|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 1, 2015 7:57:44 GMT
There is a lot of suspicious stuff concerning the Antarctic expeditions, so it is possible at least in theory that somehow even the people who think they visited the pole and "Antarctica" are misled and in fact they didn't, but went somewhere else instead.
Some of them might be even lying. What proof do we have they really went there?
Some of the expeditions were solo.
People went completely alone. Who verified they were there in the first place?
Who gave them permission to do it?
Can I get such a permission? Can anyone? Still, we should try to get there ourselves to validate this if possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 16:24:08 GMT
Yeah, good points. I admit I made that mistake of not asking questions, because I trusted that he had done all the work. I still haven't even read your evidence on Antarctica. That's why we need more users, so that while others write, we can focus on reading. Even on the forum of our friends at IFERS, I spent an entire month trying to keep it going, planning to start reading after it got started. I hope you won't ban me after this gets started, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by UNreal-banned on Apr 1, 2015 23:23:54 GMT
There is a lot of suspicious stuff concerning the Antarctic expeditions, so it is possible at least in theory that somehow even the people who think they visited the pole and "Antarctica" are misled and in fact they didn't, but went somewhere else instead. Some of them might be even lying. What proof do we have they really went there? Some of the expeditions were solo. People went completely alone. Who verified they were there in the first place? Who gave them permission to do it? Can I get such a permission? Can anyone? Still, we should try to get there ourselves to validate this if possible. hello LIT Freethinker • under are some links to books and websites that describes the 'North Pole discovery' as being largely contrived and positively hoaxed by Dr Fredrick Cook. can understand that you are not convinced that these missions were faked, but when you state that no evidence was put forth when i made these claims i must disagree. • Helen Skelton's probable South Pole hoaxthe great Polar Fraud by Anthony GalvinDoctor Cook North Pole fraudDr. Frederick Cook 1906 ascent of Denali in Alaska HOAX• there are more links and references i can provide to substantiate my position, but if you have not read or checked what i have already presented this would seem overkill if you have made up your mind, especially without checking first. IFERS thread here • UNreal |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 2, 2015 7:51:31 GMT
There is a lot of suspicious stuff concerning the Antarctic expeditions, so it is possible at least in theory that somehow even the people who think they visited the pole and "Antarctica" are misled and in fact they didn't, but went somewhere else instead. Some of them might be even lying. What proof do we have they really went there? Some of the expeditions were solo. People went completely alone. Who verified they were there in the first place? Who gave them permission to do it? Can I get such a permission? Can anyone? Still, we should try to get there ourselves to validate this if possible. hello LIT Freethinker • under are some links to books and websites that describes the 'North Pole discovery' as being largely contrived and positively hoaxed by Dr Fredrick Cook. can understand that you are not convinced that these missions were faked, but when you state that no evidence was put forth when i made these claims i must disagree. • Helen Skelton's probable South Pole hoaxthe great Polar Fraud by Anthony GalvinDoctor Cook North Pole fraudDr. Frederick Cook 1906 ascent of Denali in Alaska HOAX• there are more links and references i can provide to substantiate my position, but if you have not read or checked what i have already presented this would seem overkill if you have made up your mind, especially without checking first. IFERS thread here• UNreal Thank you for your post. UNreal, why don't you join us? In fact, despite what I said earlier that the Antarctic expeditions seem very real, as supposedly many people regularly visit Antarctcia according to statistics, I agree that those early expeditions look quite suspicious. It is quite easy to fake an expedition to a place where no one goes. Even nowadays, since Antarctica doesn't have any landmarks they can just shoot a video in Siberia or in Alaska or even in a studio and say it is from Antarctica, I don't think many people would know the difference anyway. So yes, I guess it is possible. Perhaps all the visitors are taken to a big frozen island somewhere in the south and they are fooled that is Antarctica. I know someone who climbed Mt Vinson, but Mt Vinson could be a peak somewhere around there, and not necessarily on the ice wall. There might be several big islands around the ice rim. Let's speculate that one could be close to South America and another one could be close to New Zealand, so they go there, they have built research stations and they lie it is a continent in the south, but it could be that beyond those islands there is a real ice wall which surrounds the disc at least hypothetically. That is why tourists and other visitors are not suspicious, because they probably indeed visit a place which is very cold and far away. It is very suspicious that some people supposedly walk to the South pole alone. Who actually verifies they walked there if they were alone  Anyway, even officially Antarctica is a huge continent, so obviously you cannot grasp its size just by standing in the middle of the ice field, and you can easily be on a huge barren island close to the ice wall. |
