*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12896
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #40 on: February 28, 2021, 08:30:41 AM »
This is a huge problem for FE
Even if your next claim is correct - why? The degree of consensus does not translate to correctness. There is more consensus on religious matters among Jews than there is among Muslims, and both of those have fewer differences than Christians. Does that make one group more correct than the other? The answer is a rather emphatic "no".

since the RE model has one highly detailed model that is almost universally accepted
This is fundamentally false. If you spend some time here actually discussing issues rather than just trying to blindly push your preferred agenda, you will notice that the vast majority of RE posters here disagree with many fundamental assumptions of the "mainstream" RE model. The difference does not lie in the level of consensus (if anything, RE'ers are less consistent when allowed to speak freely), but rather different approaches to democratised knowledge. The RE doctrine allows the excuse of "oh, yeah, none of the posters here fully endorse or understand RET, but they're not who you should be listening to!" This is a deep philosophical difference we probably won't bridge any time soon. We want thoughts to be free, you want them to be strictly supervised by people you fetishise.

Show an A0 300 dpi map and then we can see if it matches reality.
For as long as you're presupposing your preferred worldview as "reality", you're wasting your time and ours. Do what you will with your time, but please respect ours.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2021, 08:33:13 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Peter Winfield

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #41 on: February 28, 2021, 09:09:22 AM »
The degree of consensus does not translate to correctness. There is more consensus on religious matters among Jews than there is among Muslims, and both of those have fewer differences than Christians. Does that make one group more correct than the other? The answer is a rather emphatic "no".

This example is from religious belief rather than Science. In Science, consensus is everything.

since the RE model has one highly detailed model that is almost universally accepted
This is fundamentally false. If you spend some time here actually discussing issues rather than just trying to blindly push your preferred agenda, you will notice that the vast majority of RE posters here disagree with many fundamental assumptions of the "mainstream" RE model.

Well I haven't seen this at all, so I must be reading the wrong posts. I do have many friends whose work relies on there being an extremely accurate model of the motion of the Earth, Sun, and stars, and there has never been any mention of inconsistency with that model.

Show an A0 300 dpi map and then we can see if it matches reality.
For as long as you're presupposing your preferred worldview as "reality", you're wasting your time and ours.

Sorry, I was not clear. By "reality" I meant the things that can be tested and measured by anyone.

I did not pre-suppose anything about that flat Earth map, I simply asked for a copy so I could check it against what I can see and measure.

*

Offline Elyn95

  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #42 on: February 28, 2021, 09:53:12 PM »


Well I haven't seen this at all, so I must be reading the wrong posts. I do have many friends whose work relies on there being an extremely accurate model of the motion of the Earth, Sun, and stars, and there has never been any mention of inconsistency with that model.


Just because there hasn't been any mention of inconsistency, doesn't mean that there hasn't been! People see what they want to see and ignore data that does match their presuppositions. A working model can be designed to fit within certain parameters which then leave out margins of error. The error is ignored becuase it doesn't appear within the data and the myth is perpetuated. Can you give some more conrete examples of your friends' work?
The production of too many useless things results in too many useless people.

Peter Winfield

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #43 on: February 28, 2021, 10:30:07 PM »
Quote
Well I haven't seen this at all, so I must be reading the wrong posts. I do have many friends whose work relies on there being an extremely accurate model of the motion of the Earth, Sun, and stars, and there has never been any mention of inconsistency with that model.

Just because there hasn't been any mention of inconsistency, doesn't mean that there hasn't been! People see what they want to see and ignore data that does match their presuppositions.

I really don't think that a few presuppositions are going to cover the fact the satellite you are using doesn't actually exist, or that a place you visited isn't really there.

If the Earth is flat it is not a minor tweak to existing models, it is a fundamental re-write. It isn't the sort of thing that can slip through without being noticed, or fudged because of existing presuppositions. FE makes fundamental claims about large areas of science; claims that have not even been properly made let alone proved.

*

Offline Elyn95

  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #44 on: March 01, 2021, 01:00:13 PM »
You still haven't given any concrete examples. And given two very unspecific examples you have cited (satellites - there are plenty of reasons these can still work in a FE model, and places that don't exist - can you name one? If you are referring the "Australia controversy" then you are buying into an anti-FE discourse that is both outdated and innacurate.)

