north OF the equator, and II TO this we
add 35 minutes for refraction, we get
the apparent declination OF the
sun equal TO degrees 80 min
utes north. Observing Cooks dis
lance from the pole. or degrees
l3 minutes, we get 80 degrees
AZ minutes for the zenith distance OF
the midnight sun In the latitude COOK
claimed to be in at that time. Inc
midnight sun would therefore be 80
minutes of a degree below his horizon,
and would of course be invisible. But
the midnight sun was approaching
Cooks horizon at the rate or 30 MIN
utes daily. and consequently must
have reached II on March 81 or April
l at the latest.
But DR.. Cook tells us that the night
OF April Z was made notable by the
swinging OF the midnight sun over
the northern ice" as II marke dine De-
ginning of the six months OF summer
at that place. Now, II Cook was In
the latitude he claims to have been In,
he must have had a midnight sun as
early as April l. But We have no rea-
son to doubt Cooks statement that
April Z showed him his first midnight
sun, as so simple an observation as
seeing the sun itself would require
neither instruments nor skill In using
them. and could as we'll be made by
an untutored Eskimo as by the most
intelligent whiteman. Therefore we
Will accept April as the date or
Cooks first midnight sun, and In
auire what conclusions may be legiti-
mately deduced from It,
On April Z, at midnight, the suns
declination may be taken as north
degrees minutes. and to this must
be added the suns semi-diameter, 10
minutes, and refraction, 80 minutes.
making the declination Z degrees 90
minutes, in order that the whole sun
might appear above the horizon. III
then, the sun was In the horizon OF
some place at midnight. the place
must be as far from the pole as the
sun was from the equator, and conse-
Quently the polar distance INST be
equal to degrees 55 minutes, or Its
latitude must be so degrees minutes.
DIR. Cook gives his latitude at the same
time as SO degrees 38 minutes. There
Is, therefore, a discrepancy amounting
to 4 degrees SO minutes In his latitude
TO be accounted for in some way, and
this discrepancy Is equivalent to a
linear distance of ZIG miles in the
place of the observer.
Discrepancy Of 316 Miles.
II DR.. Cooks latitude on April was
only SO degrees minutes, he was
then $50 miles from the pole, and in
order to reach 1t on April 81, he must
have travelled 80 miles daily.
In his journey towards the pole
after April I. nothing Is related OF
special interest except the extreme
precision with which he gives his lati
tude as determined by his sextant,
namely, SO degrees SO minutes 46 Sec
onds, which would give his distance
from the pole equal to 1,400 feet, or
only 80 feet more than quarter of
mile. 1t is perhaps superfluous to add
that no portable transit instrument or
sextant would be capable OF giving
that degree or precision, even by
long series of observations.
In conclusion, 1t appears that DR..
Cooks observations show that he was
really 300 miles from the pole when
he claims to have been only 234 miles
from that point. His observations
therefore show a discrepancy OF SIC
miles.
The conclusions arrived at In this
paper are based upon the assump-