|
|
|
Post by UNreal-banned on Apr 2, 2015 8:52:38 GMT
Thank you for your post. UNreal, why don't you join us? In fact, despite what I said earlier that the Antarctic expeditions seem very real, as supposedly many people regularly visit Antarctcia according to statistics, I agree that those early expeditions look quite suspicious. It is quite easy to fake an expedition to a place where no one goes. Even nowadays, since Antarctica doesn't have any landmarks they can just shoot a video in Siberia or in Alaska or even in a studio and say it is from Antarctica, I don't think many people would know the difference anyway. So yes, I guess it is possible. Perhaps all the visitors are taken to a big frozen island somewhere in the south and they are fooled that is Antarctica. I know someone who climbed Mt Vinson, but Mt Vinson could be a peak somewhere around there, and not necessarily on the ice wall. There might be several big islands around the ice rim. Let's speculate that one could be close to South America and another one could be close to New Zealand, so they go there, they have built research stations and they lie it is a continent in the south, but it could be that beyond those islands there is a real ice wall which surrounds the disc at least hypothetically. That is why tourists and other visitors are not suspicious, because they probably indeed visit a place which is very cold and far away. It is very suspicious that some people supposedly walk to the South pole alone. Who actually verifies they walked there if they were alone Anyway, even officially Antarctica is a huge continent, so obviously you cannot grasp its size just by standing in the middle of the ice field, and you can easily be on a huge barren island close to the ice wall. Hello LIT • thank you for the invitation. i found this forum through Ab Irato's post @ Fakeologist. • glad you see the contrived angle i'm coming to terms with regarding the 'Pole Expeditions'. i'm gladly wrong about these explorers but the fact is that we have established Dr Cook faked his North Pole claim and was discredited in 1909 by a commission held at the University of Copenhagen. we since have believed admiral Peary was the first man to reach the North pole only to see his achievements put into doubt by Sir Wally Herbert who found that there were significant discrepancies in the Peary's navigational records & concluded Peary had not reached the Pole either.... Herbert is accredited as the first man to reach the North Pole on foot in 1969. • what i learn for this would be that all 'expeditions' seem to be ridden with military personnel and falsehoods. in the case of Admiral Byrd, who is such an authority in the South Pole saga, his claim to have reached the north pole by plane is also very questionable. if his exploits on the North Pole were faked, it is fair to consider that Byrd's (bird?) tales made later on the South Pole might be of similar kind. also Amundsen & Scott had plans for a North Pole expedition before they settled for the South Pole. wouldn't you say the same ponies probably play the same tricks ? • if there indeed is a peripheral ice-shelf erroniously referred to as 'a location', they could bring people anywhere they'd chose to and call it the 'South Pole'. the moon footage was indeed made in a studio somewhere just as the Mars Rover's imagery is likely shot in some dessert close to a military base,,, if i had to choose for the South Pole imagery, i'd probably do the pictures on the Greenland ice-shelf as it must be closer to 'home' ? •  |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 2, 2015 9:28:57 GMT
Thank you for your post. UNreal, why don't you join us? In fact, despite what I said earlier that the Antarctic expeditions seem very real, as supposedly many people regularly visit Antarctcia according to statistics, I agree that those early expeditions look quite suspicious. It is quite easy to fake an expedition to a place where no one goes. Even nowadays, since Antarctica doesn't have any landmarks they can just shoot a video in Siberia or in Alaska or even in a studio and say it is from Antarctica, I don't think many people would know the difference anyway. So yes, I guess it is possible. Perhaps all the visitors are taken to a big frozen island somewhere in the south and they are fooled that is Antarctica. I know someone who climbed Mt Vinson, but Mt Vinson could be a peak somewhere around there, and not necessarily on the ice wall. There might be several big islands around the ice rim. Let's speculate that one could be close to South America and another one could be close to New Zealand, so they go there, they have built research stations and they lie it is a continent in the south, but it could be that beyond those islands there is a real ice wall which surrounds the disc at least hypothetically. That is why tourists and other visitors are not suspicious, because they probably indeed visit a place which is very cold and far away. It is very suspicious that some people supposedly walk to the South pole alone. Who actually verifies they walked there if they were