[Woody]

The answer is that there are entire journals devoted to the science.  Have you looked at any of them? Their evidence is presented in the exact place you would expect to find it.  Are you trying to imply that geodesy has no evidence?  Or that the field itself is a scam?  I am not sure what you are getting at.

I've looked at them. They say stuff like "if we take these magnetic field readings from the US, Europa and Asia, we can conclude x about the globe's magnetic field". None of it is actually about demonstrating that the earth is a globe.

https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/peter.clarke/offprints/Spatar_etal-2015-pp.pdf

https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/geodesy/2015/08/14/two-papers-on-ocean-tide-loading/

http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TechnicalReports.html

http://gpi.savba.sk/GPIweb/ogg/ikohut/WEBCD/Slovak-National-Report-to-IUGG_2011-2014.pdf

http://geodesy.unr.edu/publications.php

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6205/65

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/research-topics/geodesy-and-lithospheric-deformation

http://www.mred.tuc.gr/home/mertikas/geodesy.html

Just a sample of published papers some do involve the magnetic field and a lot do not.

Most by themselves do not prove a round Earth but collectively they put the puzzle together. 

There is plenty of observations spanning over 2,000 years that do not involve the magnetic field.

Then there is this, which is also is part of the geodesy field:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=91680;topic=4717.60;last_msg=91681

This seems like something you could do to me.  The equipment is not too cost prohibitive and it will allow you to make accurate measurements.  If you can prove the methodology flawed or conduct a survey with the methodology clearly and precisely given not measuring a curve then you got something. 

Edit: Just wanted to add since I did not think about satellites you will need to look for research conducted pre-satellite era.  Since in most cases the latest tech will be utilized to collect data. As I pointed out there is plenty to find before the 1950's and NASA.

[rabinoz]

The answer is that there are entire journals devoted to the science.  Have you looked at any of them? Their evidence is presented in the exact place you would expect to find it.  Are you trying to imply that geodesy has no evidence?  Or that the field itself is a scam?  I am not sure what you are getting at.

I've looked at them. They say stuff like "if we take these magnetic field readings from the US, Europa and Asia, we can assume x about the globe's magnetic field". None of it is actually about demonstrating that the earth is a globe.

That is all they say? It seems exceedingly unlikely that you were thorough.  Geodesy studies the Earth's magnetic and gravitational fields as well as the physical shape of the Earth.  Perhaps you did not look in the right place?

With very little effort I found an introduction to an oxford journal mentioning GPS satellites are used to measure the dimensions of the earth.

Well, it mentions satellites, so it's out the window from the get-go.

But for future reference, for any such cryptic academic analysis, you would also have to explain why the data couldn't be used on a Flat Earth and can only suggest a round one.

The Geodetic Surveyor I mentioned in "Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality" http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4751.msg91643#msg91643 never mentions magnetic fields and intentionally leaves of GPS, Google Earth and all the things that may be "suspicious". He refers to geodetic surveys going back hundreds of years.

His main point is that Geodetic Surveyors measure the earth using simple, though very accurate methods and these measurements prove that the earth cannot be flat.

He did not specifically bring this out, but the E-W widths of the southern hemisphere continents have been accurately measured, and these do not fit the dimensions demanded for a flat earth.

[Unsure101]

Well, it mentions satellites, so it's out the window from the get-go.

So how does GPS tracking work then?

[andruszkow]

Well, it mentions satellites, so it's out the window from the get-go.

So how does GPS tracking work then?

Radio towers, same as with the GSM network, even though it doesn't explain why a) the frequencies emitted from towers differ from those that carry the GPS data, and b) GPS coverage is everywhere, while GSM coverage isn't.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

Geodesy really has no use in the real world,google the words geodesy breakthrough to see what it has helped us learn...

https://www.google.com/search?q=geodesy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=geodesy+breakthrough

There is nothing that it actually contributes to society, or has helped us understand, besides attempting to confirm what we already "knew" about the shape of the Earth, it's supposed tilt, and other pseudo-scientific stuff like gravity. Until it revolutionizes something or gives us new insight into something important then it is much ado about nothing.

[markjo]

The evidence that the earth is a globe is certainly unsatisfactory. When sinking ships are brought up here we bring up reports of ships being restored by looking at them through telescopes and the matter is dropped, when NASA is brought up we bring up all of the questionable and fraudulent stuff they do. There really isn't much real evidence in favor of a globe earth.

What about the branch of earth science known as geodesy?

All I can say on that  is every time you bring it up we ask what evidence geodesy has and the answer is silence science.

