Not getting far is it? They do tend to ignore threads when there is no reasonable Flat Earth answer. I have tried numerous time to point out that Australia on the Flat Earth map is over twice the correct width.
That "correct width" comes from early maps (I have an 1855 map), current atlases, Google earth, GPS distances and my own measurement of parts of it.
All these sources are consistent with each other, but far from being in agreement with the Ice-Wall Flat Earth map.
In other words, I can categorically say that in this region, the Ice-Wall Flat Earth map is wrong.
You keep saying that, but you are being disingenuous. You KNOW that the Azimuthal equidistant projection doesn't show things in realistic proportions, just as no projection does. But the distances are correct if you understand how the "map" is plotted. You do understand. You are just a liar. You refuse to ever accept anything that goes against your (or your employers) narrative. You spread falsehoods and when called out you never have once adjusted your position.
To say only Flat Earthers refuse to accept logical alternatives to their worldview, then sir, kettle meet pot.
Of course I keep saying that. It's simply because it's true.
There is one simple fact that you and many other Flat Earthers simply will not face.
If the earth is flat then
no projection is needed to produce a flat map. How many times do I have to re-iterate that same point? A flat map of a flat earth would simply be a small scale drawing of the earth.
In my opinion, and that of many others the simple measurements of the earth make it impossible to be flat.
Read and understand this post
The dimensions of the Earth will not fit on a Flat Surface « on: February 05, 2016, 03:04:26 AM ».If you disagree with the dimensions given in that post, would you please come up with your figures for the equatorial circumference and the distance for the equator to the North Pole.
I can come up with plenty of evidence that those dimensions have been well accepted for a long long time, though not to the current precision.
Ships navigators would not have been fooled with the gross differences we would see if the "Ice-Wall" map were correct.
I "understand how the 'map' is plotted" very well, thank you! I know that it is as you say a North Polar "Azimuthal Equidistant Projection"
of the GLOBE and so it has the accepted distortions of a "projection of the Globe". Just learn and inwardly digest and believe that if it were indeed a Flat Earth map it
would not have these distortions.
So, your claiming that "the distances are correct if you understand how the 'map' is plotted", would be absolutely untrue if the earth were flat.
Then you scurrilously claim "You do understand."
Yes, I understand very well. then "You are just a liar."
That is nothing short of slander! I do not lie!, though I may shout at times - like now.
This is the sort of attack that comes from so many Flat Earthers when they realise that they have no case. then "You refuse to ever accept anything that goes against your (or your employers) narrative." I have
no employer and no "narrative" - whatever that means,
I do not speak for anybody else and what I say I firmly believe.
all I have is a position that is firmly based on evidence, history, on what I see around me and that fits with all the other little observations I see around me every day.
Your claim that I "spread falsehoods". That is completely untrue and again libellous, what I write here and everywhere else
what I honestly believe to be true,
so I am not spreading and falsehoods.
and finally "when called out you never have once adjusted your position." Please tell me where I have been called out and needed to "adjusted my position."
Now, I cannot deny that I may have made mistakes that needed correction. If you can point these out and
if I accept your opinion on said mistakes I will apologise.
As I see it, the Flat Earth hypothesis can only be supported by claims such as yours that adherents to the Globe are lying or deceived and that the absolute evidence we see every day is all faked.
What about YOU coming up with evidence that shows that you model for the earth explains the observations we see. You could do worse than try to tackle:
The Shadow Object Explanation of a Lunar Eclipse is Impossible! « on: November 06, 2016, 01:54:45 AM » or
Length of a day in the Southern Hemisphere in December « on: August 03, 2016, 06:08:37 PM » or
even simple things like how the sun can rise almost in the
South East here, yet at sunrise the sun on the Flat Earth model is closer to the
North East of here.
In other words instead of attacking people and always being negative, start being positive coming up with some viable alternative, as yet I honestly do not see any plausible alternative to the Globe.
Maybe part of this is from living in the Southern Hemisphere and seeing so many failings it the flat earth explanations with my own eyes. I see that the Southern Hemisphere is just a sort of "mirror image" of the Northern Hemisphere and that there is just as much reason to believe that the South Pole is a real location as there is the North Pole. There is just as much reason that the stars rotate clockwise around the South Celestial Pole as to believe that the stars rotate anti-clockwise around the North Celestial Pole. In recognition of this Tom Bishop now supports the "Bipolar map", but in my opinion that just opes up another set of problems.
Make some effort to show that your login name, "TheTruthIsOnHere", is more than just an empty phrase - if
The Truth Is On Here, show it to us.
Believe what you will, but retract your outlandish claims or you will have proved certainly that "The Truth Is not in YOU".
I'll leave your pot and kettle allusions alone, but you'd better not look in any mirrors.
There are probably numerous errors, but I have no more time to waste on this sort of stuff.