Coordinates

[marktrail]

FELLOW GEOCACHERS,

 

Am new at this. Found my first cach yesterday. Great fun. I have a small problem. I took the coordinates from the GEOCACHE.com site and pumped them into my map program, Terrain Navigator (Map Tech) and they do not take me to where the cache was located. My map program map is in NAD27, I believe the GEOCACHE coordinates are in WGS84, I went to the jeep.com site and converted but the location is the same when I pump in the coordinates in which are out in the middle of a reservoir. I was just playing around to see if the coordinates from the GEOCACHE site would take me exactly to where the cache was found, double checking, and again, they do not. The Terrain Navigator map is much more detailed than the map from GEOCACHE.com site and that's why I am trying to use it to give me some idea or a good idea where the cache is located.

[Jeremy]

Moving this to the GPS Units & Software forum, since this is a software related issue.

[+sbell111]

Which cache are you looking at? Some caches really do show that they are in the middle of the lake.

 

Beyond that issue, be very sure that you are copying the correct info from the jeeep site. Also, can you change a setting in your software so it uses the same datum as GC.com?

[Neo_Geo]

Also, check the Lat/Lon position formats. There are three different ones, and it can be easy to confuse one with the other.

 

CLICK HERE for more information.

[marktrail]

Thanks to the replies I got it figured out. GC coordinates are in degrees, minutes, minutes as my GARMIN GPSMAP60CS is set. My map program was set up in degrees, minutes, seconds. Changed my map program settings and wa-la, all fixed.

 

Thanks folks, appreciate it.

[+theprospectors]

I think your use of the term "wa-la" is incorrect in this context. It should be 'voila' which is French for something like 'I see'. Unless you are using the abbreviation "wa-la" which of course is short for 'wa-la'l be damned'.

 

Interesting post none the less.

 

Yours aye,

The Prospectors

[+sbell111]

Actually, I think 'voila' would be a correct usage. One simple change and 'voila!' it's fixed.

[Neo_Geo]

Maybe it was WA (short for Washington) and LA (short for Louisiana) meaning now he can cache successfully from Washington to Louisiana! Now... what to do about the East Coast... ?

[4x4van]

Here on the West Coast, "Wa-La" is commonly used like "viola".

[+geobc]

Here on the West Coast, "Wa-La" is commonly used like "viola".

"Wa-la" and "walla" are misspellings of the French word, voila.

 

GeoBC

[+Dr. Boggis]

Here on the West Coast, "Wa-La" is commonly used like "viola".

I prefer the cello myself.

 

(or should that be "chellow", for the hard of thinking?)

[+Sputnik 57]

Before Hemlock shuts this one down for going totally off topic, I'll put in my vote for walla walla wa. Hemlock is SO tolerant in this forum

 

Edit--Note to self: Remove mittens before typing.

Edited February 9, 2005 by Sputnik 57

[+NightPilot]

Wala is used by people who can't read or spell, and just repeat what they hear. Ignorance runs rampant in the US, and I blame computer games. Children don't read at all any more, they just press buttons on game consoles. And their ignorance grows, and grows........

[4x4van]

Wala is used by people who can't read or spell, and just repeat what they hear. Ignorance runs rampant in the US, and I blame computer games. Children don't read at all any more, they just press buttons on game consoles. And their ignorance grows, and grows........

Hmmm...I guess that means that after 25 years as an electrical and telecommunications engineer, I actually can't read or spell, and am ignorant.

 

So if Wa-La (or Walla) is simply a mispelling of the French word "viola", does that mean that "viola" is pronounced walla? I've always thought that viola was pronounced like violet, but then again I've never claimed to speak French.

[+geobc]

So if Wa-La (or Walla) is simply a mispelling of the French word "viola", does that mean that "viola" is pronounced walla? I've always thought that viola was pronounced like violet, but then again I've never claimed to speak French.

Actually, it is a misspelling of "VOILA," not "VIOLA."

 

As you may have guessed, the two have very different meanings.

 

GeoBC

[+NightPilot]

As geobc said, it's 'voila', not viola, and it's pronounced sort of like wa-la, except with a little of the v sound at the start. Viola is pronounced Vee-oh-la, with the i sounding like a long e, and is a musical instrument similar to a violin, but slightly larger and tuned to a lower pitch. So it seems that, yes, you can't read or spell, and you're ignorant. It's not the end of the world, though - we're all ignorant on most subjects, and ignorance can easily be corrected. It's certainly not the same thing as stupidity.

 

BTW, when we get a passenger who's going to fly offshore and who can't close the door of the helicopter or buckle the seatbelt or don the Mae West vest, we immediately know he's an engineer. Usually a petroleum engineer, but an engineer nevertheless.

[+Jamie Z]

when we get a passenger who's going to fly offshore and who can't close the door of the helicopter or buckle the seatbelt or don the Mae West vest, we immediately know he's an engineer.

I don't get what you mean. It's an engineer who designed those parts in the first place.

 

Ignorance runs rampant in the US, and I blame computer games. Children don't read at all any more, they just press buttons on game consoles. And their ignorance grows, and grows........

Unlike the olden days when children would go straight to the library after school? Actually, I'm quite sure that the exchange of information is substantially higher now than it was at any time in the past. Go back a few generations and the literacy rate wasn't very impressive either. Nope, the modern adolescent is expected to learn more than any of his historic peers.

 

I think what you meant to say is that "Ignorance runs rampant in humanity and it's been that way since recorded history." Fortunately, we're getting better at it.

 

Jamie

[+NightPilot]

One thing that I really didn't account for is the increase in population. That means there is more of everything, naturally. Not everyone went to the library before TV, but now very few do. When I was kid, I read almost every book in my school's rather small library, because there wasn't much else to do. We lived out in the country, no TV, and I filled the time reading. I could have done farm work, but I wasn't that ambitious. My main ambition was to get off that &^%*+#@%$ farm! Reading helped it happen.

 

Sometimes I get discouraged when people who are obviously native English-speakers don't know the difference between their, they're, and there; your and you're; its and it's; are and our; to, too, and two; this is increasingly common. It's obvious, at least to me, that this is mostly because they don't read, they just write what they hear, without understanding the words. As Mark Twain said, someone who doesn't read has no advantage at all over one who can't.

 

The stereotypical engineer is very knowledgeable in one relatively small area, and ignorant of most others. Stereotypes are often wrong, of course. I was just yanking an engineer's chain, which, while possibly wrong, is often enough fun to make me keep on doing it.

Edited February 12, 2005 by NightPilot