[MCToon]

Some hypotheses regarding mapping the earth:
1. If the earth is flat it will be possible and easy to create an accurate flat representation map of the world.  All distances of a flat earth will correctly line up on a flat representation.
2. If the earth is spherical it will be impossible to create an accurate flat representation map of the world.  All distances of a spherical earth will incorrectly line up on a flat representation.
3. If the earth is flat it will be impossible to create an accurate spherical representation map of the world.  All distances of a flat earth will incorrectly line up on a spherical representation.
4. If the earth is spherical it will be possible and easy to create an accurate spherical representation map of the world.  All distances of a spherical earth will correctly line up on a spherical representation.

Ancillary hypotheses:
1a. Flat earth maps onto a flat representation would not require a projection, it's a simple 1:x ratio with no distortion.
2a. Round earth maps onto a flat representation require an inaccurate projection, there is no consistent 1:x ratio possible, all things are inconsistently distorted.
3a. Flat earth maps onto a globe representation require an inaccurate projection, there is no consistent 1:x ratio possible, all things are inconsistently distorted.
4a. Round earth maps onto a globe would not require a projection, it's a simple 1:x ratio with no distortion.

Some observations:
* All flat earth maps I have seen do not work in regard to distances.  Land masses usually get distorted and distances always are incorrect somewhere.  This does not match hypothesis #1.
* All round earth projections onto a flat map work generally for short distances and fail for long distances, land masses on the extremes of the map get distorted, for example, Greenland on the Mercator projection.  This matches hypothesis #2.
* I have never seen anyone try to take a flat earth map and match it to a globe.  This is probably because there is no accepted flat earth map and, understandably, no flat earth proponent would have a reason to attempt to place a flat earth map onto a globe.  Nothing I have seen tests hypothesis #3.
* All round earth models I have seen match hypothesis #4.  For example: GPS mapping, Google earth, airline flight times regardless of location on the earth, all globes I have seen, country boundary mapping, ancient long distance triangulation measurements, international shipping experiences, drive times across large distances.

My experiences are not exhaustive of course, there may be some observations that match hypothesis #1.  Please include any observations that match hypothesis #1.

[Mark_1984]

The projections have already been done of course. 
The Mercator projection.  Bearings are preserved, but distances are distorted.    E.g.  Greenland looks much bigger than it really is.
The Gnomic projection.  Where great circle routes appear as straight lines.  E.g.  Draw a line from Japan to the UK and it goes over the artic.
There are others, but those 2 are the main ones used.

These maps all work, as I myself have used them navigating on commercial ships.  No Youtube, no unproved internet sites, just personal experience.  We know how fast the ship goes.  We measure the distance off a map, and we arrive at the expected time.

If the earth was truly flat, surely somebody would have mapped it accurately by now, and there would be no need for these various projections.  In fact, these projections wouldn't work as they wouldn't be possible.  A flat planet can be represented on a flat piece of paper perfectly accurately.

[Gazza711]

It's commonly accepted by Flat Earth believers that there's no known map of the flat earth. The "Azimuthal Equidistant Projection" often used is just a conceptual image, it does not reflect reality, just a rough idea of what the flat earth might look like (and by "might" i mean, it's normally accepted that it's something OTHER than that map...)

So how would one go about constructing an accurate map? Obviously navigating coast lines and recording in to journals is a pain staking expensive process. But what I propose is to start with a very very simplified basic map:

Lets construct a Flat Earth map using only 12 points

For those 12 points, let's use these known cities:

• Cape Town
• Kinshasa
• Stockholm
• Beijing
• Jakarta
• Perth (West Australia)
• Anchorage (Alaska)
• Honolulu
• Auckland (New Zealand)
• Montreal
• Panama
• Buenos Aires

So question now is: how can we determine the true distances between these cities? And that's where I'm curious what Flat Earth believers think would be an acceptable method. I know "flight times" have been raised and rubbished (i.e. seen as "skeptical") a number of times, but surely there's a logical/mathematical way to still use that data? For example, theoretically planes could "lie" to us and be travelling very slowly, in order to make distances seem longer than they truly are. Plus planes can use "slipstreams" so they can go much faster than their reported specs.

I'm curious what, if any, aspects of plane data Flat Earth believes will accept? Do you accept published maximum/minimum speeds of planes? Also, do you accept the reported speeds of winds (slipstreams) in the upper atmosphere?

If you accept that data, then that will give us "maximum" and "minimum" distances for each reported flight time between those cities. That should give us a "rough" possible map of the flat earth right?

It is clear fers have been using the wrong map since whenever. I believe i have a more accurate map. This is a projection from the north pole on the accurate globe. By accounts of journeys to antartica, many seem to have followed others paths as many could not use longitude as reference. It is clear gps is still unreliable in the southern hemisphere. These paths lead me to believe that there is not a circle around fe but more like a four leģged starfish shape as in the 4 corners of the world. This would explain the few routes taken to get to antartica.
I believe you can pinpoint your locations on this map and the distances will be the same as it is the globe from above  cant be anymore fairer than that?

[Gazza711]

Yeah that's a nice idea. Perhaps it requires a website, to coordinate such world wide effort, and code an easy way for participants to submit their finding.

Was also wondering: could short wave radio be used to measure distances? There'd no doubt be a bit of variance from atmospheric conditions, but I'm thinking the precision would be less than using flight times/plane speeds. Would also require a large amount of coordination, and not many people have short wave radios... might be able to get the SWR community interested though. I wonder if internet calibrated clocks would be accurate enough. Apparently light circles the earth about 7.5 times a second... the cities i've chosen (and can be changed) are roughly 60 degrees apart, so light/EM radiation would take about 22ms to travel 60 degrees (plus a bit more once it goes up, bounces of ionosphere, bounces back again). That's reasonably "slow" in the grand scheme of things but maybe the combination of clock accuracy and atmospheric conditions would make the data essentially useless hmm

Or use shipping distances and times: but as we've seen on this site, direct evidence from people on board such ships is tossed aside.

Maybe shipping distances are not tossed aside, just ignored.
I have posted 5 times now to ask If there is any answer to my verification of distances measured vs calculated, and the FEers have studiously ignored the post each and every time.

It’s almost like a conspiracy to avoid the questions or discussions that have difficult answers.....

As for Short wave radio, it would be possible to measure phase difference compared to distance, but you would not be able to measure what phase you were receiving as far as i remember.
Early hyperbolic navigation systems such as decca were able to to a certain extent, but you needed different widely spaced transmission bases to resolve the issue, but it was not perfect, and did not have a great range. Omega was a worldwide system used by the military with very long wavelengths to try to determine positions (mainly for submarines to get a fix before launching their missiles) which needed base stations around the world, with lots of investment and infrastructure.
Satellite based systems made them both obselete, along with Loran which was a time based measurement.......

However I am confident in my ships equipment to measure distances that we have travelled to within 2% accuracy, and this is accurate enough for a map basis. It wont be accepted because the FEers KNOW it will give a result they cannot agree with, ie the only way you can match the distances MEASURED, would be to have a globe earth, hence the rejection/ignoring/disbelief of any sort of system that tells how far apart 2 places on earth are!

What about dead reckoning. Still havent ruled that one out. Comms in southern hemisphere  still an issue. Gps innacurate in southern hemisphere too.

[SiDawg]

Who says GPS is inaccurate in southern hemisphere? Works fine for me!

[Gazza711]

Who says GPS is inaccurate in southern hemisphere? Works fine for me!

South america apparently. You do know that gps works if you have a preformed map. Otherwise useless. South america dint use waaap.Im in the uk. I went to calafornia in 2010. Had to by an american chip for me garmin/tom tom. It was 3 years out if date. Surely our technology wouldn't need updating with actual geosurveys?

[SiDawg]

Map updates are for new roads. If you're using a gps for navigating sea, bush, desert etc you don't need to update... The map just tells you "what stuff is at that location"... The land map doesn't change. There are no gaps in GPS coverage. Whether or not a particular brand of gps keeps their road/feature maps updated: who knows. This is off topic. If flat earth trusted gps we wouldn't have to present alternate ways of calculating distances.

[MCToon]

Who says GPS is inaccurate in southern hemisphere? Works fine for me!

South america apparently. You do know that gps works if you have a preformed map. Otherwise useless. South america dint use waaap.Im in the uk. I went to calafornia in 2010. Had to by an american chip for me garmin/tom tom. It was 3 years out if date. Surely our technology wouldn't need updating with actual geosurveys?

Go create a new thread for your GPS claims.  This thread is about creating an accurate map of the flat earth.

[Gazza711]

Who says GPS is inaccurate in southern hemisphere? Works fine for me!

South america apparently. You do know that gps works if you have a preformed map. Otherwise useless. South america dint use waaap.Im in the uk. I went to calafornia in 2010. Had to by an american chip for me garmin/tom tom. It was 3 years out if date. Surely our technology wouldn't need updating with actual geosurveys?

Go create a new thread for your GPS claims.  This thread is about creating an accurate map of the flat earth.

Go it. Thx