Quote
Well I haven't seen this at all, so I must be reading the wrong posts. I do have many friends whose work relies on there being an extremely accurate model of the motion of the Earth, Sun, and stars, and there has never been any mention of inconsistency with that model.

Just because there hasn't been any mention of inconsistency, doesn't mean that there hasn't been! People see what they want to see and ignore data that does match their presuppositions.

I really don't think that a few presuppositions are going to cover the fact the satellite you are using doesn't actually exist, or that a place you visited isn't really there.

If the Earth is flat it is not a minor tweak to existing models, it is a fundamental re-write. It isn't the sort of thing that can slip through without being noticed, or fudged because of existing presuppositions. FE makes fundamental claims about large areas of science; claims that have not even been properly made let alone proved.
The production of too many useless things results in too many useless people.

Peter Winfield

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #45 on: March 01, 2021, 02:14:45 PM »
You still haven't given any concrete examples. And given two very unspecific examples you have cited (satellites - there are plenty of reasons these can still work in a FE model, and places that don't exist - can you name one?[])

This is interesting...

What FE model can accurately predict the locations of multiple satellites tracked from multiple stations throughout the Earth? Because the only way to do this is to know where those tracking stations are. And the only way to do that is to have a working map of the flat Earth, which is what this thread has been asking for but no FE supporter is able to provide.

Oh, and the place that FE claim does not exist is Antarctica. Because the South Pole is incompatible with every FE model so the South Pole and the continent around it cannot exist.

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 1351
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #46 on: March 01, 2021, 03:34:29 PM »
You still haven't given any concrete examples. And given two very unspecific examples you have cited (satellites - there are plenty of reasons these can still work in a FE model, and places that don't exist - can you name one? If you are referring the "Australia controversy" then you are buying into an anti-FE discourse that is both outdated and innacurate.)

I'd also be interested in hearing how the FE model explains satellites, I didn't find a Wiki page on the subject.

How do they stay up there, going around in their orbits?  Can you map the route of a satellite on a Flat Earth map and explain how it travels that path?

How do GPS satellites stay up at their operational altitude of 20,000km and move at 14,000km/hour in a Flat Earth model?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #47 on: March 01, 2021, 06:16:53 PM »
Its my understanding that the earth spins and churns the atmosphere above it and satellites rotate in this stream.   Occasionally they will fire up there engines so as not fall back into the thick atmosphere. 

 
Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1432
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #48 on: March 01, 2021, 06:27:37 PM »
Well, if the earth is accelerating upwards at a constant rate, then any satellites above the earth would have to run their engines continuously to keep a constant distance above the surface.  That scenario is untenable under FET because any satellite would quickly run out of fuel and couldn't stay up there for years & years like is happening now.  It would be helpful if you revised your 'understanding'.     
You can lead a flat earther to the curve but you can't make him think!

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2021, 06:59:57 PM »
Its my understanding that the earth spins and churns the atmosphere above it and satellites rotate in this stream.   Occasionally they will fire up there engines so as not fall back into the thick atmosphere.

What part of the atmosphere are satellites in? And what about geostationary ones versus non?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2021, 08:05:35 PM »
Stack, good questions.  Satellites range from 2,000km to 40,000km above earth.  70k km is the record.  They travel more quickly closer to earth (about 90 min orbits) and go up to 24 hour orbits around 35k km which is the Geo-Stationary satellites you talked about.

On a flat earth, I imagine it looks something like this.
 

Satellites seem to orbit around the sun on a FE Map.  See the official NASA photos of satellite orbits and the Altitude versus speed graph of satellites.

What propels a satellite to circle so fast in Low Earth Orbit is beyond me right now.  Any ideas? 


Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #51 on: March 01, 2021, 08:20:20 PM »
Stack, good questions.  Satellites range from 2,000km to 40,000km above earth.  70k km is the record.  They travel more quickly closer to earth (about 90 min orbits) and go up to 24 hour orbits around 35k km which is the Geo-Stationary satellites you talked about.

