[davidapple]

So I've been looking for flight data to correct my map. openflights.org has lots of data on airports and routes but unfortunately, it doesn't include estimated flight times which is crucial.

They do however, have an Equirectuangual projection showing flight routes, so I have worked my Peirce Quincuncial Projection magic on this image to show exactly where my map fails.



It's interesting to see how few flights venture over the north pole.

So I really need a database of estimates flight times to continue. If any of you know about this, please let me know.

[Pete Svarrior]

But Tom says

Nobody cares what Tom says. He's not the prophet you guys take him for. He's welcome to his opinions, but "but Tom said a thing that disagrees with you!" is just not an argument anyone should give a crap about.

Yes, it's true that 100 years ago many prominent FE'ers rejected the monopole model. Since then, 100 years have passed, and most of those guys are pretty dead.

[Tontogary]

But Tom says

Nobody cares what Tom says. He's not the prophet you guys take him for. He's welcome to his opinions, but "but Tom said a thing that disagrees with you!" is just not an argument anyone should give a crap about.

Yes, it's true that 100 years ago many prominent FE'ers rejected the monopole model. Since then, 100 years have passed, and most of those guys are pretty dead.

Ok let me rephrase that,

“It was recently suggested, by a Zetetic council member, that the Society rejected the monopole model over 100 years ago”

Better?

It is hard to be able say what the society believes in when you quote a Zetetic council member and prominent member of the site, only to be told his statements dont carry any weight.

I will remember that in future.

However my point still stands that there apparently is an opinion amongst some members that the monopole model is not correct.

[Pete Svarrior]

“It was recently suggested, by a Zetetic council member, that the Society rejected the monopole model over 100 years ago”

Better?

The ZC has been defunct for years, and its function was completely irrelevant to what you're saying here.

It is hard to be able say what the society believes in when you quote a Zetetic council member and prominent member of the site, only to be told his statements dont carry any weight.

Indeed. Trying to force one individual's views onto a group is a silly thing to do. You've been here long enough to know that there are multiple competing models, and yet you still persist in the logic of "but someone who believes in another model said he doesn't believe in your model!" What's the point in that?

I will remember that in future.

Make no mistake, friendo - I'm also not the infallible FE prophet you're looking for. The next time you try smugly explaining to Tom that "b-but Pete said", you're likely to get a similar response.

You are completely missing the point of this. We're a group that openly advocates the defiance of any authority, and you're sitting here getting grumpy over the fact that we have no authorities.

However my point still stands that there apparently is an opinion amongst some members that the monopole model is not correct.

You're extremely generous to yourself - statements of the obvious are not really a "point". And no, your "point" doesn't "stand". Telling Thork that his views are not the same as the views of someone else is not advancing the discussion in any way.

[rabinoz]

You know what I mean. The whole South is the south pole on an FE map.

But Tom says in a different post that the flat earth community rejected the monopole idea over 100 years ago.

Then it cannot be true that the South Pole is all around the world at the south, which is a monopole model yes?

And the OP model does not have a bi polar model presented. I suggest that the OP might want to reflect the possibility of the bi polar model, just in case it turns out to be the accurate form?

This is a bit of what Tom Bishop has said about the bi-polar map:

Rabinoz, I support the Bi-Polar model, so I don't know what you are trying to prove to me there.

Another alternative model descripting Antarctica as a distinct continent.
There is still an "ice wall" in this model, but it not Antarctica.
Beyond the rays of the sun the waters will naturally freeze.

Undoubtedly many more questions will arise,
so if you point me to a good write-up, I'll keep out of your way (on this topic) for a while.

The South Pole was not yet discovered when Rowbotham wrote Earth Not a Globe. It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it.

The Bi-Polar model is first advocated in the book The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918). However, the layout of the continents is left ambiguous due to lack of data. The layout and dimensions of the continents in our picture may be different as well. Someone apparently just found a map projection of a globe that looked similar for illustrative purposes.

[Dr David Thork]

Yes, it's true that 100 years ago many prominent FE'ers rejected the monopole model. Since then, 100 years have passed, and most of those guys are pretty dead.

Well that's a new one. An appeal to sentience. 

