*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #40 on: December 27, 2016, 03:17:27 AM »
and successful navigation is as good a proof of accuracy as there is, maybe the ONLY proof there is.
Well, if we accept this as true (which I categorically don't, but let's humour you), then RE and FE maps are equally accurate.
I assume that you "categorically don't" accept that an "appropriate projection of the globe" is accurate for navigation.

Well, that's a bit odd, Captain Cook used "Globe maps" to find tiny places in the Pacific, such as Tahiti.
Sir Charles Kingsford Smith used "Globe maps" to find tiny refuelling stops, and his distances had to be fairly close, or he would run out of fuel.
QANTAS route planners use "Globe maps" to plan the Sydney to/from Santiago and to/from Johannesburg routes. Their distances have to be close, because they are not far from the safe range of the aircraft used.
In all the cases the distances on the "Ice-Wall" map is far in excess of the distance on the Globe and there is no hint that any of these used the "Bipolar Map".

So, maybe you could indicate where the Flat Earth map is more accurate than an appropriate projection of the globe.

Offline geckothegeek

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 1166
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #41 on: January 18, 2017, 04:14:44 AM »
And how do you get around the problem that even some so-called "true flat earth believers" say "There is no flat earth map" ?
Stick close to your P.C's and never go to sea
And You All may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Yes, Never, Never, Never go to sea
Just look out your windows,
Flat ! Flat ! Flat !
Is all that you shall see !

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8111
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #42 on: January 18, 2017, 05:09:02 PM »
and successful navigation is as good a proof of accuracy as there is, maybe the ONLY proof there is.
Well, if we accept this as true (which I categorically don't, but let's humour you), then RE and FE maps are equally accurate.
I assume that you "categorically don't" accept that an "appropriate projection of the globe" is accurate for navigation.
No, I categorically don't accept that successful navigation is a good proof of accuracy (I quoted you saying it directly before disagreeing with you - this shouldn't be hard to figure out). I then continue to say that if it was a proof of accuracy, then both maps are proven to be accurate.

The rest of your post is based on a faulty assumption, so I'll save you the effort of reading through my responses.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1362
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #43 on: January 19, 2017, 01:30:07 AM »
and successful navigation is as good a proof of accuracy as there is, maybe the ONLY proof there is.
Well, if we accept this as true (which I categorically don't, but let's humour you), then RE and FE maps are equally accurate.
I assume that you "categorically don't" accept that an "appropriate projection of the globe" is accurate for navigation.
No, I categorically don't accept that successful navigation is a good proof of accuracy (I quoted you saying it directly before disagreeing with you - this shouldn't be hard to figure out). I then continue to say that if it was a proof of accuracy, then both maps are proven to be accurate.

The rest of your post is based on a faulty assumption, so I'll save you the effort of reading through my responses.
This is hardly the place to start a debate. But if you like you start a thread in the General or Debate section, we could politely discuss how
QANTAS flights 27 and 28 manage ro fly non-stop Sydney to/from Santiago and
QANTAS flights 63 and 64 manage ro fly non-stop Sydney to/from Johannesburg.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8111
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #44 on: January 19, 2017, 02:33:58 AM »
we could politely discuss how
QANTAS flights 27 and 28 manage ro fly non-stop Sydney to/from Santiago and
QANTAS flights 63 and 64 manage ro fly non-stop Sydney to/from Johannesburg.
I don't see how any of that is relevant to your claim that successful navigation is a measure of a map's accuracy.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline Rekt

  • *
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #45 on: January 26, 2017, 02:38:27 PM »
We started to Asia with these cities:

moscow sheremetyevo
beijing capital
new delhi indira gandhi
astana int
dubai international


But we see that Beijing is in incorrect place and distances are so wrong. See how the planes going a wrong route when coming from Beijing to Delhi. They do not extend the road map faulty. So we extract out the beijing  from the list. I'll find another city instead of Beijing.

