The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: alien experiment on April 30, 2017, 02:34:52 AM
-
Why haven't the LFat earth supporters put together an antarctic expedition to prove the theory of an ice wall?
-
Anyone, anyone at all.... Hello......
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.
If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.
Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.
If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.
Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.
I agree. Why risk our lives with all this exploration nonsense? Much better to study our universe from our basements.
Toss Zeteticism out our windows. (You may need to leave the basement for this.)
Youtube, the best invention since potato chips!
-
Yes, let's stay in our basement and let other people circumnavigate Antarctica......and quite often in fact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Sanders
http://yachtpals.com/boating/antarctica-boats
http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-22/sailor-attempts-world-record-to-circumnavigate-antarctica/8201750
http://www.acronautic.com/antartica-cup-ocean-race/
Or we could let someone else do a polar circumnavigation for us:
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/first-circumnavigation-via-both-poles-surface
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.
A substantial difference.
If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.
That doesn't seem worthwhile? Ok. I guess you aren't that concerned with the truth.
Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.
The journey has been undertaken hundreds, if not thousands, of times. If you were unprepared, then it is because you didn't, well, prepare.
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.
If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.
Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.
Surely you would go prepared for it to be size that is shown in various flat earth maps which many here believe are correct.
One question - how would you know where you are? What would you use to navigate?
-
Yes, let's stay in our basement and let other people circumnavigate Antarctica......and quite often in fact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Sanders
http://yachtpals.com/boating/antarctica-boats
http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-22/sailor-attempts-world-record-to-circumnavigate-antarctica/8201750
http://www.acronautic.com/antartica-cup-ocean-race/
Or we could let someone else do a polar circumnavigation for us:
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/first-circumnavigation-via-both-poles-surface
How can we ensure that they actually performed a complete circumnavigation of Antarctica and did not simply travel along its coast for the requisite distance it is supposed to be under the Round Earth model and then head Northwards back towards warmer waters? I suspect that those people aren't doing too much verification and exploration of the Antarctic coast to ensure a complete circumnavigation was made, considering quotes like these, which we found (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=50979.msg1249528#msg1249528) in videos of a yacht race which supposedly went around Antarctica in 2006/07:
"There are very few people who have finished this race who started it."
"You're fighting to stay alive. You know that if you make a bad decision that you'll never come back again."
"To do this is suicide."
"The conditions are extremely brutal and extremely dangerous."
"Lifespan in the water is measured in minutes."
It does not appear as if there is too much initiative to make sure your boat went around the entire circumference of Antarctica to me.
-
Surely you would go prepared for it to be size that is shown in various flat earth maps which many here believe are correct.
One would need to assume that there are not any ocean pathways that lead outside of our local area when following the coast. You are kind of assuming that this is a big uniform circle. You might be sending us to a death sentence.
-
It's too bad you are so talented at finding reasons not to do this. If it were the other way around, you could settle the question once and for all.
-
It's too bad you are so talented at finding reasons not to do this. If it were the other way around, you could settle the question once and for all.
Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.
I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.
-
Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.
I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.
Stop being a drama queen, I never demanded anything. Just for all your talk about the importance of experiment and observation, you don't actually do very much. I mean, you wouldn't even hold a measuring stick in front of your eyes! To quote your Commander-in-Chief, "SAD!"
-
Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.
I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.
Stop being a drama queen, I never demanded anything. Just for all your talk about the importance of experiment and observation, you don't actually do very much. I mean, you wouldn't even hold a measuring stick in front of your eyes! To quote your Commander-in-Chief, "SAD!"
It's not like that at all. I believe that Antarctica is a continent. And if you read through that thread you are referencing you will find I did agree that it was possible to connect the moon and the sun with the string and had no issue with the video which someone posted that demonstrated that the moon could be connected to the sun -- my argument was with what it implied. Why would I perform experiments on subjects which I had no contention or disagreement with?
-
Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.
I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.
Stop being a drama queen, I never demanded anything. Just for all your talk about the importance of experiment and observation, you don't actually do very much. I mean, you wouldn't even hold a measuring stick in front of your eyes! To quote your Commander-in-Chief, "SAD!"
It's not like that at all. I believe that Antarctica is a continent. And if you read through that thread you are referencing you will find I did agree that it was possible to connect the moon and with the string and had no issue with the video which someone posted that demonstrated that the moon could be connected to the sun -- my argument was with what it implied. Why would I perform experiments on subjects which I had no contention or disagreement with?
I can see you are so mired in your desire not to do experimentation that this conversation is pointless.