alone Anyway, even officially Antarctica is a huge continent, so obviously you cannot grasp its size just by standing in the middle of the ice field, and you can easily be on a huge barren island close to the ice wall. Hello LIT • thank you for the invitation. i found this forum through Ab Irato's post @ Fakeologist. • glad you see the contrived angle i'm coming to terms with regarding the 'Pole Expeditions'. i'm gladly wrong about these explorers but the fact is that we have established Dr Cook faked his North Pole claim and was discredited in 1909 by a commission held at the University of Copenhagen. we since have believed admiral Peary was the first man to reach the North pole only to see his achievements put into doubt by Sir Wally Herbert who found that there were significant discrepancies in the Peary's navigational records & concluded Peary had not reached the Pole either.... Herbert is accredited as the first man to reach the North Pole on foot in 1969. • what i learn for this would be that all 'expeditions' seem to be ridden with military personnel and falsehoods. in the case of Admiral Byrd, who is such an authority in the South Pole saga, his claim to have reached the north pole by plane is also very questionable. if his exploits on the North Pole were faked, it is fair to consider that Byrd's (bird?) tales made later on the South Pole might be of similar kind. also Amundsen & Scott had plans for a North Pole expedition before they settled for the South Pole. wouldn't you say the same ponies probably play the same tricks ? • if there indeed is a peripheral ice-shelf erroniously referred to as 'a location', they could bring people anywhere they'd chose to and call it the 'South Pole'. the moon footage was indeed made in a studio somewhere just as the Mars Rover's imagery is likely shot in some dessert close to a military base,,, if i had to choose for the South Pole imagery, i'd probably do the pictures on the Greenland ice-shelf as it must be closer to 'home' ? • I understand your point. Great research. Thinking along those lines, there is another thing which seems quite suspicious about the modern-day explorers. In contrast with the old days, when Amundsen and Scott were hardly surviving trying to reach the pole(assuming it wasn't a hoax)the modern-day explorers never seem to encounter severe weather and it is often sunny and quiet  I read several accounts of people who supposedly visited Antarctica and they would always brag about their luck with the weather, that it wasn't very cold and it was sunny?!?! I might be exaggerating, but considering that Antarctica is supposed to be super windy and very cold, I am surprised people claim they walked to the South Pole alone for two months and survived. That sounds like fairy tales too. |
|
|
|
Post by UNreal-banned on Apr 2, 2015 13:18:46 GMT
"I understand your point. Great research. Thinking along those lines, there is another thing which seems quite suspicious about the modern-day explorers. In contrast with the old days, when Amundsen and Scott were hardly surviving trying to reach the pole(assuming it wasn't a hoax)the modern-day explorers never seem to encounter severe weather and it is often sunny and quiet I read several accounts of people who supposedly visited Antarctica and they would always brag about their luck with the weather, that it wasn't very cold and it was sunny?!?! I might be exaggerating, but considering that Antarctica is supposed to be super windy and very cold, I am surprised people claim they walked to the South Pole alone for two months and survived. That sounds like fairy tales too. hello LIT • very much in agreement on your skepticism towards the Antarctic (&Arctic?) storyline. Amundsen and Scott were another constructed duality and i believe that their 'achievements' must be scrutinized further too. if you do a movie-search on the 'South Pole' or 'Antarctica' it becomes clear that this topic has been exploited for a long while and is also subject of coming film-projects. as we see more sophisticated TV series in recent times, it is to be suspected that the subject of the Arctic/Antarctic will be emphasized also through such channels. it is therefore interesting that BBC presenter Helen Skelton in 2012 became the first person to reach the South Pole using a bicycle,,, this has later been questioned and might be just another chapter to dubious pole epedition propaganda. is it reasonable to suspect that there is an ongoing effort to dumb us down on a continual basis since over 100 years back on this topic and if so, to what end ? •  |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 2, 2015 20:18:50 GMT
