You can often look things up. Wanna know how fast Earth's (supposed) orbit or rotation is? You can look it up. Want to know about they guy who got arrested for sailing in his ship toward Antarctica. You can look that up too. The thing is, when you look online nowadays, you get fake news. What I mean by that is not what CNN calls fake news which boils down to "these news sites are fake." No fake news is when you ask a legitimate question (keywords: Antarctica trip arrested), and Google instead loads articles about women being sexually assaulted in the base in Antarctica or "fact checks"(by paid shills) about how it's so easy to visit Antarctica, no restrictions at all!
Intelligence is the ability to read between the lines. That's what the word root means. It is
not learning ability. Trained seals can learn to balance balls on their noses or do tricks. Intelligent seals instead figure out whether all the attention is worth the fish, and if not, they figure out how to escape.
An intelligent person reads online, looks at the moon and stars (and even the eclipse), and finds out themselves. They filter through what seems true and what does not based on their own logic.
Or... you can accept what you learned in an expensive university because some teacher in fancy robes said it.
Remember that web search I did?
(keywords: Antarctica trip arrested)
I eventually adjusted the search, and got Jarle Andhøy
In June 2002, Andhøy, Rosén, and Mercy, sailed to the Arctic in another Albin Vega, called Berserk II; their goal was to sail in the path of Ohthere, the Viking chief, and to sail as far as possible north towards the Arctic ice. According to their own account of the voyage, the expedition set a world record, as no other sailing vessel had ever sailed as far north in open water. Immediately after returning to Longyearbyen on Svalbard, Sysselmannen (the governor of Svalbard) charged Andhøy, as the skipper, with sailing without insurance and for failing to submit a route-plan. He was required to pay a fine of 20,000 Norwegian Kroner and was refused permission to continue in Svalbard's waters. Andhøy failed to pay the fine, and so the case was taken to Nord-Troms court on 30 April 2003. Additionally, Andhøy, Rosén, and Mercy released a television series which documented their voyage (first aired on NRK in the autumn of 2003). Using that documentary as evidence, the Sysselmannen charged the trio with a number of environmental crimes, including unauthorised landings in protected areas and provoking a polar bear. The case, carrying a sentence of 30 days imprisonment and a fine of 25,000 Kroner, was heard in Larvik court on 29 March 2004. They were found guilty, but the sentence was reduced to 5,000 Kroner and the imprisonment was suspended, pending a 2-year probationary period.
Now, a dim person might side with the law against Andhøy, and decide that he was being reckless in the first place. But a dim person doesn't question the bias of Wikipedia. As a flat Earther, I know exactly the bias of Wikipedia. For you see, this is their article on FE.
Flat Earth is an archaic and scientifically disproven conception of the Earth's shape as a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures subscribed to a flat-Earth cosmography. The model has undergone a recent resurgence as a conspiracy theory.
Before learning from their social environment, a child's perception of their physical environment often leads to a false concept about the shape of Earth and what happens beyond the horizon. Many children think that Earth ends there and that one can fall off the edge. Education helps them gradually change their belief into a realist one of a spherical Earth.
You heard it from them, folks! Flat Earthers are just people who haven't been properly educated.
So back to Andhøy.
In July 2004, Andhøy and Rosén attempted to continue the voyage. However, the Norwegian Police and Coastguard attempted to stop them since they believed Mercy, who was still wanted in connection with the previous environmental charges, was also aboard.
In February 2011 during an expedition to the South Pole, Berserk activated its emergency transponder with three people on board. At the time Jarle Andhøy and one of his crewmates, Samuel Massie, were driving ATVs towards the pole.
An extensive search was coordinated by New Zealand's Rescue Co-ordination Centre, and involved the governments of New Zealand, Norway, and the United States... On 25 February, the Steve Irwin found an empty, damaged lifeboat from the Berserk and several packages of drinking water, but no sign of the boat itself. After an extensive search by these vessels, the search was concluded on 1 March 2011 with all three crew member presumed dead.
So to summarize, this guy (it's difficult to type his name) is initially arrested, aside from the stunt with the bear, for not having insurance. Then later, he does more exploring, this time of the Northwest Passage only to search for someone who isn't even on the boat. Then this guy wakes up sans boat and sans crew members. A search is mounted but only the boat is found.
