thanx again & bravos
i think we may be moving toward a coalescence of both
hypotheses
tho i confess i am still a bit surprised by your
distance estimates
so can anyone who did see the confluence & all 3
obelisks estimate either the distances & or the
proportionalities among them
like say halfway
or a third of the way
or just how much closer to one end than the other
--- Hugh Wallis <hugh@...> wrote:
> OK -
>
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2098.jpg
> is
> taken from very close to the stream confluence and
>
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2099.jpg
> shows the
> top of the handrail that is in DSCN2098 and you can
> just see the Polish
> obelisk peeking from behind the greenery in that
> photo.
>
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2100.jpg
>
<http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2099.jpg>
> is
> taken from right beside the top of the handrail.
>
> Putting these photos and my memory together I would
> say 27 metres would be a
> good estimate, especially when you compare it to the
> 16 metres that you say
> is the distance between the CZ and PL obelisks.
>
> Unfortunately I never saw the SK obelisk so couldn't
> estimate that distance.
> However, if you look at
>
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2097.jpg,
> which is
> taken from the stream confluence up the hill towards
> Slovakia you will just
> see an SK marker (white with red top) peeking out
> from behind the greenery
> towards the left of the photo. I think this is
> probably the twin of the PL
> marker in
>
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2100.jpg
> although I cannot confirm that since I did not note
> down the numbers.
> Nevertheless with all the matched pairs of markers I
> observed along both
> banks of the stream it is plainly evident to me that
> the stream plays a
> critical role in forming the PLSK border upstream
> and the CZSK border
> downstream,
>
>
> _____
>
> From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of aletheia kallos
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 4:38 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [BoundaryPoint] czplsk practically
> found
>
>
>
> thanx
>
> how far would you guess it is from them
>
> & how far from the sk obelisk
>
> --- Hugh Wallis <hugh@our-own-
> <mailto:hugh%40our-own-home.com> home.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The stream confluence is approximately equidistant
> > from the CZ and PL
> > obelisks. You can't really tell that from any of
> the
> > photos but you can if
> > you go there in person.
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: BoundaryPoint@
> <mailto:BoundaryPoint%40yahoogroups.com>
> yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:BoundaryPoint@
> <mailto:BoundaryPoint%40yahoogroups.com>
> yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf Of aletheia kallos
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:43 PM
> > To: boundaryPoint@
> <mailto:boundaryPoint%40yahoogroups.com>
> yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] czplsk practically found
> >
> >
> >
> > if you would look again at this pic of the cz & pl
> > obelisks
> > http://freepages.
> >
> <http://freepages.
>
<http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2103.jpg>
> misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2103.jpg>
> > misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2103.jpg
> > & realize that the official measurements place the
> > tripoint not much farther down the hill than the 2
> > obelisks are distant from each other
> > or roughly 27 meters as against 16
> > then you can practically
> > s e e
> > the legal tripoint position within frame
> > or not very far out of view beneath the curvature
> of
> > the hill
> >
> > nor would this position even seem to lie among the
> > thicker veggies yet
> >
> > perhaps it is not at all far beyond the last of
> the
> > signs & poles
> >
> > other views of the area just below the obelisks
> > confirm this overall impression of an open
> clearing
> > covering most if not all these 27 meters
> > http://www.vasa.
> > <http://www.vasa.
> <http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk2.jpg>
> abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk2.jpg>
> > abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk2.jpg
> > http://www.vasa.
> > <http://www.vasa.
> <http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk1.jpg>
> abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk1.jpg>
> > abo.fi/users/rpalmber/CzPlSk1.jpg
> > http://freepages.
> >
> <http://freepages.
>
<http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2099.jpg>
> misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2099.jpg>
> > misc.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis/CZPLSK/DSCN2099.jpg
> >
> > now correct me if i am wrong but my sense at least
> > of
> > the stream confluence is that it lies in deep
> woods
> > a
> > good deal farther down the hill than any of these
> > scenes even extend
> >
> > & unless i am mistaken about that
> > then it certainly appears now
> > even without having to wait for winter or any
> retry
> > that either the stream confluence tripoint
> > positioning
> > or the official measurements of the tripoint
> > positioning must be wrong
> >
> > i can scarcely wait for the next try based on
> these
> > data tho
> >
> > or else for these measurements to somehow get
> busted
> > in favor of the confluence position
> > for i agree it still seems a reasonable enough
> > hypothesis
> > had it not been for these pesky data that seem to
> > rule
> > it out
> >
> > but please do amplify the impression or correct
> any
> > wrong impression in any of this if you can
> >
> > like how far would anyone guess the confluence
> > actually is from the pair of obelisks
> >
> > etc
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > http://mail. <http://mail. <http://mail.yahoo.com>
> yahoo.com> yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail. <http://mail.yahoo.com> yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com