"I understand your point. Great research. Thinking along those lines, there is another thing which seems quite suspicious about the modern-day explorers. In contrast with the old days, when Amundsen and Scott were hardly surviving trying to reach the pole(assuming it wasn't a hoax)the modern-day explorers never seem to encounter severe weather and it is often sunny and quiet I read several accounts of people who supposedly visited Antarctica and they would always brag about their luck with the weather, that it wasn't very cold and it was sunny?!?! I might be exaggerating, but considering that Antarctica is supposed to be super windy and very cold, I am surprised people claim they walked to the South Pole alone for two months and survived. That sounds like fairy tales too. hello LIT • very much in agreement on your skepticism towards the Antarctic (&Arctic?) storyline. Amundsen and Scott were another constructed duality and i believe that their 'achievements' must be scrutinized further too. if you do a movie-search on the 'South Pole' or 'Antarctica' it becomes clear that this topic has been exploited for a long while and is also subject of coming film-projects. as we see more sophisticated TV series in recent times, it is to be suspected that the subject of the Arctic/Antarctic will be emphasized also through such channels. it is therefore interesting that BBC presenter Helen Skelton in 2012 became the first person to reach the South Pole using a bicycle,,, this has later been questioned and might be just another chapter to dubious pole epedition propaganda. is it reasonable to suspect that there is an ongoing effort to dumb us down on a continual basis since over 100 years back on this topic and if so, to what end ? • That is amazing! Reaching the South pole seems like a walk in the park for Helen She should have brought her babies then it would have been even more impressive. Just bring all your friends and relatives and ride you bicycles to the South pole, preferably directly from London, during lunch break. It is that easy! The best place for bicycles. This is definitely suspicious. I should go on a similar expedition next winter in the nearby mountain. I just need the local media to announce that I am planning to walk to the South pole and few months later will provide them with photos that I indeed reached the pole. Easy! Great find! |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 7, 2015 19:01:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 7, 2015 19:38:50 GMT
I wrote to a fella who was down in Antarctica and asked him about their summer time. He said, "The sun is in the sky from November to February - 105 days in total." The base he was at was at Halley.
I also read in several places how anyone who travels to Antarctica has to sign a "non-disclosure agreement". Why would that be?
At a certain point, after having watched so many FE videos about Antarctica that said the opposite, I just had to let it lie. It is hard to think that it could be falsified that heavily - individuals traveling there, webcams, etc. But then there is the non-disclosure agreement too.
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 7, 2015 19:53:07 GMT
I wrote to a fella who was down in Antarctica and asked him about their summer time. He said, "The sun is in the sky from November to February - 105 days in total." The base he was at was at Halley. I also read in several places how anyone who travels to Antarctica has to sign a "non-disclosure agreement". Why would that be? At a certain point, after having watched so many FE videos about Antarctica that said the opposite, I just had to let it lie. It is hard to think that it could be falsified that heavily - individuals traveling there, webcams, etc. But then there is the non-disclosure agreement too. This can be verified by also using the website timeanddate. You can select the month you're interested in and the location, and you will be able to check the day length, the sunrise and sunset times etc. It is great you asked someone who has actually been there. I doubt the "non-disclosure agreement" has anything to do with Antarctica, if indeed there is such a thing it only concerns those stationed at different research stations or military bases. If you visit Antarctica on your own or you go on an organized sightseeing tour there won't be any "non-disclosure", I guess. It is worth looking into this though. If you wish you might want to watch the following video and later share your thoughts. I am wondering if she really went there. TEDxHull - Felicity Aston - Crossing Antarctica |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 14, 2015 15:20:22 GMT
I just read an article about a Canadian guy who reached the so-called "South Pole of inaccessibility" Canadian sets records after reaching centre of AntarcticaThis story doesn't make sense. How can you travel only several kilometers per day and reach the most remote point of Antarctica in just 36 days? It means that point is only around 200-300 km from where he started the journey. However, Antarctica is supposed to be twice the size of Australia! Either the article is wrong, or they just made up the whole thing. |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 14, 2015 16:22:08 GMT
There is something else that occurred to me regarding the long expeditions in the freezing cold of Antarctica. There are allegedly several explorers who crossed the continent completely alone. It sounds absolutely heroic. The expeditions often lasted more than 50 days. How can you survive almost two months in temperatures around -30 -40 Celsius? What about this? - The Rules of Poo and Pee in AntarcticaWhat about clothes and food? They carry everything on their own! Do they change their clothes at all during that time? Two months is a very long time! You can't expose your skin, so what do they do? I am beginning to get more and more suspicious about those missions. I tried to find something more about Felicity Aston, the woman who crossed Antarctica completely alone, but couldn't find any comments where people doubt she did it. Why is that? Why did no one question the whole thing? What if I say that I crossed Antarctica, would they believe me too? Something is fishy about the whole thing. If anyone has time I would appreciate it if you investigate these issues further. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 14, 2015 16:37:40 GMT