Fixed that typo for you.

By the way, there are also the international shipping and travel industries that rely on accurate maps to provide the most efficient long distance routes.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

All I can say on that  is every time you bring it up we ask what evidence geodesy has and the answer is silence science.

Fixed that typo for you.

By the way, there are also the international shipping and travel industries that rely on accurate maps to provide the most efficient long distance routes.

Don't they already have accurate maps? Geodesy is only an abstraction of the reality we experience. Sure, we're not actually traveling in a straight line, but what difference does it make? If gravity renders the sphere we live on as a flat plane to any traveler, then why does it matter to mathematically obfuscate the situation?

[Rama Set]

Don't they already have accurate maps? Geodesy is only an abstraction of the reality we experience. Sure, we're not actually traveling in a straight line, but what difference does it make? If gravity renders the sphere we live on as a flat plane to any traveler, then why does it matter to mathematically obfuscate the situation?

Airplanes do not travel along a flat plane, they use spherical geodesic's to take the shortest route; ditto, for sailors.

Geodesy does not obfuscate the situation it does the opposite: it provides an increasingly accurate view of the situation.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

Don't they already have accurate maps? Geodesy is only an abstraction of the reality we experience. Sure, we're not actually traveling in a straight line, but what difference does it make? If gravity renders the sphere we live on as a flat plane to any traveler, then why does it matter to mathematically obfuscate the situation?

Airplanes do not travel along a flat plane, they use spherical geodesic's to take the shortest route; ditto, for sailors.

Geodesy does not obfuscate the situation it does the opposite: it provides an increasingly accurate view of the situation.

I can understand how an airplane would travel in an arc, but that is the nature of ascending and descending in altitude... but please, please explain to me how a boat can travel upon a spherical geodetic???

[Rama Set]

Don't they already have accurate maps? Geodesy is only an abstraction of the reality we experience. Sure, we're not actually traveling in a straight line, but what difference does it make? If gravity renders the sphere we live on as a flat plane to any traveler, then why does it matter to mathematically obfuscate the situation?

Airplanes do not travel along a flat plane, they use spherical geodesic's to take the shortest route; ditto, for sailors.

Geodesy does not obfuscate the situation it does the opposite: it provides an increasingly accurate view of the situation.

I can understand how an airplane would travel in an arc, but that is the nature of ascending and descending in altitude... but please, please explain to me how a boat can travel upon a spherical geodetic???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great-circle_navigation

It is not the same as geodesic that an airplane would take,  but it is different than navigating on a flat plane.

[rabinoz]

Geodesy really has no use in the real world,google the words geodesy breakthrough to see what it has helped us learn...
https://www.google.com/search?q=geodesy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=geodesy+breakthrough
There is nothing that it actually contributes to society, or has helped us understand, besides attempting to confirm what we already "knew" about the shape of the Earth, it's supposed tilt, and other pseudo-scientific stuff like gravity. Until it revolutionizes something or gives us new insight into something important then it is much ado about nothing.

Get your facts straight first! We are talking about Geodetic Surveyors not Geodesy.

Geodetic Surveyors are the people that get out measure the earth using simple, though very accurate methods. They are the ones that measure the size of countries and continents. Until the late 1970's the work was done largely theodilites and chain measures (no satellites or even electronic equipment), then electronic distance measurement (radio and laser) started being applied, allowing much longer distances to be measured with high accuracy.

The Geodetic Surveyor I mentioned in "Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality" http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4751.msg91643#msg91643 intentionally leaves of GPS, Google Earth and all the things that you might find be "suspicious". He refers to geodetic surveys going back hundreds of years.

So think again and actually watch the video and learn something!

[markjo]

All I can say on that  is every time you bring it up we ask what evidence geodesy has and the answer is silence science.

Fixed that typo for you.

By the way, there are also the international shipping and travel industries that rely on accurate maps to provide the most efficient long distance routes.

Don't they already have accurate maps? Geodesy is only an abstraction of the reality we experience. Sure, we're not actually traveling in a straight line, but what difference does it make? If gravity renders the sphere we live on as a flat plane to any traveler, then why does it matter to mathematically obfuscate the situation?

I think that you're missing the point of geodesy.  If the earth were a perfect sphere, then there would be no need for geodesy as a science because geodesy measures the earth's deviation from a perfect sphere.