See these 4 photos to understand what is going on. It is enough to fly directly China to India but plane unnecessarily traveling around a lot of country. Look to 4th picture first.









moscow sheremetyevo
new delhi indira gandhi
astana int
dubai international
Guangzhou Baiyun Int'l (instead of Beijing)

After that we see the globe map of the Asia completely wrong. The planned distances does not match with the flying distances. So we'll get "shortest" flying distances instead of "planning distances". Then we'll correct it by reducing 10 kms because of fixes statistic errors.

moscow sheremetyevo vs new delhi indira gandhi (planned 4367 kms)

4.440 km
4.540 km
4.513 km
4.598 km
4.509 km
4.497 km
4.551 km
4.484 km
4.744 km
4.567 km
4.480 km
4.451 km
4.614 km
4.616 km
4.519 km
4.517 km
4.510 km
4.503 km
4.700 km
4.658 km
4.595 km
4.586 km
4.503 km

minimum value is: 4.440 kms
statistic fix: -10kms

moscow sheremetyevo vs new delhi indira gandhi exact distance : 4.430 kms (by flying routes)
Those flight directions, such as avoiding certain countries, arise from politics and weather

*

Offline TriangularEarth

  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Ayy dont ban me for free speach
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #46 on: April 27, 2017, 11:55:51 AM »
Ok, so your using flight paths to determine distances. But, the thing is, did you measure it yourself or believe everything you see on the internet?

Have you ever thought that it would not help the airlines to lie about distances? What good would google get from using 'incorrect data'? Does google just pluck up a random number? Are you aware that not all flights are in a streight line? Why with Asia did you use a flight path that clearly wasn't straight? How does you saying "it's possible " validate it?
free speech pal, get used to it

İntikam

Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #47 on: May 01, 2017, 08:45:29 PM »
Ok, so your using flight paths to determine distances. But, the thing is, did you measure it yourself or believe everything you see on the internet?

Have you ever thought that it would not help the airlines to lie about distances? What good would google get from using 'incorrect data'? Does google just pluck up a random number? Are you aware that not all flights are in a streight line? Why with Asia did you use a flight path that clearly wasn't straight? How does you saying "it's possible " validate it?

If you agree, we should measure distance from Beijing to New Delhi with a metre, instead of using internet, ok.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #48 on: September 25, 2017, 02:05:20 PM »
Using distances overland that cross national boundaries is a VERY unreliable method.   Aircraft routinely have to route around countries that are hostile to them in order to avoid political grief and the risk of being shot down.

Do your calculations over long transcontinental flights (predominantly over water) - and the results work out beautifully.
Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?

Re: Flat Continents
« Reply #49 on: January 21, 2018, 09:08:47 PM »
I live in Australia.  I've flown from Sydney to LA (and back again) twice. 

A few facts:
The trip takes 13 hours 45 minutes, either way. 
The aircraft was a 747-400.
The distance from Sydney to LA is just over 12,000 km.
A 747-400 has a rated speed of 988 km/h.  Allowing a bit of wiggle room, that allows for a 13-14 hour trip.

However, by your map, the aircraft has a somewhat greater distance to travel, and would have to exceed the speed of sound to make the trip. 
The kicker?  The 747-400 is not a supersonic aircraft.  I'm interested in how this works, if the earth is not a globe.

Another good one:
Australia and New Zealand are close neighbours, geographically and politically speaking.  The distance from Sydney to Auckland via global measurement is 2,155 km.  This gets flown every day, and boats travel to and from on a regular basis.  Why is it that they don't use more fuel than they've allotted for that distance?  Again, I'm interested in how this works.

And then there's Antarctica.  Because you're aware, are you not, that there are several scientific outposts on the continent?  You weren't?  Australia actually controls a large chunk of it.  Interestingly enough, a friend of mine who used to be in the Army Reserve was actually posted there for a while.  His stories of the place involve lots of ice, a crapload of penguins ... and oddly enough, no edge of the world.
Oh, and by the way, he's long since left the military.  So there's zero chance he's still being paid to keep any secrets.
So how do you reconcile that with, well, any of what you're saying?

And finally:
Captain James Cook, who mapped the eastern coast of Australia (as well as a good chunk of the coast of New Zealand) with an accuracy that still holds good today, also sailed farther south to circumnavigate Antarctica.  Which he did.  To do so in your model would require travelling a distance of 60-80 thousand km, on a sailing ship that moves at maybe 10 km/h (just saying, they would've run out of food).  Oh, and then he went from New Zealand to Tierra del Fuego in five weeks.  With your map, how far is that and how fast would he have had to travel?  Let's not forget: sailing ship.

One of the many flaws of the flat earth concept, and the most easily proven, is the lateral distance problem.  The farther out you get from the north pole on a flat disk, the greater the distance between any two lines of longitude.  The trouble is, the farther south you go from the Equator, the closer these lines get together.  I cordially invite any believers to come to Australia, rent a car, check the odometer, then drive from Sydney to Perth along the Gunbarrel Highway.  Take careful note of the distance, then compare it to what your map says it should be.
(Spoilers: it won't be that far).
Go ahead.  I dare you.