[Tom Bishop]

Even of he had a compass or a gyroscopic compass, if you are at what you think to be the South Pole on a Round Earth, you know that have to go North to go back to the coast.

We see from the diagrams of these explorers that they didn't continue in a straight line after reaching the pole. They turned in an angle. Show me an expedition where they continued in a straight line.

If your goal is to cross Austrailia, why would you change your angle mid journey?

[douglips]

And here's why you need to use a logistics company to help you:
https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/science/cold-science/life-work/crevasse-rescue-93.htm

These folks didn't know how to navigate a crevasse field, got one of themselves killed and induced a joint US-NZ rescue team to put themselves at great risk rescuing them.

[Tumeni]

So it's not a definite proof that, on a Monopole model Flat Earth, that they ventured out into the infinite plane.

Again, so what? Who or what are you disagreeing with?

[Tumeni]

Doesn't matter - what matters is that YOU CAN GO TO ANTARCTICA AND GO OVER ANY ROUTE YOU WANT, you just have to be able to pay, and you better be in good shape and know your way around survival equipment.

Really? The video we saw seemed to imply that Antarctica is very highly regulated and there was a ton of paperwork and government approvals, to the point where they approve where you go and the path you travel through.

So you're agreeing that people can go there, IF they complete the paperwork and get their route approved?

[Tumeni]

Even of he had a compass or a gyroscopic compass, if you are at what you think to be the South Pole on a Round Earth, you know that have to go North to go back to the coast.

We see from the diagrams of these explorers that they didn't continue in a straight line after reaching the pole. They turned in an angle. Show me an expedition where they continued in a straight line.

If your goal is to cross Austrailia, why woukd you change your angle mid journey?

Irrelevant.

If you cross a clock face, via the centre, and you left from 28mins past the hour, to get to 1 min past, you would change direction at the centre. So what? Why does a long walk over varying terrain have to go in straight lines?

[edby]

Even of he had a compass or a gyroscopic compass, if you are at what you think to be the South Pole on a Round Earth, you know that have to go North to go back to the coast.

We see from the diagrams of these explorers that they didn't continue in a straight line after reaching the pole. They turned in an angle. Show me an expedition where they continued in a straight line.

If your goal is to cross Austrailia, why woukd you change your angle mid journey?

What the others said. The map shows why. The highway has to cross a large ice with nasty crevasses. Then you have a detour to cross the Transarctic Mountains. Australia by contrast is pretty flat and presumably safe in the middle apart from boomerangs.

[Tom Bishop]

Doesn't matter - what matters is that YOU CAN GO TO ANTARCTICA AND GO OVER ANY ROUTE YOU WANT, you just have to be able to pay, and you better be in good shape and know your way around survival equipment.

Really? The video we saw seemed to imply that Antarctica is very highly regulated and there was a ton of paperwork and government approvals, to the point where they approve where you go and the path you travel through.

So you're agreeing that people can go there, IF they complete the paperwork and get their route approved?

Yes. I think that was the thread creator was arguing too with his mention of "hmm, only a few sections are open for tourists?"

His argument that is was possible for people to go there. The government just highly regulates it.

[Curious Squirrel]

Doesn't matter - what matters is that YOU CAN GO TO ANTARCTICA AND GO OVER ANY ROUTE YOU WANT, you just have to be able to pay, and you better be in good shape and know your way around survival equipment.

Really? The video we saw seemed to imply that Antarctica is very highly regulated and there was a ton of paperwork and government approvals, to the point where they approve where you go and the path you travel through.

So you're agreeing that people can go there, IF they complete the paperwork and get their route approved?

Yes. I think that was the thread creator was arguing too with his mention of "hmm, only a few sections are open for tourists?"

His argument that is was possible for people to go there. The government just highly regulates it.

I believe his argument was that it's IMpossible to go there. Which he claims multiple times in fact. "... which given all the restrictions, its cleverly made impossible." "basically from here on out it explains thoroughly how it is made impossible through the pretence of environment protection." But to understand how difficult or not it was, one would probably want to attempt to talk to or interview some of the many people who have done it.

[Tom Bishop]

Doesn't matter - what matters is that YOU CAN GO TO ANTARCTICA AND GO OVER ANY ROUTE YOU WANT, you just have to be able to pay, and you better be in good shape and know your way around survival equipment.

Really? The video we saw seemed to imply that Antarctica is very highly regulated and there was a ton of paperwork and government approvals, to the point where they approve where you go and the path you travel through.

So you're agreeing that people can go there, IF they complete the paperwork and get their route approved?

Yes. I think that was the thread creator was arguing too with his mention of "hmm, only a few sections are open for tourists?"

His argument that is was possible for people to go there. The government just highly regulates it.

I believe his argument was that it's IMpossible to go there. Which he claims multiple times in fact. "... which given all the restrictions, its cleverly made impossible." "basically from here on out it explains thoroughly how it is made impossible through the pretence of environment protection." But to understand how difficult or not it was, one would probably want to attempt to talk to or interview some of the many people who have done it.

Well yes, it's impossible to just "go there" like people always ask us to "just go to Antarctica."

What do you think the government will do when they see you flying your plane on radar approaching restricted airspace? It's not just an open place.

Tons of paperwork and approvals are necessary, which was the point.

[Curious Squirrel]

Doesn't matter - what matters is that YOU CAN GO TO ANTARCTICA AND GO OVER ANY ROUTE YOU WANT, you just have to be able to pay, and you better be in good shape and know your way around survival equipment.

Really? The video we saw seemed to imply that Antarctica is very highly regulated and there was a ton of paperwork and government approvals, to the point where they approve where you go and the path you travel through.

So you're agreeing that people can go there, IF they complete the paperwork and get their route approved?

Yes. I think that was the thread creator was arguing too with his mention of "hmm, only a few sections are open for tourists?"

His argument that is was possible for people to go there. The government just highly regulates it.

I believe his argument was that it's IMpossible to go there. Which he claims multiple times in fact. "... which given all the restrictions, its cleverly made impossible." "basically from here on out it explains thoroughly how it is made impossible through the pretence of environment protection." But to understand how difficult or not it was, one would probably want to attempt to talk to or interview some of the many people who have done it.

Well yes, it's impossible to just "go there" like people always ask us to "just go to Antarctica."

What do you think the government will do when they see you flying your plane on radar approaching restricted airspace? It's not just an open place.

Tons of paperwork and approvals are necessary, which was the point.

I mean, we've got the 'pirate ship' that took people there unsanctioned multiple times. If you want to get pedantic, sure. But it's not 'impossible' to go to Antarctica. I imagine the bureaucratic difficulties are less than the monetary ones though. But again, the only way to actually know would be to ask people who've gone, not hypothesize.

[Max_Almond]

Talk to Jon Johanson, who flew over the South Pole without permission.

[Tom Bishop]

Talk to Jon Johanson, who flew over the South Pole without permission.

From what I read about it suggests that he managed to make it to a base in Antarctica, perhaps after doing his research on other flight paths that have been claimed to it, and then when he landed they refused to give or sell him fuel to further his journey or return home. After being held hostage for a while he was offered a flight to New Zealand.

Not particularly conclusive. In fact, we see that the scientists there aren't so nice and welcoming as commonly believed.

[Curious Squirrel]

Talk to Jon Johanson, who flew over the South Pole without permission.

From what I read about it suggests that he managed to make it to a base in Antarctica, perhaps after doing his research on other flight paths that have been claimed to it, and then when he landed they refused to give or sell him fuel to further his journey or return home. After being held hostage for a while he was offered a flight to New Zealand.

Not particularly conclusive. In fact, we see that the scientists there aren't so nice and welcoming as commonly believed.

Seems quite conclusive in a couple of ways. Firstly: You can fly over the continent apparently relatively easily without being stopped. Secondly: Doing so you're pretty much on your own, and will not receive help from 'the locals' due to government regulations. As we say in IT "A lack of planning on your end, does not constitute an emergency on mine."

