narrowed it down to 95% of a single planet!
The peninsula is considered the north side. So the location of the shipwreck is south of South America.

You're looking at it from the South Pole, so there is no West, only North.

It literally says beneath the Weddell sea.
But where is the Weddell sea?
Yeah... probably "between Antarctica and the South Atlantic" would be the best reference here.
[Now it's probably not the time for me to ramble on how the Atlantic should be considered two oceans instead of one, right?]
The location is being kept secret to prevent looting.
It is helpful in that it gives an idea of what sort of waters it sank at. Being close to Antarctica my mind immediately goes to heavy seas with cold weather.
Yeah, the Weddell Sea is basically in Antarctica

Yeah even "near Antarctica" narrows it down to the South Atlantic, South Pacific and South Indian oceans.
if we suppose "just" means near in this context, "Just north of antarctica" and "Near antarctica" has exactly the same meaning.
It still narrows it down to about 1/8th of the Earth's surface area.
Fun fact: I have never actually seen a clip of this with audio, so I always give this guy the Skeletor voice in my head and I just realized he probably doesn't sound like that.
I looked it up. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XdWlWUUYejc
We don't talk about what's South of Antarctica
Mark here either has poor reading comprehension, or is intentionally being a little shit by cherry picking part of the title and not reading the whole thing.