Question:
1. How is it that a full crew joins an uninsured man with no passage plan on a trip south?
2. And how does the ship lose three passengers?
3. And why would someone keep trying to travel, even when people tell him "You can't because you have a criminal record"?
Answer:
1. He didn't. The Norwegian government (a Antarctica signatory) denied him permission to enter Antarctica. He acquired insurance from elsewhere, and he had a definite passage plan. Just as police can plant drugs on a person, it is rather easy to take away pieces of paper and burn them. "You have no insurance or passage plan."
2. An anchored ship shouldn't be able to do that. So unless they were all tossed overboard, they fact that they have plenty of drinking water means they should have stayed with the boat. In a violent storm scenario, you'd reasonably expect some but not all to be tossed overboard, or the ship to also be destroyed. Ship only damaged, no sign of three crew members? Foul play (probably some sort of kidnapping).
3. If it were me, I'd tell you the reason I'd keep exploring. It would be if some assholes ruined my life with trumped up charges (the bear thing was probably legit), and I want to know what was really going on. When I look up his name, we get his side of Wikipedia's story:
https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/what-really-happened-berserk/Your mission was to reach the pole and get back safely. What was their job?
ANDHOY: To stay with the Berserk and, if necessary, take shelter inside Ernest Shackleton’s hut. (Editor’s note: The hut is from the 1907–9 British Antarctic Expedition, during which Shackleton tried and failed to reach the South Pole. It sits on Cape Royds in McMurdo Sound.) The bay is the safest place for getting shelter from big seas, ice, and winds. The Berserk crew were also making preparations for overwintering if they had to. That involved storing equipment like fuel, food, tools, and shovels.
On the afternoon of February 22, the Berserk’s emergency beacon went off. For some reason, the boat had left its anchorage and traveled into a storm that was forecasted to hit the Ross Sea. The beacon was activated seven nautical miles from Horseshoe Bay. It lasted around 18 to 20 minutes—only a very short time before the signal died out.
Had you spoken to the crew the day before that?
ANDHOY: I’d discussed the bad weather that was coming. They had tied long polypropylene lines from the deck to shore. The plan was to stay in Horseshoe Bay, tethered to land, and if necessary stay in the hut.
What happened when you reached New Zealand?
ANDHOY: We had a meeting with representatives from New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and they were very upset because they claimed we had sailed illegally to Antarctica, and had violated environmental rules by anchoring in Horseshoe Bay. And that’s where my questions began. Sammy and I were in a situation where three of our friends were assumed to be dead, and in New Zealand we were met with the accusation that the Berserk had sailed to Antarctica illegally? When we got back to Norway, the Norwegian Polar Institute reported alleged violations of the Norwegian environmental regulations to the state prosecutor, based on information given to them by New Zealand authorities. The alleged violations were illegal sailing and anchorage in Antarctica. The criminal charges and the focus on safety lines tied to land were in direct contradiction with international maritime law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, specifically with regard to the fundamental rights of the high seas and the right to safe passage in the seas surrounding Antarctica.
Suddenly this story about an aimless boater traveling without insurance doesn't track.
After all these years, do you know why they left?
ANDHOY: No, and from a seaman’s perspective, it is completely illogical and irrational to leave a safe anchorage and the hut on land to put your nose into a forecasted Force 12 storm in the Southern Ocean. But that’s what the timeline shows they did. In nature, you never leave shelter from a storm, but I can’t judge the captain’s call without knowing what was said and done before he made it.
All of the paperwork from the official side prior to the accident proves that the main focus of New Zealand and Norway was to make an example of an expedition that, to them, was not welcome. I don’t know what kind of pressure had been put on our crew to leave. I believe the biggest error here is that people in Norway’s and New Zealand’s administrations have focused on bureaucratic gray-zone rules in the Antarctic Treaty instead of on the security of the missing men and the expedition.
You don't leave an area of safety unless you are made to leave.
Why didn’t you get official permission to be there in the first place?
ANDHOY: By law and by definition, sailing in the Southern Ocean is not limited—that’s why these waters are legally called the high seas. And on my search expedition to Antarctica, I knew that Norway would never give me a permit to go, because officials required insurance that does not exist. So it’s like putting you in checkmate. You have to apply for a notice or a permit, but in order to get that permit you need insurance, but you can’t get it.
Think about what he was arrested for again. Besides hurting bears, of course.