LIT - Thank you. I also saw Felicity Aston's video you posted. She seemed sincere, but it is also hard to understand, because most people are not aware of the dangers and difficulties you mention: "If she said it then it must be true". There is nothing for most people to judge by when it comes to a trip to Antarctica. I think, to most people, it is simply "very cold". I think it is hard enough for someone to go it alone in the woods for 50 days, let alone in Antarctica. 50 days of food is very heavy too - and how about it all just "freezing". It does not make sense to me. I still never understood the "non-disclosure" statement that everyone has to sign either...
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 14, 2015 17:05:43 GMT
mattYeah, the food was obviously frozen. She had to melt it every day or something. It doesn't make sense to me either. What about the tent she lived in. You can't hide from the winds in a tent. Antarctica is supposedly a flat ice dessert with an average altitude of almost 3000 meters. When the winds are strong, I don't think you can hide in a tent. It sounds totally unrealistic. Also she has a lot of photos from Antarctica which she supposedly took using a camera tripod. Some of them are shot from a distance. So she set up the tripod, got all her stuff and started pulling the sled and at the same time the camera took the picture automatically while she was pretending to move in the opposite direction. It looks as if she tried to achieve a certain effect with those photos. They are not some random photos, but they represent a nice photo composition. So it is -40 Celsius, but your mind is busy thinking how to make a nice photo composition and how to position yourself along with the sled, so that it appears realistic. And who exactly confirmed her trip if she was alone? No witnesses, but we know she did it? How do we know that? We need to also find out who grants the permission to go there alone. It sounds really suspicious to me. One more thing, she actually lives in Iceland even though she is from the UK. Since Antarctica is an ice dessert and there is nothing like a landmark you can recognize, you can take the photos in Iceland, Siberia, Greenland or even in Minnesota in winter, and I doubt you would be able to tell the difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 14, 2015 19:22:43 GMT
Ok, LIT, here is one more: www.felicityaston.co.uk/latest.htmlDown toward the middle of the page: Friday 10th October 2014 My book, 'Alone in Antarctica' is published in the US this month by the lovely people at Counterpoint Press. The release coincides with some brilliant coverage in two glossy magazines this October. I spent a fantastic day on a glacier with Icelandic photographer, Ari Magg, for the shot included in October's Vanity Fair (UK Edition) and there is a great article to promote the book in October's Marie Claire (US Edition). But perhaps the most fun photoshoot was for the 2015 Book of Guinness World Records. I had fake snow glued to my eyebrows and special 'cold' looking make-up - you can see the result this month when the 2015 edition hits the shops. Why say this? |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 14, 2015 20:52:12 GMT
Ok, LIT, here is one more: www.felicityaston.co.uk/latest.htmlDown toward the middle of the page: Friday 10th October 2014 My book, 'Alone in Antarctica' is published in the US this month by the lovely people at Counterpoint Press. The release coincides with some brilliant coverage in two glossy magazines this October. I spent a fantastic day on a glacier with Icelandic photographer, Ari Magg, for the shot included in October's Vanity Fair (UK Edition) and there is a great article to promote the book in October's Marie Claire (US Edition). But perhaps the most fun photoshoot was for the 2015 Book of Guinness World Records. I had fake snow glued to my eyebrows and special 'cold' looking make-up - you can see the result this month when the 2015 edition hits the shops. Why say this? Hahahah, that is hilarious. I wish we can find more information about these people. What she said sounds like a subliminal message. She basically tells you "I didn't go to Antarctica, I went to Iceland and we faked the whole thing". That is the feeling at least. Here is an article and a photo of her training in Iceland: British woman to begin crossing Antarctica, awaits clearing weatherBy the way, matt on her website I found the following proverb " One lie can annihilate a thousand truths." She says this in an interviewI found something interesting: First unassisted crossing of Antarctica. |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 15, 2015 13:56:38 GMT
mattI just calculated her average speed during her expedition across Antarctica. It turns out she travelled on average 30 km per day for 59 days, and she covered 1744 km! ExpeditionsThe sites even provide contradicting information as here Kaspersky One TransAntarctic Expeditionthey say the expedition was 70 days. How can you ski 30 km per day in -30 -40 degrees with 80 kg of luggage and this torture for two months! Amazing. I guess it is easier when you ski but still...  And here she is in her tent. Please remember it is -30 outside. Where was the photo taken is anyone's guess... 
