Re: Re: yikes kztmuz is reportedly undelineated & definitely elusive

well ok but actually kzuz is now purported to be fully
demarcated 
per footnote 6 here
http://www.asiaquarterly.com/content/view/28
as was expected in this post from 2003
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/11250

what was claimed or purported recently 
provoking all this now excessive yiking by me
is that kztmuz is undelineated
but this is most likely misinformed as well as
meaningless


also in morning light 
your perception of a delta where i see only a somewhat
less eroded remnant projection of the plateau spur 
i suppose is a creation of your distinctively
louisianian perspective
& not necessarily even a possibility under these
particular conditions

there are signs of streaming elsewhere that could have
caused the erosions to either side of this deltoid
formation but just not right there
as i read this enlargement of the best available
satpic
http://cache.gmane.org//gmane/culture/discuss/boundary-point/9165-002.bin

of course until we know the actual tripoint location
for sure
all these speculations are purely academic as well as
humorous

--- "Lowell G. McManus" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Despite whatever degree of spuriousness in the
> precision, it's the best 
> that we've got for now.
> 
> Yes, I agree that we are both probably close enough
> to call it Class C 
> if we were on-site, which is pretty good considering
> that its 
> purportedly unmarked anyway.
> 
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak-/[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 9:57 PM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: yikes kztmuz is
> reportedly undelineated & 
> definitely elusive
> 
> 
> ok nice
> so if live local is any more reliable in its border
> depictions than our 
> famously unreliable
> google is
> then your tripoint position guess would tend to be
> that much more 
> reliable than mine
> 
> or vice versa
> 
> for in fact we dont know which if indeed either is
> any better than the 
> other to begin with
> 
> but i trust you realize that our 200 meter
> difference is already but a 
> small fraction of the
> thickness of the google border lines at their
> tightest zoom level
> 
> so my guess is we are in both cases just compounding
> the spurious 
> precision that is
> already built into these systems
> 
> i do feel pretty sure we are both in the correct
> square kilometer
> or maybe even the right few hundred square meters
> but not necessarily any better than that
> 
> & as for the nature of the location
> well that involves several further degrees of
> speculation
> 
> but i see the right map is in stock & could be had
> for a mere 50 dollars 
> at omnimap
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Lowell G.
> McManus" <lgm@...> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, we surely could use one of those old Soviet
> maps.  I looked for 
> > one
> > also, but struck out.
> >
> > My statement about "the location of the tripoint
> according to all of
> > these mapping services" meant that they all agree
> on the shapes of the
> > boundaries and place the tripoint in the same part
> of the depression 
> > as
> > best as can be told on the various scales.
> >
> > I placed the pushpin thus:  Live Local, like
> Google Maps, dispenses 
> > with
> > the boundary overlays as one zooms in closely. 
> However, Live Local
> > allows one to move and precisely place a pushpin
> using a crosshair
> > cursor.  Once placed, it stays in place at any
> zoom level.  I placed 
> > it
> > as accurately as possible on the tripoint, then
> zoomed in to see where
> > it was within the enlarged view.  Several tries
> produced substantially
> > the same result where you saw the point of the
> pushpin in my 
> > attachment.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@...>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 3:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] yikes kztmuz is
> reportedly undelineated &
> > definitely elusive
> >
> >
> > > beautiful
> > > thanx
> > > great fun
> > > & please look for a few inserts below
> > >
> > > --- "Lowell G. McManus" <lgm@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree that there is quite an escarpment
> there, and
> > >> the name Chink
> > >> Kaplankyr might well refer to it rather than
> the
> > >> depression at its foot
> > >> in which the intermittent lake is located.
> > >
> > > if you will survey the usages of chink say in
> this
> > > local ustyurt sampling
> > >
>
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=chink+ustyurt&ie=UTF
> -8&oe=UTF-8
> > >
> > > youll see a range of evident meanings covering
> > > practically everything from the plateau itself &
> down
> > > the scarp to the depression at its base
> > > e x c e p t
> > > the bottom of the depression itself
> > > so it seems to me at this point call it anything
> but a
> > > salt pan or salt flat
> > >
> > >> Your Encarta map linked below clearly shows the
> > >> below-sea-level
> > >> depressions, numerous intermittent
> streamcourses
> > >> flowing into them, and
> > >> some water in the one near the tripoint.  It
> also
> > >> shows the tripoint as
> > >> being below sea level.  (Check the Encarta
> legend
> > >> for the meaning of
> > >> that darkest green.)
> > >
> > > there was or is no question about the elevation
> in
> > > relation to sea level
> > > tho this is an interesting excursion
> > > but only a question of what sort of terrain &
> ground
> > > the tripoint is in
> > > that might cause a problem with the
> monumentation
> > >
> > > i began with crumbly & steep based on the chink
> photo
> > > i flashed but i agree your guessed position
> pinpointed
> > > in your second attachment pic on much lower
> ground
> > > than mine & some 200 meters to the east of it
> might
> > > tend to be flatter & darker if not danker or
> damper
> > > or even as you conclude headlong in ooze
> > >
> > > so it becomes a question first of why our
> guesses are
> > > these 200 or so horizontal meters apart
> > >
> > > or perhaps only a question of what you mean by
> > > according to all of these various mapping
> services
> > >
> > > & then of how you evaluated & or used them to
> reach
> > > your pushpin conclusion
> > > not at all far from mine at the natural
> arrowhead
> > > point
> > > & yet so distinctly different in character from
> it
> > >
> > >> Now, if you'll go to the Google Maps image
> linked in
> > >> your message below
> > >> and zoom out, you will see that the tripoint
> > >> depression and its narrow
> > >> southeastern neighbor have some water and some
> salt
> 
=== message truncated ===




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/