@David, this contradicts how we are told most flights from the US come up over the North pole on the way to Europe these days. We had a huge hoo-har some years ago about how flights could now go over the North Pole (Santa's shortcut) and how many long haul flights would be doing so. Turns out that was a fabrication.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2078301/Mind-sleigh-Airlines-given-permission-fly-North-Pole-time-slashing-hours-exotic-destinations.html

Airlines tend to lie a lot to drum up interest. This week Emirates are claiming that by not having windows, their aircraft will be more rigid and be able to fly higher and faster.

The airline says it paves the way for removing all windows from future planes, making them lighter and faster.

It is clear that this is nonsense. Air liners fly in the trans-sonic range. Taking the windows out isn't going to make them supersonic. And the altitude will be the same because the engines will stay the same so their efficiency isn't going to change. A prime example of Airlines lying to make you think they are doing something to improve your service when they aren't.

I think what your image actually shows it that airlines are risk adverse and avoid wilderness. The don't fly much over the Sahara, the North or South Pole, and they take the shortest route possible over the sea in the case of both the Pacific and the Atlantic.

Another great map though. Really like it.

Can I ask you try this one if you are experimenting?
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/2916

It is a very famous NASA Composite. Would be interesting to see a version in your 'flat earth' format. I think would be very pretty.

[Dr David Thork]

Ahhh, someone has done it.





I made the map below myself in 2011 ... I suck at making maps. Nice to see someone improved it.


To all the RErs who always moan "Why don't you lot ever make maps" ... we do! When you google search 'flat earth maps', who the hell do you think made them all? A lot of them come from THIS community.

[Dr David Thork]

Meh, someone stole it for pininterest?
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/760475087049538608/

I was trying to show the spotlight sun and the moon with a nice image ...



This is the point I gave up. Imagination was trumped by lack of MS Paint skill.

Since then people have trumped it with far better models
https://www.motionelements.com/stock-video-10004278-zoom-out-and-revolution-rotation-around-flat-earth-3d-model-satellite-map

But back in the day we only had stuff like below


I'd like to think our feeble efforts contributed to spark the imagination of those that came after and made flat earth what it is today. 
I've since retired from map and model making.

[Max_Almond]

What is the date and time in either of the two images above?

Also: when does the sun ever cast a perfect circle?

[Dr David Thork]

What is the date and time in either of the two images above?

Also: when does the sun ever cast a perfect circle?

How about you have a go before complaining about my efforts? Only takes 10 seconds to make an objection.

[Max_Almond]

If you read that comment carefully you'll see there are neither complaints nor objections, but rather two questions - and pertinent ones at that.

[Dr David Thork]

You clearly missed what I was trying to achieve.

I took a 200 year old sketch and tried to add some photo realism to it. That's it. That's all it is. To make it more imaginable.

[Max_Almond]

You clearly missed what I was trying to achieve.

I took a 200 year old sketch and tried to add some photo realism to it. That's it. That's all it is. To make it more imaginable.

I guess I did. It was the bit where you were talking about making maps and defending against accusations that flat earthers didn't do that that threw me.

Fair enough. x

[Tontogary]

I will remember that in future.

Make no mistake, friendo - I'm also not the infallible FE prophet you're looking for. The next time you try smugly explaining to Tom that "b-but Pete said", you're likely to get a similar response.

You are completely missing the point of this. We're a group that openly advocates the defiance of any authority, and you're sitting here getting grumpy over the fact that we have no authorities.

I am not looking for an “infallible FE prophet” I dont think such a beast exists!

Who’s getting grumpy? Not me. Projecting an attitude onto me is irrelevant, and as is commonly pointed out feelings have no place in the debate.

I do understand that there are likely as many different models of the FE as there are FE supporters, so will try to form my questions more carefully in the future, and thank you for your invaluable insights and lessons, I will take them on board, and hopefully it will make me a better debating opponent.

[AATW]

It is clear that this is nonsense. Air liners fly in the trans-sonic range. Taking the windows out isn't going to make them supersonic. And the altitude will be the same because the engines will stay the same so their efficiency isn't going to change. A prime example of Airlines lying to make you think they are doing something to improve your service when they aren't.