For example, did you know that a degree of latitude Ecuador is not the same distance as a degree of latitude in Lapland?  This was confirmed with measurements almost 200 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Geodesic_Mission

[rabinoz]

Geodesy really has no use in the real world,google the words geodesy breakthrough to see what it has helped us learn...
https://www.google.com/search?q=geodesy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=geodesy+breakthrough
There is nothing that it actually contributes to society, or has helped us understand, besides attempting to confirm what we already "knew" about the shape of the Earth, it's supposed tilt, and other pseudo-scientific stuff like gravity. Until it revolutionizes something or gives us new insight into something important then it is much ado about nothing.

When I replied to this earlier I was in a rush, and could not take the time to do your search. Now that I have I am more baffled than ever.

You say "There is nothing that it actually contributes to society, or has helped us understand, besides attempting to confirm what we already 'knew'". Where do you get that from?
What I find is references to measuring distances and heights more accurately. That is vitally important in mining and in long tunnels (Chunnel, Gotthard etc) as well as the exact location of geographic features.
As has been stated numerous time Geodetic Surveying is the measuring of countries and continents for mapping etc. This is how we knew what you call "what we already 'knew'".

We have posters saying "we already have accurate maps". Yes, but how do think we got them? - from Geodetic Surveying over centuries!

It is these measurements done almost all over the world that prove the earth cannot be flat. We know the dimensions of Australia, South America, South Africa (and all other countries and continents) to quite high accuracy and it does not fit on a flat plane!

Until you can address this, and numerous others, you don't have a flat earth. Other "flat earth models" have been proposed (eg: the Double Flat Earth and the Bi-Polar Flat Earth), but none go near to fitting these known dimensions.

Some flat earthers (Tom Bishop and probably John Davis) would ask if we can trust these measurements. Well whereever we drive the city to city distances seem to come out right, and if there is any error it is more likely in the car's oddometer.

Yes, the maps have been improved over the last few decades, but locations have not usually moved drastically. (I said usually because I have found both here and in the UK that there are some roads that have never been accurately surveyed).

Geodetic Surveyors are certainly very useful people to have around - but not good you you are trying to push the idea of a flat earth.

[Tom Bishop]

The answer is that there are entire journals devoted to the science.  Have you looked at any of them? Their evidence is presented in the exact place you would expect to find it.  Are you trying to imply that geodesy has no evidence?  Or that the field itself is a scam?  I am not sure what you are getting at.

I've looked at them. They say stuff like "if we take these magnetic field readings from the US, Europa and Asia, we can conclude x about the globe's magnetic field". None of it is actually about demonstrating that the earth is a globe.

https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/peter.clarke/offprints/Spatar_etal-2015-pp.pdf

https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/geodesy/2015/08/14/two-papers-on-ocean-tide-loading/

http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TechnicalReports.html

http://gpi.savba.sk/GPIweb/ogg/ikohut/WEBCD/Slovak-National-Report-to-IUGG_2011-2014.pdf

http://geodesy.unr.edu/publications.php

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6205/65

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/research-topics/geodesy-and-lithospheric-deformation

http://www.mred.tuc.gr/home/mertikas/geodesy.html

Just a sample of published papers some do involve the magnetic field and a lot do not.

Most by themselves do not prove a round Earth but collectively they put the puzzle together. 

There is plenty of observations spanning over 2,000 years that do not involve the magnetic field.

Then there is this, which is also is part of the geodesy field:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=91680;topic=4717.60;last_msg=91681

This seems like something you could do to me.  The equipment is not too cost prohibitive and it will allow you to make accurate measurements.  If you can prove the methodology flawed or conduct a survey with the methodology clearly and precisely given not measuring a curve then you got something. 

Edit: Just wanted to add since I did not think about satellites you will need to look for research conducted pre-satellite era.  Since in most cases the latest tech will be utilized to collect data. As I pointed out there is plenty to find before the 1950's and NASA.

None of those links are really about showing that the earth is a globe. It's mostly "we have this data and here is how we can piece it together and tell us something interesting about the magnetic field/gravity/whatever on a globe earth".

[rabinoz]

Everybody here seems to be talking about Goedesy, magnetic fields and tide loading, nearly relying on Satellite data. Now, I personally consider satellite data is very valuable in improving the accuracy of these measurements.

In this context, however, all this is a distraction because most flat earth supporters would (understandably) dismiss this material simply because it does rely on satellite data.

Now in the (admittedly long video I presented in "Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality" (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4751.msg91643#msg91643) all these distractions are purposely excluded.
He lists:

	• NASA - "FAKE SPACE PHOTOS"
	• GRAVITY - "DOESN'T EXIST"
	• PHYSICS & MATHEMATICS- "MADE UP BY MASONIC SCIENTISTS"
	• ASTRONOMY- "IT'S A BIG DOME UP THERE"
	• AIR TRAVEL- "FAKE ROUTES AND FLIGHT TIMES"
	• GPS - "FAKE. SATELLITES AREN'T REAL. USING CELLULAR TOWERS"
	• HISTORY - "ALL LIES. LIES, LIES, LIES ..... "

Then discusses measurements done with simple instruments such as levels, plumb-bobs, chain measures and basic theodolites.
The measurements he describes are all simply distance and angle measurements covering essentially all landmasses on the earth.

So, what we get from a Geodetic Surveyors work is the sizes of the countries and continents and it is these simple measurements that I have claimed will not fit on a flat earth.

I presented this in "The dimensions of the Earth will not fit on a Flat Surface" (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4557.msg88728#msg88728) and the main comment was to "provide evidence"!

A similar post on the "other site" is in the thread "The length of the equator leads to impossible results" (The length of the equator leads to impossible results), mind you I feel almost guilty about that one - I may have driven one poor FE supporter to have a breakdown!

These do not directly relate to that video, they were written long before I knew of it, but they are based on our knowledge of the size of a degree of latitude and longitude at the equator - that is a part of what Geodetic Surveyors do. see "The Meridian Arc Measurement in Peru 1735 – 1745, by Jim R. SMITH, United Kingdom" in https://www.fig.net/resources/proceedings/fig_proceedings/fig_2002/Hs4/HS4_smith.pdf.

BTW, You might ask what is the difference between a Geodetic Surveyor and a Geodesic Surveyor - I don't really know except that the term Geodesy seems to cover more than just distance and angle measurements (the Geodetic Surveyor's realm).

[Woody]

The answer is that there are entire journals devoted to the science.  Have you looked at any of them? Their evidence is presented in the exact place you would expect to find it.  Are you trying to imply that geodesy has no evidence?  Or that the field itself is a scam?  I am not sure what you are getting at.

I've looked at them. They say stuff like "if we take these magnetic field readings from the US, Europa and Asia, we can conclude x about the globe's magnetic field". None of it is actually about demonstrating that the earth is a globe.

https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/peter.clarke/offprints/Spatar_etal-2015-pp.pdf

https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/geodesy/2015/08/14/two-papers-on-ocean-tide-loading/

http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TechnicalReports.html

http://gpi.savba.sk/GPIweb/ogg/ikohut/WEBCD/Slovak-National-Report-to-IUGG_2011-2014.pdf

http://geodesy.unr.edu/publications.php

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6205/65

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/research-topics/geodesy-and-lithospheric-deformation

http://www.mred.tuc.gr/home/mertikas/geodesy.html

Just a sample of published papers some do involve the magnetic field and a lot do not.

Most by themselves do not prove a round Earth but collectively they put the puzzle together. 

There is plenty of observations spanning over 2,000 years that do not involve the magnetic field.

Then there is this, which is also is part of the geodesy field:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=91680;topic=4717.60;last_msg=91681

This seems like something you could do to me.  The equipment is not too cost prohibitive and it will allow you to make accurate measurements.  If you can prove the methodology flawed or conduct a survey with the methodology clearly and precisely given not measuring a curve then you got something. 

Edit: Just wanted to add since I did not think about satellites you will need to look for research conducted pre-satellite era.  Since in most cases the latest tech will be utilized to collect data. As I pointed out there is plenty to find before the 1950's and NASA.

None of those links are really about showing that the earth is a globe. It's mostly "we have this data and here is how we can piece it together and tell us something interesting about the magnetic field/gravity/whatever on a globe earth".

The problem you are going to have looking at current research is no one is looking to try to find out the shape of the Earth.  The closest you are going to get is just more precise measurements of the Earth. If you are expecting someone to say,"We just proved the Earth is spherical again!", I think you maybe waiting a long time.  My guess some cataclysm would need to take place that destroys all the knowledge gained by humanity about the shape of the Earth.

Current science is building upon the foundation already built and proven by consistently making accurate predictions.

FE proponents are the ones that are going to need to step up and start making accurate and reliable predictions based on a FE model.  Since currently I do not think anyone involved in mainstream science is out to prove the shape of the Earth.

I will repeat myself.  If you start collectively looking at the information in the links I provided it starts to make a picture of the world we live in.  None by themselves will prove the shape of the Earth.

Why not start by proving this guy wrong?

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=91680;topic=4717.60;last_msg=91681

Or prove how this method of estimating range is reliable on a FE:

If an object is observed to be just rising above or just dipping below the visible horizon, its distance can be readily calculated using a simple formula. 