On a flat earth, I imagine it looks something like this.
 

Satellites seem to orbit around the sun on a FE Map.  See the official NASA photos of satellite orbits and the Altitude versus speed graph of satellites.

What propels a satellite to circle so fast in Low Earth Orbit is beyond me right now.  Any ideas?

How did you arrive at satellites orbit the sun on a flat earth? On your graphic, for where the sun is at that moment, does all of Europe and Asia loose satellite coverage? Especially during their rotation when they are way over on the left side. That would mean massive outages occur all over the disc all the time for different huge regions. That doesn't happen. Again, reality check.

As well, you'r not addressing geostationary satellites. On a flat earth, they would just sit there, hover, over one location. How might that "hovering" be achieved?

What's this 35k you're talking about and where did it come from?

(And hey, congrats, you learned how to post images properly. Well done.)


*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1432
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #52 on: March 01, 2021, 09:00:29 PM »
The INMARSAT satellites are a bit more than 35k KM above the earth's equator in geo-stationary orbit.  I personally have plenty of experience using these 'birds' for communications on the ships I worked on.  The biggest problem with this under FET is that these satellites should be continuously available at all times about anywhere on the earth.  On an actual basis, this is NOT a fact.  When we were on a long haul passage between Asia and Europe or the USA I would have to switch to a different satellite a time or two because as we progressed Easterly or Westerly the satellites would go below the earth's horizon even though they were up in the sky about 35k KM.  This fact was easily observable on my computer screen because I could see the elevation and azimuth data on the dish's gimble mount changing.  As we progressed the dish would aim closer & closer to the horizon and the signal would get too weak to transfer data at a reasonable rate.  At that point I would tell the system to aim at a closer satellite that was ahead of us and rising in the sky. The data rates went up and I could upload & download emails & other traffic to the office to keep everyone happy.  I know that the distance to the satellites were about right because it was easy to 'ping' the 'bird' and you could see the delay times.  These delay times would correspond to the expected distances very closely.  Later on we also started to use a different company that had higher speed data but the problems were the same and I had to also switch satellites from time to time to maintain communications.  In this case this scenario disproves the flat earth and firmly proves the globe earth.  No one has ever been able to come up with an acceptable flat earth explanation for what I had to deal with every day while working.     
« Last Edit: March 01, 2021, 09:02:29 PM by RonJ »
You can lead a flat earther to the curve but you can't make him think!

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #53 on: March 01, 2021, 09:17:38 PM »
Quote from: stack
[/quote

Thanks Stack..  I appreciate your input on the matter.

I arrived at this picture by plotting the location of the satellites as shown by attached picture.  The satellite goes through north America, under south Africa and Australia then returns for another loop a bit farther away.

If the satellite was way left of the map, you have a fair point about outages.  I'd have to reference my version of things and how I feel the sun is actually centered over Antarctica and the earth tilts towards the sun near the equator, so essentially, if your looking down, all sides of the earth should be underneath the circular path of satellites.  This assumes satellites gain altitude at night, but that's another topic.

Geostationary satellites would just have to rotate the same rate as earth.  About 3 is enough to cover all the landmass.

Again, im not super positive how satellites stay in orbit or what propels them.  It may be similar to planetary orbits.

The 35k altitude just shows up when you Google it.




Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #54 on: March 01, 2021, 09:35:37 PM »
Ron your saying that you had to switch Geo Stationary satellites because you moved to far away from some and was lost beyond the horizon?  On a Flat Map, it follows the same fundamentals as a sunset I think.  The farther you move away from it, it appears to sink and dip beyond the horizon...  Signal loss might be a function of distance and atmospheric interference.

Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #55 on: March 01, 2021, 09:36:17 PM »

Thanks Stack..  I appreciate your input on the matter.

I arrived at this picture by plotting the location of the satellites as shown by attached picture.  The satellite goes through north America, under south Africa and Australia then returns for another loop a bit farther away.

If the satellite was way left of the map, you have a fair point about outages.  I'd have to reference my version of things and how I feel the sun is actually centered over Antarctica and the earth tilts towards the sun near the equator, so essentially, if your looking down, all sides of the earth should be underneath the circular path of satellites.  This assumes satellites gain altitude at night, but that's another topic.

