[TheNormalOne]

Why does it have to be "interactive" to be proven correct?  That should definitely NOT be necessary for a flat earth.  And, for a globe....well, they're not interactive at all.  I'm sure there's a giant globe out there that's accurate and not interactive.

 Because any non-interactive map is severely weakened by observations that I've made when traveling internationally. If you provide me with a non-interactive map and I guarantee that I can provide overwhelming evidence showing that it is wrong using flight times and distances for flights that I've personally taken and verified. As well as the map not  matching shipping times, shipping distances shipping paths, travel times, travel paths, and travel distances.

Right, Zoom out fully on the bing map, screenshot it and work from that screenshot instead of the website. Stop talking about interactive scales. We want a picture of the world in full that is correctly sized and shaped, not one that's distorted. if it distorts, it means the distortion is making up for a projection of a spheroid or any other shape that isn't flat. It's that simple. The bing map regardless of what you think is still a globe map not a 'flat earth' map. There is no way round that fact.

By my definition Bing maps is not distorted.

There have been advancements in technology. You are asking for a map from the 1900's. I'm saying that you should consider that, in the past 200 years, advancements have been made in cartography and now we are able to create interactive online maps which are much less distorted (by both of our definitions of distortion when referring to maps) than the maps from over 100 years ago. Why are you wanting a map which is 100 year old when you could have a new, higher tech, more accurate interactive map?

What is your definition? I`m sorry if you already laid it out earlier in this tread, but I could not find it. You clearly disagree with Microsofts definition, and other definitions of distortions when it comes to projecting a sphere to a flat surface; ["Representing the earth's surface in two dimensions causes distortion in the shape, area, distance, or direction of the data. A map projection uses mathematical formulas to relate spherical coordinates on the globe to flat, planar coordinates. Different projections cause different types of distortion."[/i]

[inquisitive]

Many paper maps have lat/long lines drawn on them showing how the projection works.

[iamcpc]

What is your definition? I`m sorry if you already laid it out earlier in this tread, but I could not find it. You clearly disagree with Microsofts definition, and other definitions of distortions when it comes to projecting a sphere to a flat surface; ["Representing the earth's surface in two dimensions causes distortion in the shape, area, distance, or direction of the data. A map projection uses mathematical formulas to relate spherical coordinates on the globe to flat, planar coordinates. Different projections cause different types of distortion."[/i]

It meets all of the criteria listed below I consider that map to undistorted:

1. The map has countries the correct size (based on the interactive scale of the map).
2. The map shows countries the correct distance away from each other (based on the interactive scale of the map).
3. The map has Countries the correct direction relative to each other
4. The map is usable to accurately navigate every country on earth

"It looks kind of like a map that has a globe projection! therefore it does not count"  thus FORCING this conversation to remain on the red herring.

Ummm, so far there is only one where I can't find documentation for, timeanddate. You've seen the list. All the others are documented globe projections.

Finally. That is a Flat earth map!

And it's not a "does not count" thing for the millionth time its that a true flat earth map should have NO projection - Again, the entire point of this thread.

For the millionth time it is a "does not count" thing.

Why don't you present a layout or even just a methodology that would be a good framework for starting a flat earth map.

I presented several different ideas on how to create a flat earth map and they were all ignored.

I presented like a dozen different layouts and everyone stood up, pointed at the layout, and proudly proclaimed that it does not count because of "projection". 

Many, many people have tried to create a true and accurate flat earth map that matches reality. ALL have failed. And I can see why.

Because any time a map is presented which is true based on the scale of the map, accurate  based on the scale of the map, and matches reality based on the scale of the map you say NO WAY BUD THAT MAP DOES NOT COUNT!!

when flight times in the Southern hemiplane didn't fit his model, he simply claimed those flights were fake. Went as far to claim that Qantas, for example, simply murders all the passengers on those fake flights to hide that they are fake. Lovely logic.

Hmmm someone claiming that a flight is fake

This sounds just like someone claiming that a FE map is "fake" because of "projection"



Much like he points at the flights and says "DOES NOT COUNT"
You point at maps or models and say "DOES NOT COUNT"

[ChrisTP]

iamcpc, I don't think you understand why people are rejecting the Bing map as a 'flat earth' map. If you understood then you wouldn't simply be saying you disagree.

Tell me, if you saw earth from really far away so that you could see the entire surface of earth, do you think it'd look exactly, 100% like the shape of the Bing map visually? Do you think Greenland is literally that big compared to other countries nearer the equator?

[iamcpc]

iamcpc, I don't think you understand why people are rejecting the Bing map as a 'flat earth' map. If you understood then you wouldn't simply be saying you disagree.

I understand and I disagree.

Tell me, if you saw earth from really far away so that you could see the entire surface of earth, do you think it'd look exactly, 100% like the shape of the Bing map visually? Do you think Greenland is literally that big compared to other countries nearer the equator?

I'm not a cartographer. Even if I was i'm not interested in what a cartographer would imagine he would see from outer space. I'm interested in what the cartographer KNOWS the map should look like in a way that

1. Has countries the correct size (based on the interactive scale of the map).
2. Shows countries the correct distance away from each other (based on the interactive scale of the map).
3. Has countries the correct direction relative to each other.
4. Is usable to accurately navigate every country on earth.

[stack]

"It looks kind of like a map that has a globe projection! therefore it does not count"  thus FORCING this conversation to remain on the red herring.

Ummm, so far there is only one where I can't find documentation for, timeanddate. You've seen the list. All the others are documented globe projections.

Finally. That is a Flat earth map!

Cool, here's your flat earth map, now what? For one, now you'll have to explain how a plane flying West gets from San Francisco to Tokyo.

[iamcpc]

Cool, here's your flat earth map, now what? For one, now you'll have to explain how a plane flying West gets from San Francisco to Tokyo.

I've already done this for you 3/21/2019 here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14046.msg187564#msg187564

I described it and took print screens and drew arrows on them. Please don't make me do it again.

[Bad Puppy]

This was on timeanddate.com's FAQ page.   https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth-help.html

-I've heard rumors. Is the map really based on a flat Earth model?

No. The Earth is a globe.

iamcpc, it appears that the website is explicitly stating that the map they use is not based on a flat earth model.  Again, there's no point trying to make a flat earth map out of a globe earth projection.  If it was something that could be done this way, there would already be an accurate flat earth map.  But, there isn't.  So, clearly it must be tackled from a different direction.

[stack]

Cool, here's your flat earth map, now what? For one, now you'll have to explain how a plane flying West gets from San Francisco to Tokyo.

I've already done this for you 3/21/2019 here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14046.msg187564#msg187564

I described it and took print screens and drew arrows on them. Please don't make me do it again.

No. Show my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

[iamcpc]

No. Show my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

first off that is no my flat earth map. That is the only map of the earth that you have not stood up and said "DOES NOT COUNT" to.


I don't see the point of continuing this discussion.

I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"

I present a map that you have not yet said "DOES NOT COUNT" and you ask me to describe a plane flight.
I describe the plane flight "DOES NOT COUNT" It must be described differently

I could try to describe it differently and I know where this is going. You're going to say "DOES NOT COUNT"

Using the exact same non interactive image that you have given me here is the flight diagrammed between California and Japan. I'm sure, for whatever reason you come up with, you will proudly say "DOES NOT COUNT"

This is not a discussion or even a debate. It's me jumping through hoop after hoop after hoop and you saying that hoop didn't count jump through this one.


Here is the flight you described diagrammed from a simple google search of SF to Tokyo flight path.


I'm sure you will respond with "DOES NOT COUNT". Maybe because the map is a different color? I bet so.



Here's one that is using the same map and the same colors


I'm waiting to hear now why this one "DOES NOT COUNT"

[stack]

No. Show my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

I don't see the point of continuing this discussion.

I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"

I present a map that you have not yet said "DOES NOT COUNT" and you ask me to describe a plane flight.
I describe the plane flight "DOES NOT COUNT" It must be described differently

No, I actually conceded that I had no documentation to prove that timeandate's map was a projection after you wrote "Finally. That is a Flat earth map!". So I wrote, "Cool, here's your flat earth map." Meaning it counts.

Then I ask you about a plane flight on the map that does count: Draw my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

And you proceed to throw a fit and fall in it because this much I know:

You can't draw my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

It's pretty clear what you're doing. When finally allowed your map and given a problem to solve with it that you can't, you dodge the issue. I'm very disappointed you would do such a thing. Verging on disingenuous.

[iamcpc]

You can't draw my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map.

I already did. I'm sure you will say it "DOES NOT COUNT"

your flat earth map

Oh no sir. This is not my flat earth map. I just kept presenting maps until you stopped saying "DOES NOT COUNT!"

It's pretty clear what you're doing. When finally allowed your map

I was never allowed my map. I was not allowed my top 10 maps. I just had to keep linking maps until you FINALLY stopped saying they didn't count.

and given a problem to solve with it that you can't, you dodge the issue.

I drew the line on the map. How is that dodging the issue?

I'm very disappointed you would do such a thing. Verging on disingenuous.

You're right I could resort to countering your "DOES NOT COUNT" with my own. Normally these "THAT DOES NOT COUNT" tactics come from the FE side.

The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

oh wait my image was a snip of the original map and not the entire original map picture. it's still the same freaking thing. The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes hawaii, lands in Japan.


let me save the image instead of a print screen of the image and do it that way. I've drawn these lines so many times. i'm sure after all of this you will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

[stack]

let me save the image instead of a print screen of the image and do it that way. I've drawn these lines so many times. i'm sure after all of this you will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

As I mentioned before, I conceded that I can't prove with documentation that timeanddate is a projection map therefore it "counts".

I simply raised a problem with this type of flat earth model/map. It's called the "Pac-man" effect. I'm sure you've read about it here. In this model, my plane is magically "pac-manning" off the left side of the map and magically appearing on the right side. How did it sneak from the left side to the right unnoticed?



So we can certainly accept this model/map as a starting point as we can't prove it has anything to do with a globe projection and may very well represent a flat earth on a flat 2d plane. So it 'counts'. But you do have to answer to some pressing issues that arise from this model/map as well. Get it?

[iamcpc]

I simply raised a problem with this type of flat earth model/map. It's called the "Pac-man" effect. I'm sure you've read about it here. In this model, my plane is magically "pac-manning" off the left side of the map and magically appearing on the right side. How did it sneak from the left side to the right unnoticed?

Unfortunately for me you rejected every interactive map i found so I was limited to one that was not interactive.

I drew this line many times in many different ways using many different maps. I guess all of those "DO NOT COUNT"
Apparently you also rejected my explanation.


You don't teleport from one end to the other. Let me describe the flight in words again:

The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes Hawaii, lands in Japan.

It's very clear.



Here is an image. Are you able to prove that this image is from a map which is based on a globe, sphere, or oblate spheroid projection? I believe you can and will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

[stack]

I simply raised a problem with this type of flat earth model/map. It's called the "Pac-man" effect. I'm sure you've read about it here. In this model, my plane is magically "pac-manning" off the left side of the map and magically appearing on the right side. How did it sneak from the left side to the right unnoticed?

Unfortunately for me you rejected every interactive map i found so I was limited to one that was not interactive.

I drew this line many times in many different ways using many different maps. I guess all of those "DO NOT COUNT"
Apparently you also rejected my explanation.


You don't teleport from one end to the other. Let me describe the flight in words again:

The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes Hawaii, lands in Japan.

It's very clear.

You see, it's not. Not clear at all. For this exercise we are taking the continental layout from the timeanddate map which we can't prove is derived from a globe projection. Much like when an AE Monopole FEr uses their model (projection or no projection, doesn't matter) and maps out a flight path they show it on the whole map, as is, one world view.

So my flight on that model would look like this:



Regardless of whether anyone thinks that is the real flight path or not is not the issue at the moment. At least it doesn't pac man like is shown in your model. You need a one world view model where you show flight paths at the same time not dropping off any sides and needing to teleport.

Here is an image. Are you able to prove that this image is from a map which is based on a globe, sphere, or oblate spheroid projection? I believe you can and will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

I have no idea if it's based on a globe projection or not. But there is a lot of the world missing from the image.

[iamcpc]

At least it doesn't pac man like is shown in your model.

That is not my FE model. The depiction of the Earth which most closely resembles my FE model is bing maps which you have rejected. You demanded that I draw lines on a non interactive static image which I believe is much less accurate to what the world really looks like because that map does not even have a scale on it. Unfortunately any map that I found that had a scale, or was interactive, which was closer to my FE model you proudly said "DOES NOT COUNT"

My model does not pac man.

In addition that map has a large circle, which I assume to be the moon shown to be static over Africa. I could easily look at that and say "DOES NOT COUNT" but I don't because it's lame when done by FE people saying that flights don't count just like it's lame when done by you saying that maps or models or lines drawn between countries don't count.

I have no idea if it's based on a globe projection or not. But there is a lot of the world missing from the image.

Much like there is a lot of the world missing in a flight between California and Japan.

You see, it's not. Not clear at all.

I really question your sincerity when you say that it's unclear. I've explained this to you before, in great detail, as I am doing again. I believe that you are of at least slightly above average intelligence therefore capable of googling this flight path and seeing it shown, on least a dozen different websites.

What is unclear about the flight described below?

The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes hawaii, lands in Japan.


what is unclear about this image:

[stack]

At least it doesn't pac man like is shown in your model.

That is not my FE model. The depiction of the Earth which most closely resembles my FE model is bing maps which you have rejected. You demanded that I draw lines on a non interactive static image which I believe is much less accurate to what the world really looks like because that map does not even have a scale on it. Unfortunately any map that I found that had a scale, or was interactive, which was closer to my FE model you proudly said "DOES NOT COUNT"

My model does not pac man.

I'm not sure where we're missing the mark. Usually, if I'm explaining something to someone, 9 times out of 10, if they are not picking up what I'm putting down it's because I'm not explaining it well enough. Let's stick to the notion that we're still in the 90% realm.

- You like the bing map. So do I.
- You like that it's interactive, you can zoom in or zoom out. So do I.
- You think that the continental layout of the bing map is way more correct than this north pole centered business we see in the common FE map/model. Cool, so do I.
- So, for an FE Continental layout, let's go with the bing model. We both like it.

So here's the flat earth world Bing map we hang on the classroom wall:



I'm going with calling it a flat earth world map hanging on the classroom wall because it is meant to represent the flat earth as we know it to be on a flat piece of paper attached to our flat classroom wall.

I'll stop here to see if we're on the same page. Are we on the same page?

EDIT:

I'm stumbled upon this which may be a better explainer than I am providing of the problem space. Have look. Right up front it references a lot of the issues we've already been talking about here.

[iamcpc]

I'll stop here to see if we're on the same page. Are we on the same page?

yes. I just want to reiterate that the most accurate FE model that iIve ever seen is interactive and not a static image.

[ChrisTP]

I'll stop here to see if we're on the same page. Are we on the same page?

yes. I just want to reiterate that the most accurate FE model that iIve ever seen is interactive and not a static image.

What difference should that make? unless you think land distorts in real life the further away you are a static flat earth map is just as accurate.

[reer]

In my question about airline flight times, I have suggested a very simple method to create a flat earth map, using flight times between cities. See this post:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15105.msg196360#msg196360

Can someone from the FE community do this and report back with the result?