Cook really stepped in it with Bradley Land.
I am just reading Bryce
about Cook's photos of that marvelous land now. It is amazing how Bryce
struggles to make it difficult to conclude positively that Cook did not at
least think he had gone to the pole. Why would we take Cook's word that
he went any distance over the ice when he pawns off a photo that could not
have been taken anywhere beyond the first 5 miles of his reported track as
land much farther north? The double standard continues to amaze me.
we acknowledge that Cook could have gone far enough to reach the pole (and
maybe even have been close) despite phony sights, phony photos, total wrong
compass variation data, and traveling companions that do not (at least
consistently) support his story? Peary, on the other hand, obviously faked
everything because sights can be faked, photos can be faked, depth soundings
can be guessed, he didn't provide detailed data on the compass variation and
his traveling companions could have lied too. What nonsense!