[totallackey]

totallackey, you said:

"that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time."

You then provided an example of a 200 meter error.

How fast do you think boats go?

When someone accuses you of moving the goalposts, this is what they mean. You claim VAST inaccuracies in southern hemisphere maps, and then find one TINY inaccuracy.

Aside from this sentence I am writing, point out where I have written the word, "vast."

You are right that all human maps are made with tiny inaccuracies. So what? Your claim was "several hours of travel time."

You can look at the documentary and see there was several hours of travel time lost on the cruise.

I saw several hours lost due to a storm around 8:00 minutes into the video you shared. I did not see any loss of time due to being several hours off course. Please help me find it - can you tell me what minutes of this I should review? I watched the whole thing and the only thing that seemed to delay the voyage was storms.

As soon as you can point out my use of the word, "vast," we will move forward.

[totallackey]

Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.

If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."

But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.
Heap big difference!

How do you know?

Can you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?

And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.

But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.

How is your question related to the OP?

[rabinoz]

Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.

If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."

But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.
Heap big difference!

How do you know?

Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!

Even this Flat Earth Society makes no such claim and presents these two "continental layouts":

Layout of the Continents
There are several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:

Ice Wall model:

As a distinct continent:

From: TFES.org, Layout of the Continents

If you disgree, post your  accurate flat earth map!

Can you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?

No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.
You could buy one  British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference:  BA3597, $39.15.

And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.

But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.

How is your question related to the OP?

Because the OP is about the an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?

How is your post relate to the OP?

So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?

Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.

[JohnAdams1145]

totallackey --
1. You specifically claimed that the maps based on a globe Earth result in a traveler going several hours off course. Yes or no?
2. You have provided one video to substantiate that claim; as rabinoz has shown, this video only substantiates a difference of 200-300m. Yes or no?
3. Therefore you have not proven your original assertion. This logically follows from points 1 and 2.
4. FE maps, on the other hand, have been proven to have EXTREMELY large inaccuracies in distance measurements (this is because it is impossible to get all the distances right from a sphere onto a Earth).
5. ALL maps eventually lose accuracy of their distance measurements because a sphere can only be LOCALLY approximated with a flat map. Do you understand this? If you don't please take single-variable calculus again and compare a circle to a linear approximation.

Now you clearly don't understand elementary logic. Just because there is ONE instance of there being a deviation of 200-300m (could be due to human error, but let's assume the map sucked) that does NOT mean that this is the VERY BEST we have achieved. An existential statement is not a universal one. It's a shame that you're so full of hot air that you don't get that. You're being very intellectually dishonest here.

[totallackey]

Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.

If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."

But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.
Heap big difference!

How do you know?

Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!

Circular reasoning noted.

If you disgree, post your  accurate flat earth map!

I like the USGS AEP.

Can you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?

No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.

Lack of supporting evidence for your claim is noted.

Claim dismissed.

You could buy one  British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference:  BA3597, $39.15.

You buy it.

And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.

Depictions of the Earth on a flat map existed before globe depiction.

But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.

How is your question related to the OP?

Because the OP is about the an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?

How is your post relate to the OP?

So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?

Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.

Yeah, the OP is not even about maps...

Were you the first one to post off-topic?

Or was I?

Either way, I suggest we get back to the OP.

It takes longer than a couple of hours to fly from one side of the US to the other side so the OP is dismissed.

Okay Geoff!

You take care and put away that key for a while!

[rabinoz]

Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!

Circular reasoning noted.

Incorrect. It's not "Circular reasoning", but a bit of simple logical deduction.

• The chart appears to be in error by only 200-300 m.
• There is no accurate flat earth of comparable accuracy.
• Therefore the chart cannot be a flat earth map.

Simple!

If you disgree, post your  accurate flat earth map!

I like the USGS AEP.

Your liking a map is no evidence of its accuracy! But the "USGS AEP" is fine, provided you take due note of the changing E-W scale factor.
But it is not a "flat earth map". It is just another projection of the Globe, hence the name, Azimuthal Equidistant Projection.

Can you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?

No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.

Lack of supporting evidence for your claim is noted.
Claim dismissed.

Evidence:
Even this Flat Earth Society presents these two "continental layouts":

Layout of the Continents
There are several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:

Ice Wall model:

As a distinct continent:

From: TFES.org, Layout of the Continents

If you don't even know the basic continental layout, you clearly cannot have an accurate flat earth map.

You could buy one  British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference:  BA3597, $39.15.

You buy it.

Not on you sweet Nellie! Lack of an accurate map is your problem not mine! I know what shape the earth is!

And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.

Depictions of the Earth on a flat map existed before globe depiction.

But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.

How is your question related to the OP?

Because the OP is about an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?

How is your post relate to the OP?

So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?

Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.

Yeah, the OP is not even about maps...
Were you the first one to post off-topic?
Or was I?
Either way, I suggest we get back to the OP.
It takes longer than a couple of hours to fly from one side of the US to the other side so the OP is dismissed.

I did not claim that the OP was correct, just that the implication was about the difference between a Globe and a flat earth map.
And even you in your first post seem to acknowledge that, take another peek: Re: planes, « Reply #7 on: January 10, 2018, 03:52:16 PM ».

I dips me lid to you though Mt T. Lackey. It must surely be a thankless task trying to prop up the poor dead horse you call a flat earth!

[totallackey]

But I so love to remain off-topic as it soothes me brain!

Sorry Geoff!

The OP is totally inaccurate and can be dismissed.

[rabinoz]

<< Lying editing of quote deleted >>

Sorry Geoff!

You poor confused Mr Lackey!  There's no member Geoff here. You really should get medical help.

The OP is totally inaccurate and can be dismissed.

Well, why did you waste so much time with your silly claims about an error of only 200-300 m, when the usual FE map has thousands of kilomteres of error in Australia?

Bye bye Mr Totally Lost it.
 

[juner]

<< Lying editing of quote deleted >>

Sorry Geoff!

You poor confused Mr Lackey!  There's no member Geoff here. You really should get medical help.

The OP is totally inaccurate and can be dismissed.

Well, why did you waste so much time with your silly claims about an error of only 200-300 m, when the usual FE map has thousands of kilomteres of error in Australia?

Bye bye Mr Totally Lost it.
 

totallackey has already been given a 3-day ban for his posting behavior. You are being almost as bad. One last warning and then a 3-day ban for you as well.

I am also locking this thread as it has turned into trash.