The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: GreatATuin on November 11, 2020, 10:36:24 AM
-
Two days ago, 33 sailors have set sail from Les Sables d'Olonne, France. The Vendée Globe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe) is a solo non-stop round-the-world race, along the Clipper route (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_route).
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/VendeeGlobeRaceRoute.png)
It's a tough race: typically, only half the sailors make it to the finish line.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tmullen/2020/11/09/the-insanity-and-elegance-of-the-vende-globe-sailing-race
https://www.espn.com/olympics/story/_/id/30249677/bubbles-separation-solitude-trying-cope-2020-let-examine-vendee-globe
Their progress can be tracked online : https://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/tracking-map
On a flat bipolar Earth, this kind of circumnavigation is not possible. On a flat monopole Earth, it could be possible, but the southern part along the roaring forties would be much longer.
Are these sailors and the race organization part of a conspiracy?
-
Two days ago, 33 sailors have set sail from Les Sables d'Olonne, France. The Vendée Globe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe) is a solo non-stop round-the-world race, along the Clipper route (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_route).
On a flat bipolar Earth, this kind of circumnavigation is not possible. On a flat monopole Earth, it could be possible, but the southern part along the roaring forties would be much longer.
Are these sailors and the race organization part of a conspiracy?
I can only see three viable options here:
- The sailors and the race organisation are all part of a big global conspiracy to make everybody else think that the Earth is round
- The sailors and the race organisation are simply victims (like we are) of a big global conspiracy by using technology that has been engineered to make it seem like the Earth is round
- The sailors and the race organisation are not part of any conspiracy, and they are simply circumnavigating the Earth which we know to be a globe with known distances between land masses
Per the thread talking about the burden of proof, which of the above sounds the most ludicrous? The more ludicrous it sounds, the more it lends credibility to the opposing view.
Having said that, the race is about 21,600 miles long, so it would probably be in the region of 60,000 miles if the Earth were flat and they just travelled around it in a circle. Just like the land masses and known distances between them, FET cannot account for the massive discrepancies we get, especially involving the "southern hemisphere".
-
Without prejudging the possible responses, this would be a great project for investigation. Chart the progress of the yachts day by day on an FE-style map versus an RE map, compare distances and average speeds from the telemetry and as derived from an FE map and make comparisons. I’m sure it would be fascinating!
Just one caveat - anyone who wants to accuse the sailors of fraud or cheating better do it from a great distance: they’re a tough lot, liable to react badly to being accused to their faces. You might get an unexpected cold, salty bath.
-
Here's their position Dec. 2, 2020
(https://i.imgur.com/4wVUlP7.png)
At the time, the leading boat (Apivia) has sailed 9,132.9nM (16,914.1km) and has 16,945.2nM (31,382 km) remaining currently headed from the Cape of Good Hope to Australia.
If you plot their course on the WIKI approved FE map, there would be roughly the same distance to travel (using the most FE favorable translation of route) from the Cape to Cape Leeuwin.
(https://i.imgur.com/I73YTd4.png)
We'll see how the next stretch goes.
-
Been a fun little exercise following this race. The leader passed Cape Leeuwin, Australia looks to be sometime Dec. 13.
(https://i.imgur.com/XoSWgD4.png)
Apivia at that time had traveled 24.787 Km. That puts Apivia 7873 Km further than my previous Dec. 2 update slightly past the Cape of Good Hope.
In my previous post, I mapped out on the WIKI FE map how based on the nearly 17,000 Km from France to the Cape would correlate to another 17,000 Km from the Cape to Cape Leeuwin, we can see that the WIKI map is simply flat out wrong, by a significant margin.
-
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/VendeeGlobeRaceRoute.png)
On a flat monopole Earth, it could be possible, but the southern part along the roaring forties would be much longer.
Why are they called the roaring forties and furious fifties?
It's because there are are abnormal winds there, which will necessarily put the water into motion and anything on top of it.
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2001-2005/issue-4-spring-2002/feature2/what-is-the-southern-ocean
“ The Southern Ocean is notorious for having some of the strongest winds and largest waves on the planet. ”
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151009-where-is-the-windiest-place-on-earth
“ There are huge belts of wind caused by the uneven way the Sun heats the Earth's surface. 30° north and south of the equator, the trade winds blow steadily. At 40° lie the prevailing westerlies, and the polar easterlies begin at around 60°.
Ask any round-the-world sailor and they will quickly tell you the stormiest seas, stirred by the strongest winds, are found in the Southern Ocean. These infamously rough latitudes are labelled the "roaring 40s", "furious 50s" and "screaming 60s". ”
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2003JD004179
“ The Southern Ocean is a vital element in the global climate. Its circumpolar current plays a crucial role in the global transport of mass, heat, momentum, and climate signals from one ocean basin to another. Moreover, the Southern Ocean hosts the strongest surface winds of any open ocean area, fostering strong heat, moisture, and momentum exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. However, the Southern Ocean is tremendously undersurveyed by traditional observation methods because of the remoteness of the area and rough environment, causing the largest data gap of global oceans. ”
https://books.google.com/books?id=MxmUDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA103#v=onepage&q&f=false
“ The higher speed and greater persistence of the westerlies in the Southern Hemisphere are caused by the difference in the atmospheric pressure patterns as well as its variation from that of the Northern hemisphere. The landmass in the southern hemisphere is comparatively less and average annual pressure decreases much more rapidly on the pole ward side of the high pressure belt. ”
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/print_oo.html
“ the ocean area from about latitude 40 south to the Antarctic Circle has the strongest average winds found anywhere on Earth ”
-
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/VendeeGlobeRaceRoute.png)
On a flat monopole Earth, it could be possible, but the southern part along the roaring forties would be much longer.
