It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Soupconnees. The terrestrial basin their rivers being larger than that To spangle icy the Arctic can contain
of the 60 rivers as considerable as those of Siberia which give the ices of the north whose flow is done by les2. Debouquements
of Iceland etdu new Strait discovered by the Russians.
There must be length here and close to the dimensions of America or the raised terreins dou runs out of 9de rivers which provides
to ices the interior mother conjecturee.
Let us consider the problem of longitude, defined as the distance in
degrees east or west of the prime meridian. The current internationally
accepted prime meridian is an imaginary curve drawn from the North Pole
to the South Pole passing through the Royal Observatory at Greenwich,
London. Greenwich therefore stands at o° longitude while New York, for
example, stands at around 74° west, and Canberra, Australia, at roughly
It would be possible to write an elaborate explanation of longitude and
of what needs to be done to fix it precisely for any given point on the
earth’s surface. What we are concerned with here, however, is not so
much technical detail as the accepted historical facts about humanity’s
growing knowledge of the mysteries of longitude. Among these facts, this
is the most important: until a breakthrough invention in the eighteenth
century, cartographers and navigators were unable to fix longitude with
any kind of precision. They could only make guesses which were usually
inaccurate by many hundreds of miles, because the technology had not
yet been developed to allow them to do the job properly.
Latitude north or south of the equator did not pose such a problem: it
could be worked out by means of angular measurements of the sun and
stars taken with relatively simple instruments. But to find longitude
equipment of an altogether different and superior calibre was needed,
which could combine position measurements with time measurements.
Throughout the span of known history the invention of such equipment
had remained beyond the capacities of scientists, but by the beginning of
the eighteenth century, with rapidly increasing sea traffic, a mood of
impatience and urgency had set in. In the words of an authority on the
period, ‘The search for longitude overshadowed the life of every man
afloat, and the safety of every ship and cargo. Accurate measurement
seemed an impossible dream and “discovering the longitude” had become
a stock phrase in the press like “pigs might fly”.’
What was needed, above all else, was an instrument that would keep
the time (at the place of departure) with perfect accuracy during long sea
journeys despite the motion of the ship and despite the adverse
conditions of alternating heat and cold, wet and dry. ‘Such a Watch’, as
Isaac Newton told the members of the British government’s official Board
of Longitude in 1714, ‘hath not yet been made’.4
Indeed not. The timepieces of the seventeenth and early eighteenth
centuries were crude devices which typically lost or gained as much as a
quarter of an hour per day. By contrast, an effective marine chronometer
could afford to lose or gain that much only over several years.5
It was not until the 1720s that the talented English clockmaker John
Harrison began work on the first of a series of designs which resulted in
the manufacture of such a chronometer. His objective was to win the
prize of £20,000 offered by the Board of Longitude ‘for the inventor of
any means of determining a ship’s longitude within 30 nautical miles at
the end of a six weeks’ voyage’.6 A chronometer capable of fulfilling this
condition would have to keep time to within three seconds per day. It
took almost forty years, during which several prototypes were completed
and tested, before Harrison was able to meet these standards. Finally, in
1761, his elegant Chronometer No. 4 left Britain on board HMS Deptford
bound for Jamaica, accompanied by Harrison’s son William. Nine days
into the voyage, on the basis of longitude calculations made possible by
the chronometer, William advised the captain that they would sight the
Madeira Islands the following morning. The captain offered five to one
that he was wrong but agreed to hold the course. William won the bet.
Two months later, at Jamaica, the instrument was found to have lost just
Harrison had surpassed the conditions set by the Board of Longitude.
Thanks to the British government’s bureaucratic dithering, however, he
was not awarded the £20,000 prize money until three years before his
death in 1776. Understandably, it was only when he had the funds in his
hands that he divulged the secrets of his design. As a result of this delay,
Captain James Cook did not have the benefit of a chronometer when he
made his first voyage of discovery in 1768.8 By the time of his third
voyage, however (1778-9), he was able to map the Pacific with impressive
accuracy, fixing not only the correct latitude but the correct longitude of
every island and coastline.9 Henceforward, ‘thanks to Cook’s care and
Harrison’s chronometer ... no navigator could have an excuse for failing
to find a Pacific island ... or for being wrecked on a coastline appearing from nowhere.
Indeed, with their accurate longitudes, Cook’s Pacific maps must be
ranked among the very first examples of the precise cartography of our
modern era. They remind us, moreover, that the making of really good
maps requires at least three key ingredients: great journeys of discovery;
first-class mathematical and cartographic skills; sophisticated
It was not until Harrison’s chronometer became generally available in
the 1770s that the third of these preconditions was fulfilled. This brilliant
invention made it possible for cartographers to fix longitude precisely,
something that the Sumerians, the Ancient Egyptians, the Greeks and the
Romans, and indeed all other known civilizations before the eighteenth
century were supposedly unable to do. It is therefore surprising and
unsettling to come across vastly older maps which give latitudes and
longitudes with modern precision.
Originally posted by serbsta
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
1. Most of these maps were made throughout the 16th and 18th centuries. No one says they weren't accessible during these times since naval technology was developed enough for an endeavor. They just simply weren't discovered.
2. I they drew a ship in proportion to the land I don't think it would be visible on the map. Perhaps some coasts look slightly different because of technological advances we have today giving us a better overview.
3. Ice Age's aren't myths, they're backed up by scientific data. From what I know simply sedimentary analysis through the use of core tubes can give results in regards to this, disproving or proving periods of severe colds.
Originally posted by Totalstranger
best thread in a while!
quick question, when were each of these maps "discovered"? what I mean is do any of them (I think the Piri does) have controversy surrounding them?
You don't see the controversy in them supposedly depicting Antarctica before it was 'officially' discovered?
Originally posted by operation mindcrime
The text within the continent of Antarctica reads:
Soupconnees. Le bassin terrestre de leurs fleuves etant plus grand que celui de LaMer glaciale arctique peut contenir
des 60 fleuves aussi considerables que ceux de siberie qui donnent les glaces du nord dont l'ecoulement se fait par les2. Debouquements
de L'islande etdu nouveau Detroit decouvert par les Russes.
Il doit y avoir ici le long et pres des cotes de l'amerique ou des terreins eleves dou s'ecoulent de 9de fleuves qui fournissent
de glaces la mere interieure conjecturee.
Any French people on board?
[edit on 25/1/2010 by operation mindcrime]
Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11
It's not 'bending the mind' but 'snapping the brain off at the neck'. It's baseless conjecture. We're trying to talk about facts here, not some insane idea devoid of substantiating evidence.