in February 1910 Peary's claim to have reached the North Pole has long been subject to doubt. despite internal council splits that became known only in the 1970s. The RGS based their decision on the belief that the NGS had performed a serious scrutiny of the "proofs", which was not the case. Neither the
American Geographical Society nor any of the geographical societies of semi-Arctic
Scandinavia has recognized Peary's North Pole claim.
Criticisms Omissions in navigational documentation The party that accompanied Peary on the final stage of the journey did not include anyone trained in navigation who could either confirm or contradict Peary's own navigational work. This was further exacerbated by Peary's failure to produce records of observed data for steering, for the direction ("
variation") of the compass, for his longitudinal position at any time, or for zeroing-in on the pole either latitudinally or transversely beyond Bartlett Camp.
Inconsistent speeds in 1909 The last five marches when Peary was accompanied by a navigator (Capt. Bob Bartlett) averaged no better than marching north. But once the last support party turned back at "Camp Bartlett", where Bartlett was ordered southward, at least from the pole, Peary's claimed speeds immediately doubled for the five marches to Camp Jesup. The recorded speeds quadrupled during the two and a half-day return to Camp Bartlett – at which point his speed slowed drastically. Peary's account of a beeline journey to the pole and back—which would have assisted his claim of such speed—is contradicted by his companion Henson's account of tortured detours to avoid "pressure ridges" (ice floes' rough edges, often a few meters high) and "leads" (open water between those floes). In his official report, Peary claimed to have traveled a total of 304 nautical miles between April 2, 1909, (when he left Bartlett's last camp) and April 9 (when he returned there), to the pole, the same distance back, and in the vicinity of the pole. These distances are counted without detours due to drift, leads and difficult ice, i.e. the distance traveled must have been significantly higher to make good the distance claimed. Peary and his party arrived back in Cape Columbia on the morning of April 23, 1909, only about two and a half days after Capt Bartlett, yet Peary claimed he had traveled a minimum of more than Bartlett (to the Pole and vicinity). The conflicting and unverified claims of Cook and Peary prompted
Roald Amundsen to take extensive precautions in navigation during
Amundsen's South Pole expedition so as to leave no room for doubt concerning his 1911 attainment of the
South Pole, which—like
Robert Falcon Scott's a month later in 1912—was supported by the sextant,
theodolite, and compass observations of several other navigators.
Review of Peary's diary The diary that Robert E. Peary kept on his 1909 polar expedition was finally made available for research in 1986. Historian
Larry Schweikart examined it, finding that: the writing was consistent throughout (giving no evidence of post-expedition alteration), there were consistent
pemmican and other stains on all pages, and all evidence was consistent with a conclusion that Peary's observations were made on the spot he claimed. Schweikart compared the reports and experiences of Japanese explorer
Naomi Uemura, who reached the North Pole alone in 1978, to those of Peary and found they were consistent. However, Peary made no entries in the diary on the crucial days of April 6 and 7, 1909, and his famous words "The Pole at Last!", allegedly written in his diary at the pole, were written on loose slips of paper that were inserted into the diary.
1984 and 1989 National Geographic Society studies In 1984, the
National Geographic Society (NGS), a major sponsor of Peary's expeditions, commissioned
Wally Herbert, an Arctic explorer himself, to write an assessment of Peary's original 1909 diary and astronomical observations. As Herbert researched the material, he came to believe that Peary falsified his records and concluded that he did not reach the North Pole.
Review of depth soundings Supporters of Peary and Henson assert that the depth soundings they made on the outward journey have been matched by recent surveys, and so their claim of having reached the Pole is confirmed. Since only the first few of the Peary party's soundings, taken nearest the shore, touched bottom; experts have said their usefulness is limited to showing that he was above deep water. Peary's expedition possessed 4,000 fathoms of sounding line, but he took only 2,000 with him over an ocean already established as being deeper in many regions. Peary stated in 1909 Congressional hearings about the expedition that he made no longitudinal observations during his trip, only latitude observations, yet he maintained he stayed on the "Columbia meridian" all along, and that his soundings were made on this meridian. The pack ice was moving all the time, so he had no way of knowing where he was without longitudinal observations.
Re-creation of expedition in 2005 In 2005, British explorer
Tom Avery and four companions re-created the outward portion of Peary's journey using replica wooden sleds and
Canadian Eskimo Dog teams. They ensured their sled weights were the same as Peary's sleds throughout their journey. They reached the North Pole in 36 days, 22 hours—nearly five hours faster than Peary. However, Avery's fastest 5-day march was 90 nautical miles (170 km), significantly short of the 135 nautical miles (250 km) claimed by Peary. After reaching the Pole, Avery and his team were airlifted off the ice rather than returning by dogsled. ==Legacy==