The object's elevation (the height of a light above chart datum) can be found in the chart or other nautical publication such as the 'List of Lights'. Note that in some charts elevation is referred to a different datum than soundings.

The formula contains the two distances from the visible horizon and can be simplified by the equation: 2.08 x (√Elevation + √Eye height)

Use the dipping range to plot a Distance LOP in the chart: a circle equal in radius to the measured distance, which is plotted about the navigation aid. Finally, take a bearing on the object to get a second LOP and a position fix.

How about coming up with away to predict tides and the variations that does not include something like this:



Explain this in some way that includes something observable:



It begins retrograde motion about the middle of next month that lasts to the end of June.

By themselves they may not prove the Earth is a spheroid to you.  If you start looking at the evidence collectively you may notice it really seems we live on a roundish planet orbiting the sun.

[Tom Bishop]

The answer is that there are entire journals devoted to the science.  Have you looked at any of them? Their evidence is presented in the exact place you would expect to find it.  Are you trying to imply that geodesy has no evidence?  Or that the field itself is a scam?  I am not sure what you are getting at.

I've looked at them. They say stuff like "if we take these magnetic field readings from the US, Europa and Asia, we can conclude x about the globe's magnetic field". None of it is actually about demonstrating that the earth is a globe.

https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/peter.clarke/offprints/Spatar_etal-2015-pp.pdf

https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/geodesy/2015/08/14/two-papers-on-ocean-tide-loading/

http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Pubs/TechnicalReports.html

http://gpi.savba.sk/GPIweb/ogg/ikohut/WEBCD/Slovak-National-Report-to-IUGG_2011-2014.pdf

http://geodesy.unr.edu/publications.php

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/346/6205/65

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/research-topics/geodesy-and-lithospheric-deformation

http://www.mred.tuc.gr/home/mertikas/geodesy.html

Just a sample of published papers some do involve the magnetic field and a lot do not.

Most by themselves do not prove a round Earth but collectively they put the puzzle together. 

There is plenty of observations spanning over 2,000 years that do not involve the magnetic field.

Then there is this, which is also is part of the geodesy field:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=91680;topic=4717.60;last_msg=91681

This seems like something you could do to me.  The equipment is not too cost prohibitive and it will allow you to make accurate measurements.  If you can prove the methodology flawed or conduct a survey with the methodology clearly and precisely given not measuring a curve then you got something. 

Edit: Just wanted to add since I did not think about satellites you will need to look for research conducted pre-satellite era.  Since in most cases the latest tech will be utilized to collect data. As I pointed out there is plenty to find before the 1950's and NASA.

None of those links are really about showing that the earth is a globe. It's mostly "we have this data and here is how we can piece it together and tell us something interesting about the magnetic field/gravity/whatever on a globe earth".

The problem you are going to have looking at current research is no one is looking to try to find out the shape of the Earth.  The closest you are going to get is just more precise measurements of the Earth. If you are expecting someone to say,"We just proved the Earth is spherical again!", I think you maybe waiting a long time.  My guess some cataclysm would need to take place that destroys all the knowledge gained by humanity about the shape of the Earth.

Current science is building upon the foundation already built and proven by consistently making accurate predictions.

FE proponents are the ones that are going to need to step up and start making accurate and reliable predictions based on a FE model.  Since currently I do not think anyone involved in mainstream science is out to prove the shape of the Earth.

I will repeat myself.  If you start collectively looking at the information in the links I provided it starts to make a picture of the world we live in.  None by themselves will prove the shape of the Earth.

If none of the research is about showing that the earth is curved, or that the earth is a globe, then what good is it to us?

I could take some data of the most abundant minerals on each continent and make a visualization with a Flat Earth map, but that would do nothing to show that the earth is flat.

[Rama Set]

What about geodetic surveying Tom?

[markjo]

If none of the research is about showing that the earth is curved, or that the earth is a globe, then what good is it to us?

What about the Geodesic Mission in the 18th century that measured the difference in distance between degrees of latitude near the equator and near the north pole that showed the oblateness of the earth?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Geodesic_Mission

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

If none of the research is about showing that the earth is curved, or that the earth is a globe, then what good is it to us?

What about the Geodesic Mission in the 18th century that measured the difference in distance between degrees of latitude near the equator and near the north pole that showed the oblateness of the earth?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Geodesic_Mission

Degrees of latitude, and longitude are just arbitrary lines drawn on a map assuming it is a globe.