Why are they called the roaring forties and furious fifties?
It's because there are are abnormal winds there, which will necessarily put the water into motion and anything on top of it.
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2001-2005/issue-4-spring-2002/feature2/what-is-the-southern-ocean
“ The Southern Ocean is notorious for having some of the strongest winds and largest waves on the planet. ”
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151009-where-is-the-windiest-place-on-earth
“ There are huge belts of wind caused by the uneven way the Sun heats the Earth's surface. 30° north and south of the equator, the trade winds blow steadily. At 40° lie the prevailing westerlies, and the polar easterlies begin at around 60°.
Ask any round-the-world sailor and they will quickly tell you the stormiest seas, stirred by the strongest winds, are found in the Southern Ocean. These infamously rough latitudes are labelled the "roaring 40s", "furious 50s" and "screaming 60s". ”
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2003JD004179
“ The Southern Ocean is a vital element in the global climate. Its circumpolar current plays a crucial role in the global transport of mass, heat, momentum, and climate signals from one ocean basin to another. Moreover, the Southern Ocean hosts the strongest surface winds of any open ocean area, fostering strong heat, moisture, and momentum exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. However, the Southern Ocean is tremendously undersurveyed by traditional observation methods because of the remoteness of the area and rough environment, causing the largest data gap of global oceans. ”
https://books.google.com/books?id=MxmUDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA103#v=onepage&q&f=false
“ The higher speed and greater persistence of the westerlies in the Southern Hemisphere are caused by the difference in the atmospheric pressure patterns as well as its variation from that of the Northern hemisphere. The landmass in the southern hemisphere is comparatively less and average annual pressure decreases much more rapidly on the pole ward side of the high pressure belt. ”
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/print_oo.html
“ the ocean area from about latitude 40 south to the Antarctic Circle has the strongest average winds found anywhere on Earth ”
Great info, Tom. Absolutely meaningless when talking about the fact that the distance covered over the last 9 days is roughly 1/2 the distance required if the route is plotted on the WIKI flat earth map. It's really basic. You can't peel the spherical earth from the north pole onto a flat map and keep the lines of longitutde without vastly distorting the measurable longitudinal distances the further you go into the southern hemisphere.
-
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/VendeeGlobeRaceRoute.png)
On a flat monopole Earth, it could be possible, but the southern part along the roaring forties would be much longer.
Why are they called the roaring forties and furious fifties?
It's because there are are abnormal winds there, which will necessarily put the water into motion and anything on top of it.
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2001-2005/issue-4-spring-2002/feature2/what-is-the-southern-ocean
“ The Southern Ocean is notorious for having some of the strongest winds and largest waves on the planet. ”
And the next sentence from you link is: "It is also home to the largest current in the world ocean, the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. The Circumpolar Current carries between 135 and 145 million cubic meters of water per second from west to east along a 20,000km long path around Antarctica."
So I guess this would refer to a bi-polar flat earth model?
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151009-where-is-the-windiest-place-on-earth
“ There are huge belts of wind caused by the uneven way the Sun heats the Earth's surface. 30° north and south of the equator, the trade winds blow steadily. At 40° lie the prevailing westerlies, and the polar easterlies begin at around 60°.
Ask any round-the-world sailor and they will quickly tell you the stormiest seas, stirred by the strongest winds, are found in the Southern Ocean. These infamously rough latitudes are labelled the "roaring 40s", "furious 50s" and "screaming 60s". ”
Correct and from your link:
"This depression boosts the trade winds that blow towards the equator. The column of rising air spins due to the Coriolis effect, whereby the rotation of the Earth deflects winds away from the equator."
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2003JD004179
“ The Southern Ocean is a vital element in the global climate. Its circumpolar current plays a crucial role in the global transport of mass, heat, momentum, and climate signals from one ocean basin to another. Moreover, the Southern Ocean hosts the strongest surface winds of any open ocean area, fostering strong heat, moisture, and momentum exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. However, the Southern Ocean is tremendously undersurveyed by traditional observation methods because of the remoteness of the area and rough environment, causing the largest data gap of global oceans. ”
From the first line of the abstract in your link, "Space‐based scatterometer instruments provide crucial surface wind measurements with high resolution over global oceans."
Are you referencing global satellite data now?
https://books.google.com/books?id=MxmUDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA103#v=onepage&q&f=false
“ The higher speed and greater persistence of the westerlies in the Southern Hemisphere are caused by the difference in the atmospheric pressure patterns as well as its variation from that of the Northern hemisphere. The landmass in the southern hemisphere is comparatively less and average annual pressure decreases much more rapidly on the pole ward side of the high pressure belt. ”
Your link also describes latitudes as: "Latitudes specify the North-South position of a location on the globe." As well as many references to earth's rotation and orbit around the Sun.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/print_oo.html
“ the ocean area from about latitude 40 south to the Antarctic Circle has the strongest average winds found anywhere on Earth ”
The first sentence of your link is, "A large body of recent oceanographic research has shown that the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC), an ocean current that flows from west to east around Antarctica, plays a crucial role in global ocean circulation."
It seems that all or your references and explanations are decidedly Globe centric.
-
This is a a great case study to look at issues with the FE map, though there are other variable at play that Tom has pointed out, the differences between distances plotted on globe-based maps and the most prominent FE map are staggering.
Appealing to 'exaggerated distances in the hemisphere' creates another issue, because if the world was indeed flat, map making should be simple --no need for complicated projections that necessarily skew the size, distance, shape, or positions of depicted features.
It would be relatively straightforward for one to compare the progress of the racers and compare their speeds to reported weather conditions to evaluate whether the mean seas of the south could account for all of the apparent changes in speeds interpreted from the FE and globe-based maps.
Tom posted some quotes on the nature of weather systems in this region, from sources he likely views as trustworthy... I wonder what else those sources might say about the causes of those weather systems...
-
This is a a great case study to look at issues with the FE map, though there are other variable at play that Tom has pointed out, the differences between distances plotted on globe-based maps and the most prominent FE map are staggering.
Appealing to 'exaggerated distances in the hemisphere' creates another issue, because if the world was indeed flat, map making should be simple --no need for complicated projections that necessarily skew the size, distance, shape, or positions of depicted features.
It would be relatively straightforward for one to compare the progress of the racers and compare their speeds to reported weather conditions to evaluate whether the mean seas of the south could account for all of the apparent changes in speeds interpreted from the FE and globe-based maps.
Tom posted some quotes on the nature of weather systems in this region, from sources he likely views as trustworthy... I wonder what else those sources might say about the causes of those weather systems...
Hover over any vessel on the tracking map and it will tell you their telemetry at that point in time. For the FE model to be accurate if you compare the mostly N-S distance traveled over the first 21 ish days and put that distance over the last 9 days the vessels would have to average something around 30 knots. You can see on the tracker that much of the time the vessels are under 20. Just a quick calc. puts their average a little over 16.
-
Over the next couple weeks we'll be able to track the Tasmania to Cape Horn route.
(https://i.imgur.com/2gH74pV.png)
If you use the length of the route on the FE map and compare it to the already completed track it comes in at roughly 25,000 Km (gave the FE map about 2,500 Km in their favor in my estimation.) Even a straight line course on the FE map would be around 20,000 Km. Don't think many will find it surprising when the actual route comes in at less than 10,000 Km.
-
It is tremendously and abnormally windy in that area. An assessment would need to take that into account.
-
It is tremendously and abnormally windy in that area. An assessment would need to take that into account.
Why? The wind has nothing to do with the distances being traveled. We aren't talking about the time required to get from point A to point B. We are discussing the distance. As I mentioned in my previous post, the vessels track their speed. The FE speed required is nearly double the measured speed to get from Cape of Good Hope to Cape Leeuwin in the time traveled if the FE distance was actually correct.
Edited to add: The last update shows the leader in 3M seas and 21.8 Knot winds. Though significant, hardly tremendous or abnormal by sailing standards.
-
The formula for speed is Speed = Distance / Time
If the distance is in question, then the speed is also in question.
The situation is fluids traveling within fluids. The winds and water are in motion. On board airplane airspeed indicators are similarly unreliable, and are not used for navigation. The local area of the airplane might be in motion faster than a larger area around that airplane, which might itself be in motion.
-
The formula for speed is Speed = Distance / Time
If the distance is in question, then the speed is also in question.
The speed is measured relative to the water. That's how boats measure speed. They don't get there and then say, "Well, we traveled this far in the past 24 hours so we were going this fast." It's a realtime measurement each vessel has on board. You're grasping trying to explain something that the FE model can't.
Edited to add: I'll also throw this in here. The ACC is 20CM/S. That's about .4 knots. Ocean current velocity would be neglible with regards to the boats' speeds.
https://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/southern/antarctic-cp.html
-
The amusing thing here is, of course, that the boats know their position either via GPS or other satellite-based navigation systems, or they might use more traditional methods such as taking sightings from celestial bodies to calculate latitude. Both of these things require the earth to be globe-shaped, as do the sources that Tom used to support his own arguments around wind and current flows.
-
Boats have two speeds. Speed thru the water (STW) and speed over the ground (SOG). Professional mariners know the difference and both are important in depending on the situation. The relevant speed here is speed over ground. That can be measured in several different manners, depending upon the situation. If you can't get a fix relative to land because you are too far out, or are maybe in some fog, you have to depend upon GPS. If you don't believe in GPS then you can use celestial navigation for a reasonably accurate position fix. Then its a matter of determining the distance between two fixes and dividing by the amount of time that's passed. Then you have an accurate speed and distance. Aircraft pilots do the same thing. Yes, the airspeed indicator gives just a ball park estimate of the ground speed but gives no indication of the headwind or tail wind component. That can be determined by using accurate fixes relative to the ground, measuring the distance traveled and dividing by the time it took between the fixes. When you compare that with the indicated airspeed you will have an idea of what kind of head or tail wind component is affecting the aircraft's ground speed. Over the ground speeds on both aircraft and boats can vary continuously because of the operational environment. You can accurately make time and distance measurements and the resulting average speed measurement will then be accurate as well.
-
The amusing thing here is, of course, that the boats know their position either via GPS or other satellite-based navigation systems, or they might use more traditional methods such as taking sightings from celestial bodies to calculate latitude. Both of these things require the earth to be globe-shaped, as do the sources that Tom used to support his own arguments around wind and current flows.
Satellite data is extremely important for anyone racing. That data supplies wind speeds all over the ocean and you can watch the boats change course in order to head to the locations of the highest wind velocities. It's been quite fun to track.
-
Boats have two speeds. Speed thru the water (STW) and speed over the ground (SOG). Professional mariners know the difference and both are important in depending on the situation. The relevant speed here is speed over ground. That can be measured in several different manners, depending upon the situation. If you can't get a fix relative to land because you are too far out, or are maybe in some fog, you have to depend upon GPS. If you don't believe in GPS then you can use celestial navigation for a reasonably accurate position fix. Then its a matter of determining the distance between two fixes and dividing by the amount of time that's passed. Then you have an accurate speed and distance. Aircraft pilots do the same thing. Yes, the airspeed indicator gives just a ball park estimate of the ground speed but gives no indication of the headwind or tail wind component. That can be determined by using accurate fixes relative to the ground, measuring the distance traveled and dividing by the time it took between the fixes. When you compare that with the indicated airspeed you will have an idea of what kind of head or tail wind component is affecting the aircraft's ground speed. Over the ground speeds on both aircraft and boats can vary continuously because of the operational environment. You can accurately make time and distance measurements and the resulting average speed measurement will then be accurate as well.
Was hoping you'd give some input given your familiarity with ocean navigation. I'm absolutely not a mariner in any way shape or form. Simply making some observations.
-
The formula for speed is Speed = Distance / Time
If the distance is in question, then the speed is also in question.
The situation is fluids traveling within fluids. The winds and water are in motion. On board airplane airspeed indicators are similarly unreliable, and are not used for navigation. The local area of the airplane might be in motion faster than a larger area around that airplane, which might itself be in motion.
This is a joke, right? Apart from their vital use at the lower end of the range, around stalling speed, this is the main reason for having an airspeed indicator. I don't know when or where you did your own pilot training, but when I was taking lessons (in 1973) the first piece of kit I had buy was something called a "computer", which was a type of circular sliderule, where you would factor in your airspeed, intended course, and wind velocity and it worked out the heading you needed to steer. En route, similar inputs would tell you how far you had travelled. This is why commercial aircraft and large military aircraft carried navigators. The windspeeds are forecast by meteorological agencies, and verified by shore stations and weather balloons.
The advent of more advanced terrestrial navaids in the 50s, and GPS in the 90s has reduced dependence on dead reckoning, and consequently reduced crewing requirements, but its still a vital part of crew training. Its also how Amy Johnson, Jim Molinson, Alan Cobham and thousands of other civilian pioneers and military pilots managed to find their way around the South Pacific in the 30s and 40s.
And I'd be very surprised if the Vendee sailors aren't comparing at least 3 different forms of navigation.
(Incidentally, leading boat currently has a windspeed of 23 kts, to the rear of the peloton its around 8 kts. Scary stuff).
-
I am also a FAA licensed commercial pilot (retired) as well as a CG licensed Merchant Marine Officer (retired). The 'computer' you were talking about mostly pertains to calculating the effects of winds on your aircraft's speed relative to the ground (among other things). Your aircraft's air speed indicator only give you a relative speed indication (to the air). It's use for navigational purposes is limited. Mostly the air speed indicator is used to know how close you are to stalling, for setting your aircraft up during a climb, and for not exceeding your red line speed during a decent. A boat, or ship, has a thru the water speed indicator as well. It can only tell you how fast you are going relative to the water. The water will also have a speed relative to the ocean bottom. There are significant currents along the coast of Japan and of course the Gulf Stream along the coast of Florida. So the thru the water speeds will only give you a 'ball park' number in relation to how fast you are going over the ocean bottom. The important thing in this case (an ocean race) is how fast you are going over the ocean bottom and what is the distance. The distance will be accurately determined by your WGS-84 charts (or maybe some British Admiralty ones). Your speed can only be accurately be determined by using GPS (the best), or taking a couple of fixes relative to observable landmarks, or celestial navigation. Celestial navigation is essentially similar to using landmass fixes because what you are doing is determining your position relative to a star, or planets zenith position on the surface of the earth. You get these zenith positions from a nautical almanac but this is based upon knowing the exact time to the second of when your observations were taken.
Yes, both GPS and celestial navigation depend upon the earth being spherical. Both techniques will not work on a flat earth.
-
The formula for speed is Speed = Distance / Time
If the distance is in question, then the speed is also in question.
The situation is fluids traveling within fluids. The winds and water are in motion. On board airplane airspeed indicators are similarly unreliable, and are not used for navigation. The local area of the airplane might be in motion faster than a larger area around that airplane, which might itself be in motion.
This is a joke, right?
Nope. The on-board instruments which give the true airspeed only detects the local wind or air flow around the wings, and is not used in navigation. That information is primarily used for banking maneuvers and such.
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Aircraft_speed
From that link: "Knowing TAS (True Airspeed) during flight is surprisingly useless - for navigation, ground speed is needed"
-
To be honest, you are both (@Tom Bishop and @DuncanDoenitz) engaged in something of a sidebar debate. For what it's worth, ASIs in aircraft aren't 'unreliable', they are both reliable and extremely important. They are also extremely useful for navigation, but they have limitations. As Tom rightly points out, they don't measure groundspeed, or 'gs'. Traditional navigation would involve correcting for the forecast wind, using either mental reckoning or the more sophisticated Dalton computer, and then updating position using either visual features or a ground based beacon such as VOR/DME. GPS has clearly made that process a lot easier, but then presumably FET proponents would take issue with the concept of a constellation of geo-stationary satellites.
For ships at sea a similar station exists. Sailors can measure their speed through the water, but cannot account for the movement of the water without measuring by some external means, such as celestial sightings (deeply problematic from a FET perspective) or again, GPS.
But leaving all of this aside, there is a much more fundamental truth that we need to establish here. Could a FET proponent, maybe @Tom Bishop, for example, please tell us how far the race route would actually be on a FET map, and therefore how fast, in terms of groundspeed, the boats would have to travel in order to make the kind of times we are discussing. We can then see whether or not the speed of water movement required would be credible.
I would also like @Tom to explain how the boats know where they are - how does GPS work, for example? Does celestial navigation work?
-
It is tremendously and abnormally windy in that area. An assessment would need to take that into account.
Have been watching the last 5 days or so since the leader crossed under Tasmania. Winds in the teens and boat speeds in the mid to low teens with some single digit speeds the majority of the time. Certainly no "roaring 40s" or "furious 50s". Will be interesting to see how many days it takes to reach Cape Horn.
-
The speed is in question if the distance is in question.
The formula for speed is Speed = Distance / Time
If the distance is in question, then the speed is also in question.
The situation is fluids traveling within fluids. The winds and water are in motion. On board airplane airspeed indicators are similarly unreliable, and are not used for navigation. The local area of the airplane might be in motion faster than a larger area around that airplane, which might itself be in motion.
I would also like @Tom to explain how the boats know where they are - how does GPS work, for example? Does celestial navigation work?
GPS works via triangulation, like LORAN. The transmitters don't need to be in space for it to work.
Celestial navigation mostly involves looking at pointers to find which way is North or South, and determining the direction of East and West in relation.
-
Celestial navigation mostly involves triangulation. You use a nautical almanac to determine the zenith point of the star, planet or moon you are using for navigational purposes. After using a sextant to measure the angle above the horizon you can use that data (and the exact time) to plot a line on your chart. Repeat that process using other stars or planets. Where the lines cross is your position via triangulation. It's a difficult process because usually your vessel is in motion while you are taking the sights. This motion has to be accounted for. If everything is done correctly your position will be accurate to about 1 or 2 miles depending on how good of a navigator your are. GPS does the same thing but a microcomputer inside the receiver does all the calculations and all the observations are done very quickly so your vessels movement isn't much of a factor. Both GPS & celestial navigation require that the earth be a sphere to properly work.
-
The speed is in question if the distance is in question.
Do you question your speed when you drive your car and don’t know how far you’ve traveled?? No, because you have a speedometer.
These vessels all have speedometers. Their speed is not in question. In the end their speed will confirm the distance as it’s been measured for navigation for decades if not centuries.
Sorry, Tom. It’s 2020 and distances on this planet, flat or round, are known and measured. You can’t bring out the 1850 argument that we don’t know them anymore. It totally discredits you.
-
Yes, vessels all have speedometers. These all measure speed thru the water. Unfortunately this speed thru the water isn't the most accurate. If you were to take your boat up the Mississippi River your speed over the ground would be a whole lot slower than when you are going down the river even when your 'speedometer' was reading an identical speed. There are some quite strong currents, even in the oceans so these have to be accounted for. A sailboat going up the wind tacks back & forth so progress toward the final destination can be quite a bit different than what the boat's speedometer says. What's important here is the course made good and the speed over the ground.
Having said all that, it still is possible to take a vessel's position fix, send it to shore via Sat-C, and then chart all those positions and times to come up with an accurate position, speed, and distance traveled for all of the sail boats. An accurate mileage figure can be determined as well as an average speed. In the end you will be able to determine the distance between the longitude lines South of the Equator.
-
Roads are static. How would a boat know how fast the water it is in is moving?
-
Roads are static. How would a boat know how fast the water it is in is moving?
The ACC is a known current. It doesn’t flow at 20 knots. I posted this earlier.
Once again, it’s 2020. Things like ocean currents have been studied and known for decades.
-
Roads are static. How would a boat know how fast the water it is in is moving?
The data is easily accessible:
"Information on the rate and direction of ocean currents via the Global RTOFS (Real-Time Ocean Forecast System) model is easily accessed through navigation software programs that download data in GRIB format."
https://www.yachtingworld.com/expert-sailing-techniques/pro-navigators-tips-on-how-to-use-the-oceans-currents-114981
So that's how they know how fast the water it is in is moving.
-
Unfortunately this speed thru the water isn't the most accurate.
The ACC is a known current.
The data is easily accessible:
"Information on the rate and direction of ocean currents via the Global RTOFS (Real-Time Ocean Forecast System) model is easily accessed through navigation software programs that download data in GRIB format."
https://www.yachtingworld.com/expert-sailing-techniques/pro-navigators-tips-on-how-to-use-the-oceans-currents-114981
So that's how they know how fast the water it is in is moving.
So the boat doesn't know and couldn't know with on-board instrumentation. Thanks for verifying that this argument that the boat can know its speed on its own is incorrect.
You have to assume that other data is correct, which It might not be, since the equation for speed requires a known distance.
-
The ACC is a known current.
So the boat doesn't know and couldn't know with on-board instrumentation. Thanks for verifying that this argument that the boat can know it's speed on its own is incorrect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current
https://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/southern/antarctic-cp.html
http://polardiscovery.whoi.edu/antarctica/circulation.html
The current is a known quantity. Just because you want to continue to repeat the lie that we don’t know what the speed of the water is doesn’t make it true. I’d give you some leeway if the math was relatively close but we are talking a a difference of a 3 knot current and a required 20 knot current to make the current account for the vast differences in time and distance witnessed. Your continued desire to make current or wind account for the extreme difference in what we measure doesn’t hold up
to any scrutiny.
-
Unfortunately this speed thru the water isn't the most accurate.
The ACC is a known current.
The data is easily accessible:
"Information on the rate and direction of ocean currents via the Global RTOFS (Real-Time Ocean Forecast System) model is easily accessed through navigation software programs that download data in GRIB format."
https://www.yachtingworld.com/expert-sailing-techniques/pro-navigators-tips-on-how-to-use-the-oceans-currents-114981
So that's how they know how fast the water it is in is moving.
So the boat doesn't know and couldn't know with on-board instrumentation. Thanks for verifying that this argument that the boat can know its speed on its own is incorrect.
You have to assume that other data is correct, which It might not be, since the equation for speed requires a known distance.
I think these guys and gals have all of the speed data they need regardless of what you would like to rail against. The bottom line is that this real world race doesn't fit an FE model and there's really no way around that fact. Unless, of course, this is part of the conspiracy.
(https://i.imgur.com/RE0Qjch.png)
-
The current is a known quantity
The equation for speed requires a known distance. Please provide proof that the methods used were accurate.
-
The current is a known quantity
The equation for speed requires a known distance. Please provide proof that the methods used were accurate.
Ask these folks. They have all of the data for their tracking/modeling.
https://youtu.be/vJQqORxX0uE
And I'm sure the captains know what's accurate or not because they are, well, racing one another for one. For two, their lives depend upon knowing where they are and when they will be somewhere else. Pretty rudimentary. If you have an objection to those folks knowing what they are doing, maybe contact the Vendée folks and express your concerns.
In the mean time, we'll be watching this insane race race around the globe.
-
Ask these folks.
So you don't actually know that you are correct and must make a number of assumptions. Okay.
-
The current is a known quantity
The equation for speed requires a known distance. Please provide proof that the methods used were accurate.
Incorrect. You can measure ocean current with a stationary device. You need no information about distance whatsoever. It’s called math and science. You should look into it sometime.
I make a living off of instrumentation and it being accurate.
It’s laughable the proof required to back measurements that FE can’t account for yet absolutely zero measurements or proof for concepts like UA and EA are required for them to be fact. Zero proof whatsoever.
-
Ask these folks.
So you don't actually know that you are correct and must make a number of assumptions. Okay.
I know I'm correct because those folks know they are correct because the race and their lives depend on it. And the race is happening live, right now, and is trackable by us with all of the data they provide. You, on the other hand, just keep saying, "No," when it's right there in front of your face. Such a strange stance; evidence staring you in the face and you are still blind to it. To the extent that you fall back on the "you're making assumptions..." ploy. No, you're making assumptions that are based upon zero evidence. The evidence that I'm right is right there, watch the race and enjoy:
https://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/tracking-map
Again, unless you want to throw all of these folks into the conspiracy. That's your only way out. So you might as well pull that lever.
-
Incorrect. You can measure ocean current with a stationary device. You need no information about distance whatsoever. It’s called math and science. You should look into it sometime.
Source? What device was used?
I know I'm correct because those folks know they are correct
In other words you are admitting that you don't know that you are correct. I see.
-
Incorrect. You can measure ocean current with a stationary device. You need no information about distance whatsoever. It’s called math and science. You should look into it sometime.
Source? What device was used?
In general, several methods are used. Ask NOAA:
How do we monitor currents?
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/currentmon.html#:~:text=The%20Acoustic%20Doppler%20Current%20Profiler,off%20particles%20in%20the%20water.
As well, I think the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) plays a role. They've got a gajillion buoys and such all over the seas and oceans constantly collecting data. Their network looks like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/QzTk8Z8.png)
https://www.goosocean.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=24&Itemid=123
I know I'm correct because those folks know they are correct
In other words you are admitting that you don't know that you are correct. I see.
No, I'm admitting that the sailors know they are correct as the race and their lives depend on it. Do you personally know everything is correct in ENAG?
-
Not many moored buoys in the SH there. Looks like a loss on your part.
No, I'm admitting that the sailors know they are correct as the race and their lives depend on it.
You are admitting that you are relying on third party knowledge, which you assume to be correct according to your own faith.
-
Not many moored buoys in the SH there. Looks like a loss on your part.
Who said moored buoys are the only way to collect data? In any case, actually the loss is for you to have and to hold. They've got plenty of collection points:
(https://i.imgur.com/VbV5m7q.png)
No, I'm admitting that the sailors know they are correct as the race and their lives depend on it.
You are admitting that you are relying on third party knowledge, which you assume to be correct according to your own faith.
That would be second party knowledge. The first party being the sailors and their successful predictable movements from points A to B throughout the 70 some odd days of the race. Are you a second party to Rowbotham's data, which you assume to be correct according to your own faith?
-
Incorrect. You can measure ocean current with a stationary device. You need no information about distance whatsoever. It’s called math and science. You should look into it sometime.
Source? What device was used?
Not to difficult to find a link regarding ocean current measuring devices.
https://uskess.whoi.edu/components/cpies/
Your continued attempt at discrediting years of ocean research is getting ridiculous. It's really beginning to make you look rather foolish.
I'll paraphrase an argument you made in another post. Are you more knowledgeable about the oceans than all of these ocean research institutes? If not, then who are you to say that they are wrong?
The onus is now on you, Tom. No more of the B.S. You've been given plenty of accurate data. If you want to argue the data further then it's now up to you to provide proveable references and sources from knowledgeable, qualified people explaining exactly how the stated low velocity ACC estimates are incorrect. Simple statements or questions will simply be viewed as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate and as an admission that you have nothing to refute the current accepted values of the ACC. Actual sources and data are what is now required of you to continue your line of defense.
-
Not many moored buoys in the SH there. Looks like a loss on your part.
Who said moored buoys are the only way to collect data? In any case, actually the loss is for you to have and to hold. They've got plenty of collection points:
(https://i.imgur.com/VbV5m7q.png)
I don't see any evidence that those are fixed.
https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/argo/
"Argo is an international program that calls for the deployment of 3,000 free drifting profiling floats, distributed over the global oceans, which will measure the temperature and salinity in the upper 2,000m of the ocean providing 100,000 T/S profiles and reference velocity measurements per year."
And there is a distinction between platforms and fixed platforms:
(https://i.imgur.com/Rt5Cl8F.png)
Incorrect. You can measure ocean current with a stationary device. You need no information about distance whatsoever. It’s called math and science. You should look into it sometime.
Source? What device was used?
Not to difficult to find a link regarding ocean current measuring devices.
https://uskess.whoi.edu/components/cpies/
That says nothing about oceans of the Southern Hemisphere.
-
That says nothing about oceans of the Southern Hemisphere.
Simple statements or questions will simply be viewed as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate and as an admission that you have nothing to refute the current accepted values of the ACC. Actual sources and data are what is now required of you to continue your line of defense.
-
That says nothing about oceans of the Southern Hemisphere.
Simple statements or questions will simply be viewed as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate and as an admission that you have nothing to refute the current accepted values of the ACC. Actual sources and data are what is now required of you to continue your line of defense.
I don't see anything about the ACC in the link you provided: https://uskess.whoi.edu/components/cpies/
Please quote it for us.
-
That says nothing about oceans of the Southern Hemisphere.
Simple statements or questions will simply be viewed as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate and as an admission that you have nothing to refute the current accepted values of the ACC. Actual sources and data are what is now required of you to continue your line of defense.
I don't see anything about the ACC in the link you provided: https://uskess.whoi.edu/components/cpies/
Please quote it for us.
Simple statements or questions will simply be viewed as irrelevant and meaningless to the debate and as an admission that you have nothing to refute the current accepted values of the ACC. Actual sources and data are what is now required of you to continue your line of defense.
-
Well, instead of arguing about this endless buoys debate, here is another one:
If the currents were that strong in the SH oceans, how do you explain they looked for Escoffier, who was on an inflatable survival boat, around a stationary point for 12 hours. With a strong 20 knots current, we would have seen the 4 boats looking for him moving by 200 miles between Nov 30th 14:00 UTC and Dec 1st 2:UTC .
-
Well, instead of arguing about this endless buoys debate, here is another one:
If the currents were that strong in the SH oceans, how do you explain they looked for Escoffier, who was on an inflatable survival boat, around a stationary point for 12 hours. With a strong 20 knots current, we would have seen the 4 boats looking for him moving by 200 miles between Nov 30th 14:00 UTC and Dec 1st 2:UTC .
Assuming that I can find a sufficient stretch of highway, I can drive 200 miles in three hours at 67mph, and it would seem to me in my car that I am not moving that much over the duration.
Why not relative motion of winds and water of 200 miles over 12 hours?
-
Well, instead of arguing about this endless buoys debate, here is another one:
If the currents were that strong in the SH oceans, how do you explain they looked for Escoffier, who was on an inflatable survival boat, around a stationary point for 12 hours. With a strong 20 knots current, we would have seen the 4 boats looking for him moving by 200 miles between Nov 30th 14:00 UTC and Dec 1st 2:UTC .
Assuming that I can find a sufficient stretch of highway, I can drive 200 miles in three hours at 67mph, and it would seem to me in my car that I am not moving that much over the duration.
Why not relative motion of winds and water of 200 miles over 12 hours?
Perhaps you misunderstood the post. What we would have witnessed in a 15-20 knot current would have been a search zone that traveled 200 miles over the course of the search. What actually occurred was that Escoffier was actually found near where he reported going in the water.
Since your going to say, "How do you know he was found close to where he went in the water." I went back to the date on the tracker map. You can see the track of Yes We Cam, the boat that found him. His search path covers less than 1/2 a degree longitude which is around 25 miles at 40 deg. S.
-
I have been watching the race myself and the winds & seas conditions encountered. What I see would be far from 'roaring' conditions. When you see 1 to 4 meter seas & average winds in the Southern seas you have good sailing conditions. The boats are making good progress on a daily basis. You can easily use the displayed race maps to measure distances between the longitude lines. My measurements indicate that the lines are converging the further South you go. You can see the indicated distances made good, according to the data sent back. It's also possible to see the track from the 2016 race that was completed on day 74. A study of the chart with the noon to noon positions marked is possible and distance measurements made. These all match the ballpark speeds of 16 to 18 knots. That is impressive for a wind powered vessel (blow boat). Many powered ocean going ships don't go much faster.
The bottom line that I see here is, if the earth is flat with a monopole model, then the race times & distances all have to be faked. Ocean currents are not a viable line of defense to make up the disparity between the required distances to be traveled on a flat earth map in 74 days. Yes, there are ocean currents out there, but they are fairly narrow and are only about 3 or 4 knots. The chances that a sail boat would both have a favorable current and a wind for a long time are about zero. There is no way to complete the race on a flat earth map in the time indicated unless the race data is being faked, or the earth is a sphere, as indicated on the race map. Use your best judgement as to which possibility to believe.
-
Well, instead of arguing about this endless buoys debate, here is another one:
If the currents were that strong in the SH oceans, how do you explain they looked for Escoffier, who was on an inflatable survival boat, around a stationary point for 12 hours. With a strong 20 knots current, we would have seen the 4 boats looking for him moving by 200 miles between Nov 30th 14:00 UTC and Dec 1st 2:UTC .
Assuming that I can find a sufficient stretch of highway, I can drive 200 miles in three hours at 67mph, and it would seem to me in my car that I am not moving that much over the duration.
Why not relative motion of winds and water of 200 miles over 12 hours?
Perhaps you misunderstood the post. What we would have witnessed in a 15-20 knot current would have been a search zone that traveled 200 miles over the course of the search. What actually occurred was that Escoffier was actually found near where he reported going in the water.
Since your going to say, "How do you know he was found close to where he went in the water." I went back to the date on the tracker map. You can see the track of Yes We Cam, the boat that found him. His search path covers less than 1/2 a degree longitude which is around 25 miles at 40 deg. S.
Thank you, I never thought it would have been a necessity to explain something so obvious.
Also, catching stronger winds doesn't always relate to faster speed. At some point, the see becomes to rough and sails can't withstand so much force. Sailors are obliged to reduce their sails size to slow down and protect their boat.
-
Please alter your post to remove the words "as per FES wiki" from your diagram. It is not an accurate description of what is being proposed, and this sort of deception will not be allowed. Similarly, I am asking you to eliminate any suggestions that your imagination here is in any way supported by the Wiki. Thanks.
EDIT: Since this request was rejected, the post is being moved down to CN where it belongs. Longitube, you're welcome to recreate your post without misleading others about the views being proposed by your opponents.
-
It is not an accurate description of what is being proposed
What is an accurate description of what is being proposed?
-
I have been watching the race myself and the winds & seas conditions encountered. What I see would be far from 'roaring' conditions.
This comment here seems to discard the possibility of relative motion. Do you notice "roaring" conditions inside of your car when traveling at 60mph?
Over the eons, would would it be possible at all for the winds and water in such a current to standardize to similar velocities?
-
Do I see 'roaring conditions' when in my car at 60 mph?, why yes, if I roll the window down. I used to have a convertible and conditions were 'roaring' with the top down as well. Some people like that, as I did, 40 years ago.
I haven't lived for eons but in my thousands of days at sea over the last 20 years things haven't standardized. There were times when I would be out for 120 days and the vast majority of the time we were in gentle sea conditions. You can sometimes say to another sailor 'May you have fair winds and following seas'. This is what you want. Other times there would be typhoon after typhoon along the way and we did the best to avoid the worst of it so the cargo would stay on the ship undamaged. There have been times when it was calm in the morning but one hour later the winds had picked up to 140+ knots and we were all hanging on the best we could.
The sailboat races are in fairly nice conditions. Anytime you have seas less than 5 meters in that area you can thank your lucky stars. King Neptune is a harsh task master and can surprise you very quickly and you better have your vessel rigged for heavy seas. You never know what will happen out there. I have seen times when we actually took the great circle route thru the Bering Sea that is notorious for being rough because conditions were even worse further South in the Pacific. The Southern oceans can be the same. Don't think that the winds & waters out there will standardize to anything. King Neptune will never be that kind to a sailor.