-
Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.
I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.
Stop being a drama queen, I never demanded anything. Just for all your talk about the importance of experiment and observation, you don't actually do very much. I mean, you wouldn't even hold a measuring stick in front of your eyes! To quote your Commander-in-Chief, "SAD!"
It's not like that at all. I believe that Antarctica is a continent. And if you read through that thread you are referencing you will find I did agree that it was possible to connect the moon and with the string and had no issue with the video which someone posted that demonstrated that the moon could be connected to the sun -- my argument was with what it implied. Why would I perform experiments on subjects which I had no contention or disagreement with?
I can see you are so mired in your desire not to do experimentation that this conversation is pointless.
I have to do experiments on subjects I have no disagreement with now? Do I need to prove the existence of gnomes because someone posted in one of the forums that he believes that gnomes exist?
-
I don't get it Tom Bishop. You say you believe that Antarctica is a continent and yet in this thread you argue against the veracity of all of the evidence of people circumnavigating that continent, which should be quite possible on a bipolar flat earth. Furthermore, in other threads, you have posted links to info in the Wiki based on the unipolar model when it seems you believe in the bipolar model of the flat earth. Do you even know what you believe?
-
I don't get it Tom Bishop. You say you believe that Antarctica is a continent and yet in this thread you argue against the veracity of all of the evidence of people circumnavigating that continent, which should be quite possible on a bipolar flat earth. Furthermore, in other threads, you have posted links to info in the Wiki based on the unipolar model when it seems you believe in the bipolar model of the flat earth. Do you even know what you believe?
I believe Antarctica to be a continent, but I would not blindly follow the Antarctic coast, in the case it were not one.
The people who claimed to have circumnavigated it may not me the most reliable sources. I believe that when we last looked at this subject those circumnavigations are done out in the open ocean in high latitudes far away from Antarctica. Those racers don't see any landmass at all.
-
I don't get it Tom Bishop. You say you believe that Antarctica is a continent and yet in this thread you argue against the veracity of all of the evidence of people circumnavigating that continent, which should be quite possible on a bipolar flat earth. Furthermore, in other threads, you have posted links to info in the Wiki based on the unipolar model when it seems you believe in the bipolar model of the flat earth. Do you even know what you believe?
I believe Antarctica to be a continent, but I would not blindly follow the Antarctic coast, in the case it were not one.
The people who claimed to have circumnavigated it may not me the most reliable sources. I believe that when we last looked at this subject those circumnavigations are done out in the open ocean in high latitudes far away from Antarctica. Those racers don't see any landmass at all.
You seem to live in a world filled with unreliable sources. But if they are actually reporting their route and the distance traveled which is quite easy to do in this day and age of gps, then the distance they traveled would make the ice ring impossible, and also would prove that the continent is smaller than the average diameter of the route they traveled. So actually viewing the coastline they circled would not be necessary to set an upper limit on how big Antarctica could be. Also, any ocean race like this has checkpoints along the route that every yacht must pass in the correct sequence in order to prevent the kind of shortcuts and cheating you suggest might have occurred.
As for a more reputable source, there is the one that involved teams of scientists from all over the world, also with several stops and ports along the way that they visited in sequence, including stops on the actual continent: http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
And here is a group that is trying to prove the flat earth with high altitude balloons instead of a circumnavigation: https://www.facebook.com/copernicusproject1/
Of course they are doomed to fail if the flat earth is bipolar.
PS: The most recent winner of the Vendee Globe race covered 24,500 nautical miles from start to finish. Not enough for a circumnavigation at that latitude on the unipolar flat earth map (and that total includes the travel to and from France in the Northern Hemisphere). http://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/ranking-and-race-data
-
You seem to live in a world filled with unreliable sources. But if they are actually reporting their route and the distance traveled which is quite easy to do in this day and age of gps, then the distance they traveled would make the ice ring impossible, and also would prove that the continent is smaller than the average diameter of the route they traveled. So actually viewing the coastline they circled would not be necessary to set an upper limit on how big Antarctica could be. Also, any ocean race like this has checkpoints along the route that every yacht must pass in the correct sequence in order to prevent the kind of shortcuts and cheating you suggest might have occurred.
As for a more reputable source, there is the one that involved teams of scientists from all over the world, also with several stops and ports along the way that they visited in sequence, including stops on the actual continent: http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
It appears that it took 3 months for those people to make that journey. How do we know that they didn't go around the Antarctic Rim?
-
You seem to live in a world filled with unreliable sources. But if they are actually reporting their route and the distance traveled which is quite easy to do in this day and age of gps, then the distance they traveled would make the ice ring impossible, and also would prove that the continent is smaller than the average diameter of the route they traveled. So actually viewing the coastline they circled would not be necessary to set an upper limit on how big Antarctica could be. Also, any ocean race like this has checkpoints along the route that every yacht must pass in the correct sequence in order to prevent the kind of shortcuts and cheating you suggest might have occurred.
As for a more reputable source, there is the one that involved teams of scientists from all over the world, also with several stops and ports along the way that they visited in sequence, including stops on the actual continent: http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
It appears that it took 3 months for those people to make that journey. How do we know that they didn't go around the Antarctic Rim?
The winner made it in 74 days. The greatest distance covered in any 24 hour period was 537 nautical miles which was a new record for this race. The winner averaged more like 330 nautical miles per day ( 13.75 knots) over the entire race. And all of this includes the travel time and distance from France to the latitudes at which they circumnavigated and back up to France.
So sure if they cheated and turned on their motors (which they did not have as that would slow down a competitive ocean racing yacht) then maybe they could have traveled more like the 70-75,000 nautical miles down to and around the ice rim on the unipolar map in 74 days. However, the yachts in this race could not ever make a pit stop as that was against the rules, so there is no way they could have carried enough fuel to make it that far. A large motor boat could easily burn 2 gallons or more of fuel for every nautical mile at the necessary speeds to cover that much distance....so say a minimum of 150,000 gallons of fuel weighing 900,000 pounds (the yachts in this race weighed more like a total of 15-20,000 pounds). Yeah, that would not really work. These yachts relied on the wind and there is no way they could average such high speeds 24 hours a day for 3 months. Their top speed is around 30-35 knots, so even with extreme wind conditions 24 hours a day for months on end, they still could not cover the distance.
Either the entire race and all of the participants in the eight races that have been run are all part of this big, dumb and pointless conspiracy to fool us all into thinking the world is round, or else they simply sailed around Antarctica. Here is the winner's yacht under sail:
(http://pressure-drop.us/imagehost/images/61793974220739326193.jpg)
These yachts are amazing feats of engineering and are going so fast already that it is pretty much torture to ride one for weeks on end:
http://www.yachtingworld.com/extraordinary-boats/close-look-hugo-boss-alex-thomsons-vendee-globe-2016-92713
-
You seem to live in a world filled with unreliable sources. But if they are actually reporting their route and the distance traveled which is quite easy to do in this day and age of gps, then the distance they traveled would make the ice ring impossible, and also would prove that the continent is smaller than the average diameter of the route they traveled. So actually viewing the coastline they circled would not be necessary to set an upper limit on how big Antarctica could be. Also, any ocean race like this has checkpoints along the route that every yacht must pass in the correct sequence in order to prevent the kind of shortcuts and cheating you suggest might have occurred.
As for a more reputable source, there is the one that involved teams of scientists from all over the world, also with several stops and ports along the way that they visited in sequence, including stops on the actual continent: http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
It appears that it took 3 months for those people to make that journey. How do we know that they didn't go around the Antarctic Rim?
The winner made it in 74 days. The greatest distance covered in any 24 hour period was 537 nautical miles which was a new record for this race. The winner averaged more like 330 nautical miles per day ( 13.75 knots) over the entire race. And all of this includes the travel time and distance from France to the latitudes at which they circumnavigated and back up to France.
So sure if they cheated and turned on their motors (which they did not have as that would slow down a competitive ocean racing yacht) then maybe they could have traveled more like the 70-75,000 nautical miles down to and around the ice rim on the unipolar map in 74 days. However, the yachts in this race could not ever make a pit stop as that was against the rules, so there is no way they could have carried enough fuel to make it that far. A large motor boat could easily burn 2 gallons or more of fuel for every nautical mile at the necessary speeds to cover that much distance....so say a minimum of 150,000 gallons of fuel weighing 900,000 pounds (the yachts in this race weighed more like a total of 15-20,000 pounds). Yeah, that would not really work. These yachts relied on the wind and there is no way they could average such high speeds 24 hours a day for 3 months. Their top speed is around 30-35 knots, so even with extreme wind conditions 24 hours a day for months on end, they still could not cover the distance.
Either the entire race and all of the participants in the eight races that have been run are all part of this big, dumb and pointless conspiracy to fool us all into thinking the world is round, or else they simply sailed around Antarctica. Here is the winner's yacht under sail:
(http://pressure-drop.us/imagehost/images/61793974220739326193.jpg)
These yachts are amazing feats of engineering and are going so fast already that it is pretty much torture to ride one for weeks on end:
http://www.yachtingworld.com/extraordinary-boats/close-look-hugo-boss-alex-thomsons-vendee-globe-2016-92713
Does it look like I am replying to the yacht race?
-
Does it look like I am replying to the yacht race?
My mistake, as most of the post you replied to was about the race. But similar rough calculations apply to the scientific expedition. To travel even 50,000 miles in three months would mean traveling at an average of 23 mph 24 hours a day for 90 days. That is an incredibly fast pace and would still require huge amounts of fuel for a ship that large.
In fact, the ship they used has a top speed of 18 mph: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Tryoshnikov , so it could only have covered about 39,000 miles if it was underway at top speed for 90 days continuously. The specs for the ship say it can only cover 17,000 miles before refueling, so even that would have been impossible as they would have had to make at least two stops to refuel. Their planned itinerary shows a distance covered of roughly 14,000 miles: https://documents.epfl.ch/groups/e/ep/epflmedia/www/20161220_ACEexpedition/Travel%20plan%20ACE.pdf
If you look at their itinerary, it is clear that they spent a lot of time in port and also onshore doing their scientific experiments. These videos show how they spent much of the time at anchor or traveling at slower speeds doing their research:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TvkL0meGU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHk-jAe2Gw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_Euo08O9I
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It would have to prove that Antarctica is not a continent and the geodesic survey map is a fake.
It would have to prove that the earth is not a globe, and is a flat earth with a continuous ice wall 150 feet tall with a circumference of 78,000 miles encircling the entire earth.
-
Does it look like I am replying to the yacht race?
My mistake, as most of the post you replied to was about the race. But similar rough calculations apply to the scientific expedition. To travel even 50,000 miles in three months would mean traveling at an average of 23 mph 24 hours a day for 90 days. That is an incredibly fast pace and would still require huge amounts of fuel for a ship that large.
In fact, the ship they used has a top speed of 18 mph: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Tryoshnikov , so it could only have covered about 39,000 miles if it was underway at top speed for 90 days continuously. The specs for the ship say it can only cover 17,000 miles before refueling, so even that would have been impossible as they would have had to make at least two stops to refuel. Their planned itinerary shows a distance covered of roughly 14,000 miles: https://documents.epfl.ch/groups/e/ep/epflmedia/www/20161220_ACEexpedition/Travel%20plan%20ACE.pdf
If you look at their itinerary, it is clear that they spent a lot of time in port and also onshore doing their scientific experiments. These videos show how they spent much of the time at anchor or traveling at slower speeds doing their research:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TvkL0meGU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TvkL0meGU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHk-jAe2Gw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHk-jAe2Gw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_Euo08O9I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_Euo08O9I)
Of the Monopole proponents a theory is becoming increasingly popular that South America, Africa, and Australia are actually closer together than depicted in the common Monopole maps and the Pacific Ocean is larger.
Under such a map it is certainly possible to travel from Africa -> Australia -> Antarctica -> South America -> Africa without having to go around the entire Antarctic rim. The directions of travel would not reflect the map on their site, but if you are just trying to set sail with your instruments to a destination from the middle of nowhere it is easy to not pay too much attention to directions.
-
What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?
It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.
Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.
If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.
Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.
It might be pointed out that Antarctica shows up as the so-called "the rim continent" on the crcular so-called "flat earth map" as a result of the distortion that the map is in actuality The Unipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection....of the Globe. Which seems to be the best that flat earth has come up with so far.
The Bipolar Projection presents even more problems.
-
It might be pointed out that Antarctica shows up as the so-called "the rim continent" on the crcular so-called "flat earth map" as a result of the distortion that the map is in actuality The Unipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection....of the Globe. Which seems to be the best that flat earth has come up with so far.
The Bipolar Projection presents even more problems.
The maps are for illustrative purposes only to stimulate discussion. The continents may take a number of configurations and we are underfunded to explore the matter further. You keep posting here expecting us to take up lots of our time to talk to you and offer nothing in return. What gives?
-
Does it look like I am replying to the yacht race?
My mistake, as most of the post you replied to was about the race. But similar rough calculations apply to the scientific expedition. To travel even 50,000 miles in three months would mean traveling at an average of 23 mph 24 hours a day for 90 days. That is an incredibly fast pace and would still require huge amounts of fuel for a ship that large.
In fact, the ship they used has a top speed of 18 mph: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Tryoshnikov , so it could only have covered about 39,000 miles if it was underway at top speed for 90 days continuously. The specs for the ship say it can only cover 17,000 miles before refueling, so even that would have been impossible as they would have had to make at least two stops to refuel. Their planned itinerary shows a distance covered of roughly 14,000 miles: https://documents.epfl.ch/groups/e/ep/epflmedia/www/20161220_ACEexpedition/Travel%20plan%20ACE.pdf
If you look at their itinerary, it is clear that they spent a lot of time in port and also onshore doing their scientific experiments. These videos show how they spent much of the time at anchor or traveling at slower speeds doing their research:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TvkL0meGU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TvkL0meGU)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHk-jAe2Gw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUHk-jAe2Gw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_Euo08O9I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt_Euo08O9I)
Of the Monopole proponents a theory is becoming increasingly popular that South America, Africa, and Australia are actually closer together than depicted in the common Monopole maps and the Pacific Ocean is larger.
Under such a map it is certainly possible to travel from Africa -> Australia -> Antarctica -> South America -> Africa without having to go around the entire Antarctic rim. The directions of travel would not reflect the map on their site, but if you are just trying to set sail with your instruments from the middle of nowhere it is easy to not pay too much attention to directions.
I do not think you can just say that Africa, Australia and South America are closer together without showing how that actually could possibly work on a map. But you claim it is beyond your capacity to draw out even a rough sketch of what that would look like, so I guess your theory is just that....a theory with no evidence to back it up. I can say I have a theory that Australia is in the northern hemisphere, but so what? It does not make it a viable theory. And the Pacific Ocean is already shown as much larger than it really is on the unipolar map. How would making the ocean larger bring the continents closer together? That is a ridiculous assertion. You even say, "Under such a map it is certainly possible...". Well clearly there is no such map, so to claim that something is possible "under such a map" is a meaningless statement.
As for the idea that this large ship full of scientists from all around the world just set sail with their instruments from the middle of nowhere, that does not even make sense. What are you suggesting? That they just took off with no idea where they were going? No ship captain would last a day on their job if they ever did not know exactly where they were and exactly where they were going at all times. They had several planned stops on specific remote islands in the extreme southern latitudes where they had experiments and observations ready to perform, so I am sure they did not want to waste time just "setting sail". Again, this was a ship with 80 passengers and 60 crew members. They also most certainly always knew what direction they were headed. Have you never heard of a thing called a "compass"?
As usual, you are either trolling or simply incredibly uniformed about what you are claiming.
-
A theory that is becoming increasingly more appealing to me is that there is a flying green spaghetti monster. Under my preferred version of this theory he brings me big steaming bowls of delicious spaghetti and meatballs whenever I wish for it. In order to bring me spaghetti and meatballs, he must exist. So take that, flying spaghetti monster deniers!
(Yep. It's low content. Warning received before it was even sent. It's almost like time travel! Ps. Please go light on the sentence, I don't wanna be bammed!)
-
I don't get it Tom Bishop. You say you believe that Antarctica is a continent and yet in this thread you argue against the veracity of all of the evidence of people circumnavigating that continent, which should be quite possible on a bipolar flat earth. Furthermore, in other threads, you have posted links to info in the Wiki based on the unipolar model when it seems you believe in the bipolar model of the flat earth. Do you even know what you believe?
I believe Antarctica to be a continent, but I would not blindly follow the Antarctic coast, in the case it were not one.
The people who claimed to have circumnavigated it may not me the most reliable sources. I believe that when we last looked at this subject those circumnavigations are done out in the open ocean in high latitudes far away from Antarctica. Those racers don't see any landmass at all.
Uvv. An ambitious perspective. For to believe Antarctica to be a continent, you should believe it has an end. At least, you should an evidence about it.
-
Of the Monopole proponents a theory is becoming increasingly popular that South America, Africa, and Australia are actually closer together than depicted in the common Monopole maps and the Pacific Ocean is larger.
Under such a map it is certainly possible to travel from Africa -> Australia -> Antarctica -> South America -> Africa without having to go around the entire Antarctic rim. The directions of travel would not reflect the map on their site, but if you are just trying to set sail with your instruments to a destination from the middle of nowhere it is easy to not pay too much attention to directions.
I look forward to your scale sketch of how that would be possible. A flat earth should be perfectly represented on a flat map, you should be able to measure distance with a ruler and not have to do any conversion beyond scale multiplication.
You've made a claim, burden of proof is on you.