I would also suggest before using such turns of phrase as 'held hostage' you might want to try and find him saying anything about the matter. Remember, if the station had not been there he would have died. Them not having the correct fuel for him, and/or obeying international treaties on the matter don't really change that.

I also can't recall anyone saying the scientists would be exceptionally 'nice and welcoming' to someone who showed up without prior approval, not to mention this article makes no comment on how he was treated while there beyond "Sanson said Johanson was being well looked after at the US base" which would at least imply they were welcoming or nice, in so far as his presence there, even if they might not have been particularly helpful in getting him out of there beyond offering other flights out.

[Tumeni]

From what I read about it suggests that he managed to make it to a base in Antarctica, perhaps after doing his research on other flight paths that have been claimed to it, and then when he landed they refused to give or sell him fuel to further his journey or return home. After being held hostage for a while he was offered a flight to New Zealand.

Not particularly conclusive. In fact, we see that the scientists there aren't so nice and welcoming as commonly believed.

So ... if you assert that the scientist were "less than welcoming", then you surely must accept that he got to their base, without govt sanction, and without being detected on radar, stopped by govt patrols, or intercepted by other Antarctica police?

Why would anyone who had planned, possibly for months or years, their own base operations with supplies for X number of residents, welcome the unexpected, unannounced arrival of anyone who swells their number to X+1

[Max_Almond]

Australian adventurer Jon Johanson has become the first person to fly solo over the South Pole in a fixed-wing aircraft but has received an icy reception after an emergency landing in the Antarctic.

Johanson had planned to fly from New Zealand, over the South Pole, and on to Argentina, but dangerous headwinds after he flew over the pole Monday forced him to turn back and make an emergency landing at the United States' McMurdo Antarctic base.

Now he doesn't have enough fuel to fly back to New Zealand, and officials at the U.S. base and New Zealand's nearby Scott base are refusing to give or sell him the fuel to fly out.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americas/12/09/antarctica.cold.shoulder.reut/

The US Antarctic base did not welcome his unscheduled landing, and initially refused to let him use its facilities. They later let him sleep in the fuel shed. But Mr Johanson said he had "no complaints at all with what happened down there".

Because of their policies on private expeditions to Antarctica, neither the Americans nor the New Zealanders at nearby Scott Base would sell him fuel, although both offered him alternative air travel back to New Zealand.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3539644

After a couple of days, Polly Vacher, who had a cache of fuel stored at nearby Scott Base (N.Z.) sold him some so he could get home, while she returned to Argentina from Rothera Base (U.K.).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/british-aviator-in-polar-rescue-armed-with-can-of-petrol-82453.html

While the list of people who have been to the south pole is long, not many people have circumnavigated the globe by crossing both poles.

I think Ranulph Fiennes is the only guy to do it on land/sea, but here's a list of flights that have done it aircraft:

Elgen Long, 1971
Pan-Am Flight 50, 1977
Calin Rosetti and Richard Norton in 1987
Dick Smith and Giles Kershaw in 1988/89
TAG Global, 2008
Bill Harrelson in 2015
Miguel Gordillo in 2016.

Here are a couple of those routes on a flat earth map:





And here's the southern portion of the Pan-Am one on the globe:



There's also a new transpolar circumnavigation flying in October of this year - 50 hours from and to New York, passing over both poles in the process:

https://www.overthepoles2018.com/

Only $12,000 a ticket, if anybody wants one.

[Tom Bishop]

Why is everyone making a sharp turn when immediately hitting the South Pole? Especially in a plane flying over it?

Makes one wonder.

[Max_Almond]

That's what makes you wonder?

How about the two maps above where the planes disappear off into space and reappear on the other side of the disk??? 

[Max_Almond]

(PS The answer to your question is because they want to go to the south pole to say they've been to the south pole. But then to get back to an actual country they have to change their course.)

[Tom Bishop]

How about the two maps above where the planes disappear off into space and reappear on the other side of the disk??? 

We only put out that map as an example for visualization purposes. The actual intricacies of the earth may be different.

[Max_Almond]

They must be if planes can fly off one side of it and reappear on the other.

Kind of like Pacman, huh?