you are welcome kevin
i am glad you are with us
& i understand that you still wish to rationalize & streamline the
true oktx boundary into an estimable condition or format
& to proceed to estimate the length of your rationalization of it
or else for further streamlining
to just appropriate someone elses estimate of their
rationalization of it
& i have no objection if you want to do any or all of this
& indeed i even like the idea of your trying
however you may try
so please let me know when you do arrive at your result
like
to get your minimum guess at the red river sector of oktx
i could imagine you might just adopt the lower of the 2 estimates
joe has already provided from the state of texas for the full length
of its red river boundary & then just chop 10 percent off for artx
no muss no fuss
very official looking
& no pretentious or spurious accuracy if you just remember to
round your minimum grand total down to the next lowest tens or
hundreds of miles
since we know you could always round it down a little if you liked
& you will thus convince yourself & anyone who is willing to
share your fantasy that the true oktx is objectively & indeed
comfortably longer than the true canv
& i would say good on you if you do
because i think after all we have been thru only a fool would
argue with you at that point anyway
& you are home free in your try
but i dont think there is any minimum possible length we could
all agree upon
since you apparently already know the description & method of
my minimum possible length
based on punctological principle
which is to connect with great circle arcs the known terminal
points of the survey sectors
& evidently you dont & cant agree that so minimal a minimum
rationalization of the true oktx could even be considered by us
& i gather that is because you think it less than the minimum
possible rationalization
but again i have no problem if you do think that
moreover i understand that what you are proposing or actually
trying to do is widely done all over the world with river boundaries
& indeed by the best of authorities such as ibru & the usgovt
so really what does it matter if i could agree with you or not
when anyone who apparently does matter & indeed practically
the whole world already does agree with you
so you have no need of me in your we here
& no need to consider my minimum
so really why detain yourself over it
nevertheless
in the name of the camaraderie i believe you do intend
i would go so far as to suggest that i could certainly agree with
you that procedures such as you are proposing could be used to
obtain good estimates of the minimum possible lengths of
boundary rivers
but just not of the minimum possible lengths of river boundaries
& tho you may believe it cant be done
i assure you that upon still deeper reflection i really do continue
to consider canv the longest known interstate boundary
while granting further that oktx may be the longest unknown one
& even the first among many equally long unknown ones
thanx to its apparently having a longer punctological minimum
length than any of the other unknown ones
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...> wrote:
> Thanks for the interesting links. I have to reiterate that even
with the
> disagreement over the ability to accuratly measure OK-TX, the
minimum length
> we could all agree upon is still greatly longer than CA-NV and
so
> CA-NVcannot be consired the longest common state
boundary.
>
> > ----------
> > From: m donner[SMTP:maxivan82@h...]
> > Reply To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 8:53 AM
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] new truth at oktx including aroktx
> >
> > yikes the truth has changed
> >
> > on 31aug2000 all previous & cumulative avulsions
accretions & confusions
> > of
> > the red river since 1923 were granted official pardon &
erasure
> > & a new oktx regime was established as of that date
> > apparently wiping away all the old boundaries shown on the
topos i have
> > been
> > flashing
> > & incidentally emplanting a new short but fixed parallel
survey sector in
> > lake texoma
> > within this renovated riverbank sector spanning oksw &
aroktx
> >
> > curiously tho the position of aroktx hasnt changed
> > since artx is not affected by the new oktx pact
> > but a second new survey sector has been inserted between
aroktx & the
> > south
> > bank
> > this one a meridional projection of the extant arok thru aroktx
> >
> > thus the minimum possible & only knowable length of true
oktx has been
> > increased
> > but probably not so much as to surpass the longest known
interstate
> > boundary
> > line length
> > which remains
> > at least punctologically speaking
> > canv
> >
> > some other juicy details
> > including an armed standoff between the governor of
oklahoma in a tank & a
> >
> > lone texas ranger on horseback etc etc
> > http://ssl.csg.org/compactlaws/redriverbound.rtf
> > http://www.house.gov/judiciary/sand1026.htm
> > http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/tslac/20069/tsl-20069.html
> > http://www.lsb.state.ok.us/house/news1946.htm
> > http://www.okit.com/news/2000/January/compact.htm
> > http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/news/aa073100a.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
__________________________________________________
_______________
> > The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2
months FREE*
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >