Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« on: March 11, 2019, 09:25:52 PM »
Pick out some major cities and check multiple sources to determine their distance apart. I Suggest Stockholm, Moscow, Cairo, Capetown, Lisbon, and Tehran.

Get some washers and string and mark each washer with the city name. The strings must be scale distance long after tying to the washer. Try 1 inch = 500 miles, easier math with 1 cm - 500 miles.

Look up the distances between ALL the cities (this will insure accuracy) and tie a string of that length between the city/washers.

Now put it on a flat flat flat table and stretch the strings tight. When you have all strings tight, the city/washers are located at their true relative positions. Once you have the true relative positions, it should be easy to continue the technique and locate all cities accurately and see how the map is oriented.

If at first it seems impossible to get all strings tight, keep trying! It may take hours, keep going, don't stop.

If you do eventually despair, try putting a deflated balloon under your city/washer string net and inflating the balloon. You may find that as the balloon becomes a globe, making all the strings tight works much better on a curved surface.

If you can make all the strings stretch tight on a flat surface, you have proved FE and are well on your way to a FE map!

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8629
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2021, 10:30:16 PM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

The translation to a FE model may be attributable to a number of possibilities. For example; if the outer edges of the FE celestial system are moving at a quicker speed over the Earth like the outer extremities of a record on a record player, then it stands that the upper atmosphere may be as well. A plane traveling in a high region of atmosphere may move faster in certain regions of the Earth than another.

And indeed, the winds are said to be anomalous in the South - https://wiki.tfes.org/Issues_in_Flight_Analysis
« Last Edit: April 25, 2021, 10:40:39 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2677
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2021, 11:05:08 PM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons: ... Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

How would you suggest that would be resolved? How would you and the other get to a point where you agree on distances?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Offline c0i9z

  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2021, 11:32:20 PM »
"Stockholm, Moscow, Cairo, Capetown, Lisbon, and Tehran" were the suggested cities. All of them are within the Europe/Africa/Asia continent mass. None of them require crossing oceans to access and they can all be reached on foot, given enough time. No need for planes. And the distances were certainly not measured with planes.

The point about speed, we should put aside. It seems to be a red herring as no one has mentioned doing anything relating to speed. Only distance.

Given that your three reasons appear to be irrelevant to this discussion, do you have any more excuses as to why the proposed experiment is invalid? Especially as it sounds like you're pre-emptively expecting it to fail when done on a flat surface..

Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2021, 09:35:44 AM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

The translation to a FE model may be attributable to a number of possibilities. For example; if the outer edges of the FE celestial system are moving at a quicker speed over the Earth like the outer extremities of a record on a record player, then it stands that the upper atmosphere may be as well. A plane traveling in a high region of atmosphere may move faster in certain regions of the Earth than another.

And indeed, the winds are said to be anomalous in the South - https://wiki.tfes.org/Issues_in_Flight_Analysis


Ah, yes, the "said to be anomalous" winds. 

You may remember this thread from pre-Covid; 

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15877.0

LATAM, and Qantas, 2 commercial organisations that depend on knowing the distance from (for instance) Santiago, Chile, to Sydney, Australia, didn't seem to have any problem predicting the winds when they were operating their 3-times weekly return-service between the 2 cities.  Its stretching credibility somewhat to think that the winds would provide an anomalous advantage in both directions on demand. 

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 391
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2021, 11:34:48 AM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

The translation to a FE model may be attributable to a number of possibilities. For example; if the outer edges of the FE celestial system are moving at a quicker speed over the Earth like the outer extremities of a record on a record player, then it stands that the upper atmosphere may be as well. A plane traveling in a high region of atmosphere may move faster in certain regions of the Earth than another.

And indeed, the winds are said to be anomalous in the South - https://wiki.tfes.org/Issues_in_Flight_Analysis

Distances are indeed the fundamental point of contention here Tom. Let's not muddy things with vague statements like 'the winds are said to be anomalous...'. Let's stick to precise, verifiable things, like overland distances.

Can we agree on some distances? In the wiki it says that the estimation for the circumference of the globe earth is in fact the diameter of the flat earth, given in the wiki as 25,000 (presumably statute) miles. If we use that on the monopole FE map, that would retain the relationship between latitude and distances measured in nautical miles, whereby one minute of latitude is one nautical mile. 360 degrees x 60 minutes = 21,600 nautical miles, which is as near as doesn't matter to 25,000 statue miles - so far so good. So north-south distances on the two systems match up. It also appears from the monopole map that the lat and long of places has been preserved, meaning that places that are north-south of each other on the globe earth are also that way aligned on the FE map.

To keep things simple, I'll treat the round earth as a pure sphere (ignoring its oblateness) and I'll use 3440nm as a globe radius, which would give us a circumference of 24,873 statute miles - again, close enough for our purposes here. I'll keep things in nautical miles from now on.

So we can say the monopole flat earth as shown in the wiki has a flat diameter of 2πr=21,614nm, where r=3440nm - that lines up with the wiki and gives us the means to compare the two representations of the earth. At the centre of the map, in the 'north', longitudinal distances will be compressed, and at the southern extremes, they will be stretched out. At 90 degrees south, at the 'edge' / ice wall / whatever, the circumference of the monopole FE is π x diameter, or or 2π2r = 67902nm.

So now let's make a formula for working out the ratio between longitudinal distances measured on a conventional globe and those measured on a monopole flat earth. Let's define 'ϕ' as our latitude in degrees, measured from the equator with positive angles referring to the northern hemisphere. For a given ϕ, the circumference of a circle of latitude on a globe earth is given by cos(ϕ) x 21,614. On the monopole FE, it comes out at 377.2 x (90-ϕ). So divide one by the other and we get the 'SteelyBob ratio', which you are welcome to add to the wiki:

SteelyBob ratio = (90-ϕ) / (57.3 cos ϕ)

So, for example, at 55 degrees north over here in the UK, the SteelyBob ratio works out at 1.06. So if the world really was shaped like the monopole FE map suggests, you might notice a small 6% discrepancy in distances travelled East-West, if the map you used to plan the journey was, like pretty much every map or satnav there is, based on a globe earth.

As we head further south, the discrepancy becomes far more noticeable. At the equator, ϕ=0, the SteelyBob ratio is already 1.57, meaning east-west journeys are 57% longer than would be expected from a globe earth map. Head further south and it gets whole lot worse. At the same latitude as Santiago and Sydney, ϕ=-33, the SteelyBob ratio is 2.56, meaning the flights mentioned below would have an extra 1.56 miles to travel for every planned mile - that's some serious anomalous winds, Tom.

But it's simpler just to talk about land masses. The Falkland Islands, for example, are about 140 nautical miles across, east to west, measured on a globe. They are around 52 degrees south, so have a SteelyBob ratio of 4.02, so the monopole FE map is seriously proposing that the Falklands are in fact 560nm across. That means the famous 'yomp' across East Falkland, carried out 45 Commando, royal marines, in 1982, was actually 4 times further than anybody realised. These lads did it in 4 days, which is pretty good for a 480km hike in full kit. Some would say completely impossible... https://en.mercopress.com/2014/03/25/falklands-yomp-recreated-by-royal-marines-from-hms-protector

It's interesting, on a recent thread discussing this area of the earth I made some estimates which I've now realised were wrong - I held the equatorial circumference of the two systems to be the same, but of course they aren't, as I've shown here. So my maths for the ratio gave an underestimate. Always happy to correct mistakes, so here we are.

So, there we go - the SteelyBob ratio. What do you think, Tom? Agree with my maths? Interested in your thoughts. Have I represented the translation between the monopole FE map and the globe earth correctly?

Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2021, 12:40:43 PM »
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

They aren't though, are they? They're only in contention because you're refusing to accept the known distances. And it's obvious why you're doing that - if the known distances are correct then the earth can't be flat because those distances simply don't work on a flat earth.

What you're basically claiming is that the global airline and shipping industry don't know how far they're travelling, or they don't know how fast. It's a ridiculous claim. I went on a cruise a while back and the Captain did a talk. He was explaining how they basically just use GPS these days. They do keep paper charts too, by law they have to, but I'm sure they'd have noticed if GPS wasn't working at sea or the islands they're supposed to be visiting weren't where they thought they were. Same with airlines. When you go on a long haul flight they often have a map option in the entertainment system which shows you where you are, how fast you're going and estimated time to arrival. To do all that you have to know where you are, how far it is to your destination and how fast you're going. To claim that none of this really works is absurd. There are whole industries that rely on it working.
"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

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Pete
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2021, 02:22:57 PM »
I went on a cruise a while back and the Captain did a talk. He was explaining how they basically just use GPS these days. They do keep paper charts too, by law they have to, but I'm sure they'd have noticed if GPS wasn't working at sea or the islands they're supposed to be visiting weren't where they thought they were.

Take a cruise to Alaska.  Most ships have a bridge observation deck.  You can watch as, at night, in fog, the ship follows the GPS line precisely through the narrow waters of the inside passage.
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.

Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2021, 03:04:31 PM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion

The translation to a FE model may be attributable to a number of possibilities. For example; if the outer edges of the FE celestial system are moving at a quicker speed over the Earth like the outer extremities of a record on a record player, then it stands that the upper atmosphere may be as well. A plane traveling in a high region of atmosphere may move faster in certain regions of the Earth than another.

And indeed, the winds are said to be anomalous in the South - https://wiki.tfes.org/Issues_in_Flight_Analysis


Ah, yes, the "said to be anomalous" winds. 

You may remember this thread from pre-Covid; 

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15877.0

LATAM, and Qantas, 2 commercial organisations that depend on knowing the distance from (for instance) Santiago, Chile, to Sydney, Australia, didn't seem to have any problem predicting the winds when they were operating their 3-times weekly return-service between the 2 cities.  Its stretching credibility somewhat to think that the winds would provide an anomalous advantage in both directions on demand.

And it's not just the distance, but direction was well. RE vs. FE direction between locations is radically different.

Offline nthurd

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2021, 03:55:33 PM »
Would FE vs. RE not simplify to "prove sufficient number of google maps land distances, sufficiently wrong, using a mechanical odometer"?

I must be missing something, seems like the easisest way to achieve everlasting glory.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1502
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2021, 03:56:05 PM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion
You can contend that distances at sea are not known all you want, but that is completely wrong.  What are your qualifications for making a statement like that?  If your qualifications were sufficient then your contentions must be just for trolling purposes.  Without sufficient navigational experience & qualifications your contentions are irrelevant and should be considered shit posting.  I can make this statement from the point of view of an experienced navigator with lots of time at sea working on ships and as pilot in command of aircraft.  Celestial navigation works well when weather conditions are right but GPS works even better under just about all conditions.  Modern ships & airplanes use GPS and the positions and distances measured are very accurate.  If they were not then ships could and would run aground while navigating in foggy conditions.  I can well remember leaving San Francisco in very foggy conditions and navigating under the Golden Gate bridge in fog so thick that we didn't see the bridge until we were directly under it on a ship that was nearly 1000 feet long.  The bottom line is that there can be no doubt about the measured distances anywhere in the world.  Please supply any verifiable evidence you have that could refute my contentions. If those contentions can be verified then you would be doing a great service to the maritime industry that depends on very accurate positions and distances to operate huge ships. 
You can lead a flat earther to the curve but you can't make him think!

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 391
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2021, 05:10:20 PM »
Would FE vs. RE not simplify to "prove sufficient number of google maps land distances, sufficiently wrong, using a mechanical odometer"?

I must be missing something, seems like the easisest way to achieve everlasting glory.

You are not missing anything. You could take a drive somewhere in Australia, for example, on an east west road between two towns, and observe that the odo reads roughly 2.5 times the distance shown by Google, or indeed your old road atlas, or any globe earth sourced distance data.

With this data in hand, you could repeat the feat in a variety of vehicles, get it all verified and achieve global fame. As long as you cite the SteelyBob ratio, I'm cool with you using it too.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 1304
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2021, 07:30:11 PM »
Your assumed distances are fallacious for a few reasons:

- People aren't walking across the oceans
- Planes use jet streams to reach far off locations
- The calculated of speed is s = d/t and requires a known distance. Distances are fundamentally in contention in this discussion
You can contend that distances at sea are not known all you want, but that is completely wrong.  What are your qualifications for making a statement like that?  If your qualifications were sufficient then your contentions must be just for trolling purposes.  Without sufficient navigational experience & qualifications your contentions are irrelevant and should be considered shit posting.  I can make this statement from the point of view of an experienced navigator with lots of time at sea working on ships and as pilot in command of aircraft.  Celestial navigation works well when weather conditions are right but GPS works even better under just about all conditions.  Modern ships & airplanes use GPS and the positions and distances measured are very accurate.  If they were not then ships could and would run aground while navigating in foggy conditions.  I can well remember leaving San Francisco in very foggy conditions and navigating under the Golden Gate bridge in fog so thick that we didn't see the bridge until we were directly under it on a ship that was nearly 1000 feet long.  The bottom line is that there can be no doubt about the measured distances anywhere in the world.  Please supply any verifiable evidence you have that could refute my contentions. If those contentions can be verified then you would be doing a great service to the maritime industry that depends on very accurate positions and distances to operate huge ships.

Tom has been singing that same song as long as I have been here.  Silly as it is, he uses it to disarm any and all threads that talk about how simple a map is to make with known distances.

Let's not forget his famous "The distance from New York to Paris is not known" 
Nothing Guest has ever said should be taken as representative of anything other than Guest's own delusions opinions.

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Pete
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2021, 07:54:40 PM »
Today's marine traffic map.



All those vessels and none of them know how far they are traveling or at what speed. ::)

Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Pete
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2021, 07:59:00 PM »

Tom has been singing that same song as long as I have been here.  Silly as it is, he uses it to disarm any and all threads that talk about how simple a map is to make with known distances.


He can never give up that fight.  To admit that, unlike 1870, we can accurately determine distance anywhere on earth is to admit that the earth is not flat.  "Distances are unknown" will always be a tenet of TFES.
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Pete
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2021, 08:28:15 AM »

Ah, yes, the "said to be anomalous" winds. 


The stupid thing about the "anomalous winds" defense is that there's nothing 'anomalous' about them.  The aren't unexpected or out of the norm.  Yes, sometimes they are great.  Sometimes they are not.  What matters is that they are predictable and measurable and can be accounted for in any distance/time estimations. Evidently Tom has never had a pilot come on the air and say, "Sorry folks.  We were a little late pushing back from the gate.  However, we have a nice tailwind today, so we should be able to make up some time along the way and get you to your destination on time."
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.

Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2021, 12:39:01 AM »
I find it impressive that RE distances are known through: astral navigation, time/speed/distance with a car, with a plane, with a boat, gps, geodetic survey, anyone think of some more ways? I have checked, they match perfectly. What my phone says, google maps, shooting the north star with an inclinometer, flawless match. Boats and planes seem to get where they want to go and have a pretty good idea of how long it will take.

Tom Bishop would probably never get on a boat, they have no idea where they are or where they are going, and he supports a bi-polar map, so no ice wall for Tom, he could sail off the edge.

Tom Bishop going on a car journey: his passenger says "when will we get there?" Tom says, "No one can ever know."

Really Tom, do you ever drive someplace and use google maps to plan the trip? Did it work? When you got there did your cell phone gps match? Did that match google maps? There is a geodesic marker somewhere near everyone, did that match? Inclinometer shooting north star match latitude per google and other sources?

Do you ever fly on a plane, if so do you get on thinking they have no idea how to navigate? Or do you trust that the conspiracy (pilot? nasa? avionics manufacturer? FAA?) will send you to your destination by secret clever gadgets fooling the operators yet successful arrival?

If only some FE could figure out the real distances, they would have something to say other than "RE not true", "no one knows", "unknown forces" and "conspiracy!". But I think we know why they can't.

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Pete
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #17 on: April 28, 2021, 05:01:30 PM »
Tom Bishop going on a car journey: his passenger says "when will we get there?" Tom says, "No one can ever know."

I believe Toms says, "As long as we don't encounter any anomalous winds we should be there in X." would be more accurate.
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.

Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #18 on: April 28, 2021, 05:35:05 PM »
Tom Bishop often explains some FE issue with a brief glib, yet at least remotely plausible FExplanation - such as anomolous winds aloft speeding planes in both directions. Then some RE shoots big holes in his explanation. In typical FE fashion, no further discussion, if you press them, they say "we already answered that." And they literally did, just not in a complete, consistent, detailed way, no proof (except "it has to be because the earth is flat", or in any way satisfying answer. FE is a one layer system. The FE never is required to continue the debate beyond his vaguely plausible answer. You see the same thing with politicians, not so much with scientists.

Strikes me that FE is more political/tribal than scientific. The only certain claim all FEs will support is "not FE". They disagree with each other or don't know, nothing is certain, except one thing, "not RE". They respect and demand consideration for multiple FE models cheerfully, except for RE. They support each other while making contradictory cla9ims. I don't think this is about scientific exploration of the shape of the earth, it seems to me to be a pointless "us vs them" conflict.

Claiming it is scientific is what makes REs that come here to patiently explain become angry.

When all your debates end in you lending the debate, changing the subject, repeating the same answer and insisting it be accepted, you are not winning the debate.

Re: How to make an FE map with accurate distances
« Reply #19 on: April 28, 2021, 10:46:13 PM »
Strikes me that FE is more political/tribal than scientific. The only certain claim all FEs will support is "not FE". They disagree with each other or don't know, nothing is certain, except one thing, "not RE". They respect and demand consideration for multiple FE models cheerfully, except for RE. They support each other while making contradictory cla9ims. I don't think this is about scientific exploration of the shape of the earth, it seems to me to be a pointless "us vs them" conflict.

This forum is based upon the Bedford's canal experiment and its supposed flatness (for REs it's due to refraction). In general, FEs look at the sea and somehow discard the idea that the horizon ends abruptly because there's a frontal curvature, in favour of an undefined, as you say, "not-roundness". Given these cognitive premises, their problem is no more proving flatness, but if you'd explore the wiki you'd see that they are trying to unify many possible FE models. These models are very different, but there could be a disambiguation if pairwise distances among cities was taken into account, as you say. So, the question of distance is of the utmost importance for FEs themselves, in order to unify their models.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".