I presume you have expertise in aerodynamics?
The claim is not that it will make them supersonic, the claim is that they will be structurally stronger and be able to fly faster and more efficiently.
How is this clearly nonsense? I'm not an expert in aerodynamics but it sounds right that a smooth fuselage is potentially a better aerodynamic shape than one with regular indents for windows and therefore the planes could fly more efficiently.
They should be stronger too - clearly the windows are potential weak points.
Why do you think everyone is lying to you all the time even when what they're saying makes sense? They've already started doing this on some planes in first class:

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2018/06/emirates-airline-unveils-new-virtual-windows-for-first-class-passengers.html

The suggestion is they may do this throughout the whole plane. Not sure I like the idea but the claims about efficiency sound right.
Airlines are primarily interested in efficiency. I have no idea why you think they would be lying about this.

[douglips]

So I've been looking for flight data to correct my map. openflights.org has lots of data on airports and routes but unfortunately, it doesn't include estimated flight times which is crucial.

They do however, have an Equirectuangual projection showing flight routes, so I have worked my Peirce Quincuncial Projection magic on this image to show exactly where my map fails.



It's interesting to see how few flights venture over the north pole.

So I really need a database of estimates flight times to continue. If any of you know about this, please let me know.

I'd like to applaud you for going through this effort - and I'm sorry for the distractions on this thread (which I have contributed to, and for which I apologize.)

This is good work, looking at where your model fails and how to improve.

As for tables of estimated flight times, I don't have a good source for that - but you can get individual flight estimates by searching on Google for (for example) "flights auckland to doha"

Make sure you find nonstop flights for the best numbers.

For example, in the search for "flights auckland to doha" I see Qatar airways has a nonstop. So I then search for "qatar auckland to doha" and get a flight number (see attachment - Qatar 921)

Once you have the flight number you can see actual tracks for the past few flights:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/QTR921

Here's one from a couple of days ago:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/QTR921/history/20180606/0225Z/NZAA/OTHH

If the map looks weird, look for a "three lines" button in the upper right and you can change the map images.

Similarly, here's Sydney to Santiago: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/QFA27/history/20180606/0303Z/YSSY/SCEL
Here's Shanghai to San Jose: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CCA830/history/20180531/1750Z/KSJC/ZSPD
Here's JFK to Hong Kong: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPA845/history/20180605/0535Z/KJFK/VHHH
Note the other direction doesn't go over the pole due to taking advantage of the jetstream over the pacific:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPA830/history/20180603/0115Z/VHHH/KJFK

It might be a fair amount of work to look these up, but it's a start.

[davidapple]

Can I ask you try this one if you are experimenting?
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/2916

It is a very famous NASA Composite. Would be interesting to see a version in your 'flat earth' format. I think would be very pretty.

Sure man, thanks, here you go...



In my video, I mention that the Peirce Quincuncial Projection was developed by Charles Sanders Peirce in 1879 and Greenwich in London was selected as the Prime Meridian international standard in 1884. Just 5 year apart.

Greenwich in London is located on 1 of 4 lines of longitude that cause the Peirce Quincuncial Projection to distort only a few small areas of land.

Is this just a coincidence?
Is there a connection between Charles Sanders Peirce and London?

[Max_Almond]

It's more the other way around: the line of longitude was centred on Greenwich, by humans.

We now call that line the 'prime meridian' - but there were other claimants to that title back in the day: 0 degrees could just as easily have been centred on Paris.

Do lines of longitude actually exist? Or are they merely man-made constructs and delineations?

[Tontogary]

It's more the other way around: the line of longitude was centred on Greenwich, by humans.

We now call that line the 'prime meridian' - but there were other claimants to that title back in the day: 0 degrees could just as easily have been centred on Paris.

Do lines of longitude actually exist? Or are they merely man-made constructs and delineations?

Apart from the ones man made in Greenwich and Paris i am not sure.
Zero or the prime meridian could be pretty much anywhere on earth.

However there are no natural lines at all on earth that correspond to meridians of longitude.

[Max_Almond]

Those don't "actually exist" either. As in, there are an infinite number of lines joining the north and south poles, and any one of them could have been the "zero line".

The tropics, on the other hand, and the equator could be said to "exist in reality", given that they actually represent something real. Same perhaps for the lines of latitude that represent the angles to the sun/north and south celestial poles (ie, all of them).¿

I guess what I'm saying is there's no discernible reason for David Apple to draw lines of longitude on his map. The tropics and the equator, though, should be represented.