[Pete Svarrior]

Yes. The sister site wants 5M USD to go and get a real one, though.

It's 4M USD and we are doing quite well.

Is there any particular reason for you to bring up this obvious troll in the upper fora?

[Mostlyharmless]

Whether it is ad populum or not is irrelevant, as the point is that the navigation system used would be RET. This fact is relevant, because "where the navigation system tells it to go" would be a direct (ish) route in RET terms.

Substantiate your claims.

Abbs what is necroing?

The term refers to posting in very old threads. This is usually viewed as negative unless you're providing a valuable contribution to said threads.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/necropost

Okay, so, in an ret world, the pilot's navigation system, assuming that the world is ret, would, in a flight from south America to Australia, fly south and slightly West until it arrived there. On the other hand, if the world were in fact flat, the best route would be to fly directly north until reaching Australia. This doesn't happen, because otherwise people would realise they were flying over the Americas, the North Pole, siberia and China, and finally the rest of Australia, before landing on the south of the country.
This shows that, due to the fact that the flight times are the same in the southern hemisphere and the northern hemisphere, that the world is, in fact, round.

And I apologise for necroing, u didn't realise a)  that it was a bad thing, and b) that the thread was old.

[Misero]

No idea where they are in it or where exactly it is. But now would be a good time to head over there to check. JRowe is banned/away.

[freemind]

Ok, I will share a few thoughts on this...

As I see it: According to Flat Earth Theory..Antarctica is a mysterious out of bounds region. It represents some kind of edge or barrier to the known world.

This region has been lied about by worldly powers in a massive deception. The worldly powers have banned travel there, banned fly overs etc and it is in any case a difficult environment to reach and survive in.

Those who aim to deceive the public often employ "controlled opposition" groups and shills to derail both productive debates AND useful actions that would destroy the deception.

So (whether difficult or not) the obvious course of action in resolving the question of Antarctica is to explore the region, to observe it and make records thereof to share with key people in the population as a prelude to mass awakening regarding the truth of the matter.

In such a case we have: human exploration, telescopes etc as suggested by Mostlyharmless and remote exploration via technology eg a remote controlled flier or balloon.

None of these options should be discounted. In fact each suggestion should be worked on and planned. Difficult goals should be broken up into smaller more achievable goals and worked on bit by bit.

So, talking of controlled opposition, would they be encouraging explorations like this or discouraging them?

I am not implying that everyone dismissing the project on this Forum are controlled opposition. However in contemplating scenarios discussed above (eg a massive hundreds of years old deception) it seems there is likely to be a lot of 'conditioning' in people discouraging them from actually making attempts to explore the edges. That conditioning may take the form of discouraging beliefs about the impossibility or great difficulty of such exploration projects. Therefore those who find themselves initially discouraging such exploration should look closely at the hidden inner causes of such a position and then adjust their position as appropriate.

Apart from the hypothetical controlled opposition and apart from disempowering conditioning there may also be an ego based fear-a fear of actually being proved wrong after all. We should not be attached to our beliefs no matter how long we have held them, or how much effort we have put into promoting them. We should be loyal to truth.

The surest way to failure is to not even try. So lets look again at Pongo's useful post above:
http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=2676.msg66877#msg66877
which outlines some of the steps needed and build from there.

[magic]

The drone would require a robust logistics channel to support the mission, if you wanted to collect any data from the drone.

There is also the regulatory concern, that Antarctica is a protected region by a number of nations and I would expect a reasonable capacity to respond to any unauthorized flights over the region. Simply put, any notion of flying over the area while retaining the data from the flight is currently out of reach.

It has been proposed before but three boats setting course towards the Antarctic landmass and the first ship  holding position while the other two ships sail with their starboard and port sides respectively, towards the Antarctic landmass while maintaining line of sight with said landmass will eventually record the distance that the landmass encompasses, this data will have been recorded twice by the two ships sailing along the landmass to reduce the margin of error.

This is more feasible than a fly over as the logistics involved are simplified and should not provoke a military response.

The first step is to answer the question regarding the purported nature of the Antarctic landmass, as it is too convenient to simply agree.

I am not aware of a private entity having performed this evaluation. Australia can be the starting point. Bring a compass, sextant and high power lens.

[dave]

we have already flown over Antarctica...the public cannot handle the horrible truth of what is beyond the ice wall.