The location specified is not 'north of Antarctica'.
It is, 'the Weddell Sea, north of Antarctica.'
Giving 'the Weddell Sea' as the location is actually decently specific, and the 'north of Antarctica' that follows is modifying / adding to the description of 'the Weddell Sea'... not the entirety of the location description.
I would snarkily, rhetorically, ask if people are even taught how to diagram out a sentence structure anymore, but I already know the answer is 'not really, no', because the average adult American literacy level is that of a 6th grader.
Mark, and anyone else who also finds this to be a funny, poignant zinger, need to go back to middle school and relearn grammar.
It should probably say, "off the Antarctic coast", or even "X kilometers off the Antarctic coast".
Or - bear with me here - it’s just a funny detail and people are laughing about it. Because any sea is obviously going to be north of it
I see you've bought into the globey lie of a round earth.
Uh?
It is still valid to point out that "north of Antartica" is a silly phrase in context, even though it's fine given the more specific Weddell Sea information. If you did want to help readers know the story based on a more well-known landmark, a less silly phrase would have been simply been "Weddell Sea, near Antarctica".
I'd go with "the Antarctic's Weddell Sea".
Nope. You could as well say: Mediterranean Sea, north of Antarctica.
I have two dollars, less than infinity.
The temperature is pleasant, higher than absolute zero.
Doesn't add anything. There are no seas south of Antarctica.
It adds something, it specifies the nearest location, if we assume the basic sanity of the sentence. Mediterranean Sea, north of Antarctica would be insane thing to say. Mediterranean Sea, north of Africa however is a proper signifier.
Is there any Mediterranean Sea south of Africa?
The map he linked literally shows the Ross sea south of Antarctica.
Also since its earth is spherical and its near the south pole you can really go any direction and find a sea... that just becomes a matter of perspective.
In this case, specifically, the wedell sea is to the north of the continent
Tthat's not south of Antarctica though. It's below, in terms of the map's perspective, but "absolute south" is the middle of the picture. Anywhere outside Antarctica is north of Antarctica.
The perspective of a map does not change how the cardinal directions relate to each other. You may be confused about how in slang, “south” may mean below and “north” may mean “above”, but that slang usage does not apply with geography where these terms are rigidly defined. The South Pole is categorically the southernmost point* — there is no location more south than the South Pole. The South Pole is located within Antarctica; ergo, there is no location more south than Antarctica.
*it’s beside the point to distinguish between the Magnetic South Pole and the True South Pole for this discussion but I figured I’d mention it
Yes i get that
But we also live on an oblong sphere, which is 3 dimensional
The axes of north and south, east and west, are two dimensional
If you have a ship that can sail through anything, with infinite provisions, and you sail past the south pole, you will end up going north. That doesnt suddenly discount the fact that up until a certain point, you were going south. If the sea is immediately around the island, which it is, and is on the opposite side of the exact point of the axis, i wouldnt call that a misnomer.
When you are in that area you're essentially sailing south until you're sailing north. If we came at it from the other side it would likely be called something different.
No. There are parts of Antarctica that are north of the sea. That is, you can be in Alaska and travel south and hit the sea. It really depends on where the two points are.
I would snarkily, rhetorically, ask if people are even taught how to diagram out a sentence structure anymore, but I already know the answer is ‘not really, no’, because the average adult American literacy level is that of a 6th grader.
I agree with your overall statement. Just wanted to point out that there are a lot more people than Americans out there.
Yup, by naming Wedell, they located it quite well; there are 13 small named seas completely encircling Antarctica. By naming any of them, you can reasonably locate (to any point that matters to dear reader) the wreck
Sure, if you happen to already know where the Wedell Sea is or if you look it up it you can reasonably locate it, in which case adding the "north of Antarctica" part is superfluous. But if you don't already know where the Wedell Sea is, adding in the "north of Antarctica" part doesn't actually narrow it down any, which is why it's a funny thing to point out.
If they had wrote "just north of Antarctica" or "off the coast of Antarctica" or "near Antarctica", that would have narrowed it down significantly.
Now that I have thoroughly explained the joke, I imagine it's much funnier now.
I'm sure that "Mark "Three-Jabs" Newton" and the rest of us who found this funny were able to deduce from the context that is actually what the writer meant . That isn't what they actually wrote though so "sp3ctr4l" is not only incorrect in asserting that Mark has "poor reading comprehension", he is also wrong that 'reading the whole thing' would have clarified things and was extremely condescending about his incorrect statement at the same time, which makes him kind of an ass imo.
He was correct that Mark was "intentionally being a little shit" so 1 out of 3 wouldn't have been so bad if he weren't such a douche about it at the same time.
It's much funnier now
Nah, It was rather self-explanatory, I believe most of us read it is more of a pedantic thing than a joke. Sadly, explaining the pedantic thing at length reinforced that substantially. :)
You're not wrong, you're just insufferable.
Nah, spectral IS wrong. The "complaint" isn't arguing grammar, it's explicitly pointing out that there's a very unhelpful couple of words in the sentence.
The sentence "I live north of Antarctica." gives you basically zero information but is perfectly grammatically correct.
The line may as well have been "The weddel sea, which is made of water,..."
The Endurance has been found, 3000 metres beneath the Weddell Sea, [which is]north of Antarctica.
I'm wondering if you fail to realize that the entirety of the antarctic coast is "north of Antarctica" which makes the description a virtually useless modifier.
Nothing wrong with the grammar, just the logic.
It seems they forgot to mention it was on earth. They really should have indicated it was within the solar system too. No mention of being located in the Milky Way galaxy or the known universe either.
A 6th grader’s literacy level means they can write a book report.
Baby don’t hurt me.
Here I’ll help, it’s also south of the North Pole.
Was Ernest okay?
A bit damp, but no complaints. Considering a new career distributing swords.
I can construct a weird true statement from this: All continents besides Antarctica are located North of the South-Pole.
That's a good one *takes notes
The earth is a bit lumpy, so chances are that was a lie and he was actually lost and couldn't figure out how to get everybody else out of the car so he could go on a trip to get milk.
*Directly above the gravitational center of mass of the Earth
Sheeeeesh, happy?
I should've put "ackshually" and /s
I guess I should have too, I was playing along with you :P
Top left corner is the Weddell Sea so we know it’s somewhere in that direction
I can specify: south of the arctic.
No moor
Might as well just write it's north of south
Near the British Empire then.
most probably between southamerica and antartica.
asshat with a scuba tank
3000 meters beneath the Weddell Sea
Good luck
From what I’ve read, billionaires need more private sub trips
Better north of antarctica than north of arctica.
Are kids today so Vine-brained they don't understand headline syntax? The Weddell Sea just north of Antarctica.
For further clarification:
The Antarctic Peninsula(the long bit sticking out) is the furtest part away from the south pole in the antarctic and is thus the northernmost part, and is generally considered to be the "north" when using cardinal directions there. The Weddell Sea is off the coast of the peninsula.
If you leave Antarctica, you're heading north. Is it North of Antarctica toward Australia, South Africa, Patagonia or some other northerly direction from Antarctica?
That's the ambiguity inherent to the headline.
Where else would you succinctly say the Weddell sea is?
Headline syntax sucks.
It's like a basic reading comprehension thing....
The ship is located in the Weddell Sea, which is north of Antarctica.
I appreciate the "perhaps", like, the headline qualifies how annoyed they are at imprecision.
TBF it's also south of the Arctic Ocean.
I'll have to use that one.
Of course they aren’t going to give the exact location. That wreck would be ransacked for scrap metal if it isn’t resting too deep. Like in Indonesia several WW2 shipwrecks have gone missing.
a fun fact about this, by the way
the reason we scavenge steel from old shipwrecks is because all modern peoduced steel is contaminated with a miniscule - but still present - amount of radioactive isotopes, incompatible with some incredibly precise scientific instruments and other nieche, but essential applications, that not only require old steel, but old steel that wasn't exposed to all the radioactive fallout during the nuclear tests in the cold war, hence why the sunken ships.
adding a personal note here, if some nuclear tests around the world contaminated everything THIS MUCH, what will we say about microplastics in a couple decades? just food for thought
You can't see radiation filling up a bird's stomach. People are, ultimately, very bad about dealing with things we cannot see.
3000 meters is pretty fucking deep.
Like - 6 times deeper than the deepest hardsuit dive in history.
There's only a few ships in the world that can salvage at that depth, and they're not fly-by-night pirate operations.
@mander.xyz
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
go to feed...
@mander.xyz
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
go to feed...
Narrowed it down to a single planet.
save