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 15, 2015 14:09:50 GMT
Yes, and how much of the 80kg of luggage was food? For 59 (or 70) days, how much weight in food needs to be transported?
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 15, 2015 14:32:08 GMT
mattDoesn't she need to be heavily dressed inside the tent too? Outside is -30 then what is the temperature inside? +10? Really? What kind of food did she eat that she needs a pot? She was probably cooking beans or something? I might be wrong, but this looks suspicious.
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Nov 20, 2015 15:45:36 GMT
Felicity Aston - Antarctic Scientist and Polar ExplorerYeah, right! Kate Marsden admitted she lied, but Felicity Aston discovered Kate is now heralded as a national hero?!?! How could Kate be a national hero in Sakha if she never went there? I don't know who is lying, but it is clear that Felicity does this for publicity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Broheims on Sept 29, 2017 0:02:13 GMT
LIT and Mat, I want to go to Antarctica and prove the earth isn't a globe. What are your thoughts on how I should prepare?
|
|
|
|
Post by cgi blue marble on Nov 16, 2017 21:06:15 GMT
there are sites that claim to sell voyages to the geographic and magnetic south pole. 50-60k USD per person from South America. Funny that is costs 10k to go to tip of antartica but then costs another 50k for a short flight to pole from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 8, 2018 13:33:47 GMT
there are sites that claim to sell voyages to the geographic and magnetic south pole. 50-60k USD per person from South America. Funny that is costs 10k to go to tip of antartica but then costs another 50k for a short flight to pole from there. Indeed, on top of that you are not allowed to independently research any of Antarctica. I don't think it is possible to just get your buddies and explore there on your own. Supposedly, there is nothing there, but why the restrictions then? They say it is to preserve the pristine nature, well, last time I checked no animals or plants exist in Antarctica; all the living organisms there live in the coastal regions, none deep into the continent itself. They also claim it is a place where no weapons are allowed etc, however we hear of bases funded by the military and employing military personnel?! What is going on, and why south of the 60th parallel you should need a special permission to even sail? |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 8, 2018 13:35:53 GMT
LIT and Mat, I want to go to Antarctica and prove the earth isn't a globe. What are your thoughts on how I should prepare? Good luck! Are you planning on going there alone? |
|
|
|
Post by Mellow03 on Jun 16, 2018 6:10:56 GMT
And it is suspect that it is tour when it shouldn't be tour, the moment it says it is tour then it is control by the person there, not unlimited to Antarctica. And it says Antarctica is not own, but that is a lie since government do own it and it is tour, then the person own the tour. And there should be no permission.
|
|
Anyway, even officially Antarctica is a huge continent, so obviously you cannot grasp its size just by standing in the middle of the ice field, and you can easily be on a huge barren island close to the ice wall. 
I read several accounts of people who supposedly visited Antarctica and they would always brag about their luck with the weather, that it wasn't very cold and it was sunny?!?! I might be exaggerating, but considering that Antarctica is supposed to be super windy and very cold, I am surprised people claim they walked to the South Pole alone for two months and survived. That sounds like fairy tales too. 