Geostationary satellites would just have to rotate the same rate as earth.  About 3 is enough to cover all the landmass.

Again, im not super positive how satellites stay in orbit or what propels them.  It may be similar to planetary orbits.

The 35k altitude just shows up when you Google it.

Here again we run headlong right into reality. You having a notion that the sun is centered over Antartica doesn't even come close to what is observed reality by billions of people every day for, well for forever, regardless of the shape of the earth or maps or whatever. So what is compelling you to say that when you can literally go outside yourself and look up and see where the sun is?

As well, there are 402 geosynchronous satellites, not just 3. You can track them if you want.

Are these just all thought experiments? Sort of "what ifs" just for fun?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #56 on: March 01, 2021, 10:30:43 PM »
Stack, its not an original idea.  In the RE model the sun is perpendicular to the equator, but the earth tilts forward and back during the year.   That's what I'm saying.  Except in a flat earth, you can tilt the earth towards the sun so it hovers above the same area and then tilt it again with the changing seasons.
Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2020
    • View Profile
Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #57 on: March 01, 2021, 10:36:57 PM »
Stack, its not an original idea.  In the RE model the sun is perpendicular to the equator, but the earth tilts forward and back during the year.   That's what I'm saying.  Except in a flat earth, you can tilt the earth towards the sun so it hovers above the same area and then tilt it again with the changing seasons.

Woah, wait a minute, I somehow missed that. The flat earth tilts? In what manner, as in what is the tilting orientation? How often does it happen? How much does it tilt? What causes it to tilt? How does it know when to tilt?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #58 on: March 01, 2021, 11:23:41 PM »
Lol, I had a few threads about this, but in short, it tilts towards the sun so it's centered above the equator.  It then wobbles slowly back and forth every year to give you change of seasons.  It also spins once every 24 hours but nobody likes that idea, lol.
Is the Earth flat and sky is round?  Or is the Earth round and the sky flat?

Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« Reply #59 on: March 01, 2021, 11:33:59 PM »
since the RE model has one highly detailed model that is almost universally accepted
This is fundamentally false. If you spend some time here actually discussing issues rather than just trying to blindly push your preferred agenda, you will notice that the vast majority of RE posters here disagree with many fundamental assumptions of the "mainstream" RE model. The difference does not lie in the level of consensus (if anything, RE'ers are less consistent when allowed to speak freely), but rather different approaches to democratised knowledge. The RE doctrine allows the excuse of "oh, yeah, none of the posters here fully endorse or understand RET, but they're not who you should be listening to!" This is a deep philosophical difference we probably won't bridge any time soon. We want thoughts to be free, you want them to be strictly supervised by people you fetishise.

It's not about fetishising anyone. It's simply recognising that not everyone has the same abilities or experience.
You do know this, of course. If your car doesn't work then who you gonna call? Not the Ghostbusters, obviously. You'd call a mechanic.
If you're ill you'd go to a doctor. You recognise that people are experts in certain fields and are the best people to ask to help you with certain problems.

Of course everyone has the right to an opinion, but you know that not everyone's opinion is equally valid.
So yeah, if you want to know what mainstream scientific theories are then maybe ask a scientist or read a book written by one, rather than looking at what some bloke on the internet (like me) has to say. I think I understand scientific theories better than most, but I wouldn't claim to be an expert by any means.

And of course there are debates within the scientific community, but not about, say, the shape of the earth or the shape of landmasses or how far apart they are. This stuff is known, it IS universally accepted and there are multiple technologies which rely on these things.

Now, I've just said you wouldn't necessarily expect complete agreement on science amongst a load of internet RE randoms but I'm expecting some amongst a load of internet FE randoms. Isn't that unfair? I don't think so, because you are the guys who are claiming to have discovered new theories which would revolutionise our understanding of reality. If you want to be taken seriously you should have some vaguely coherent model. The fact there isn't any working FE map which matches flight routes and times is pretty damning.

« Last Edit: March 01, 2021, 11:36:03 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis