Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The coordinate system absolutely rests upon the idea that the earth is a globe.
It's clear that most of the people on this board are here to debunk FE. I'm interested in their motivations. Do they think they're going to change minds? Is it the challenge? Have they just picked a group they can easily ridicule?Some died in the wool FErs will never change their stance, they have too much stake in FE, the cognitive dissonance is too strong. But I like to think other people browsing the site will see the FE arguments for what they are.
I guess I just think truth is important.
These two 4-cornered itineraries take roughly the same amount of time. Any flat projection of the earth needs to account for it. The problem is that you get a wrap-around problem on one of the legs that should make the trip far longer. If you bunch the countries together at the northern poll then the southern itinerary suffers. Bunching to the south messes up the north conversely. There is logically no way to arrange and stretch the continents on a flat surface that will account for these two itineraries at the same time.
However, if the earth wraps around like a tube, then the numbers can be justified. All of this makes the assumption that planes don't deliberately sometimes fly slower just to trick us.
This is evidence. Let me know what you think.
I'm not surprised that this hasn't garnered responses. The claim is always that the various maps are all inaccurate, and that the real flat Earth map hasn't yet been produced. Flight times, however, are inherently incompatible with any flat Earth map.
I think I've mooted the idea of a school project involving wire and plasticine. Cut the wire to lengths proportional to the travel times between cities, and try to make a model accordingly. It's not possible to make a flat model. Connect the wires between North and South of the Equator, and you start to build a sphere. It's the only way the connections link up. It's not perfect, of course. Shorter flights spend proportionately more time on the runway and attaining altitude, and not all flights are at the same speed. Prevailing winds will have an influence. Still, as a way of getting a general concept of the shape of the world, it's not bad.
Flight times are an excellent way to kill the flat Earth nonsense from the start, because unlike many of the ways to verify the globe, flight times involve the everyday experience of ordinary people. Tell people about measuring angles to the Sun, and they switch off. Tell them about how long it takes to fly to Hawaii, and they know that's for real.
You are providing words, not demonstration. Showing is more powerful than saying. You are making a positive claim that something is accurate. You are expected to provide something more than an assertion.Documentation available and used everyday. What would you like to see and what can you provide?
https://confluence.qps.nl/qinsy/en/world-geodetic-system-1984-wgs84-29855173.html
You need to provide evidence to demonstrate YOUR claim. If YOU are claiming that a technology or system is 100% accurate, then YOU need to demonstrate YOUR claim.
Yes, in both models.
Why would it be mutually exclusive?
"We can't have meridians in Flat model because 'they' have meridians in Globe model"?
Very "good" reason... LOL
It would be just like saying "we can't have sky in Flat model because 'they' have sky in Globe model" (or Asia, or South).
Some things exist in both.
You are acting like there is no solar noon in Flat model.
Or there is no subsolar point in Flat model?
Or there are no meridians in Flat model?
Or the Sun path is not circular in Flat model?
Or the center of Sun's path is not North pole in Flat model?
So, let me ask you for the third time: is there solar noon in Flat model?
It should be easy to answer.
Try.
We make no claim on where and when it occurs. Maybe the sun's path is circular. Maybe it's oval. Maybe the sun makes a figure 8 over the year with a bi-polar type model. Much of that seems to be unstudied. The Flat Earth is a blank canvas that will require a lot of research.
No one is really claiming certainties on the subject. But you (RE'ers in general) seem to be claiming certainties on a lot of subjects. Since you are so certain, you need to demonstrate your claims. If you cannot demonstrate your claims, then we cannot join you in your certainty.
The Lat/Lon system does assume that the earth is a sphere.
Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.
The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model. I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle. I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have.
There is nothing to explain. There is no Flat Earth map. What you are combating is a map used for visualization purposes only. We don't know if there are one or two poles; or the nature of those continents.
What you have provided may be a basis to create some kind of map, but it is not a contradiction against the Flat Earth map, since it doesn't exist.
QuoteAs far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing. I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason. Also, the majority of these routes are over water. There would be no place to refuel. As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/
Thanks.
If a bus had to stop and fill up its tank at some point along its 29 stop route, would the bus company advertise that the bus made 29 stops or 30 stops?
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.
There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.
There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.
There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.
Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.
We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.