[enkidugilga]

Surely people travel from one country to the next using airplanes. The map provided in the Wiki would describe many flight paths not currently used by airlines, and many different travel times for flights. It seems clear that flight times, and flight paths correspond to a more or less spherical Earth.

[StinkyOne]

Surely people travel from one country to the next using airplanes. The map provided in the Wiki would describe many flight paths not currently used by airlines, and many different travel times for flights. It seems clear that flight times, and flight paths correspond to a more or less spherical Earth.

You are correct. FE doesn't have a working map, which seems kinda suspicious for a theory that is so old. The map in the wiki is claimed to only be an example.

[3DGeek]

Surely people travel from one country to the next using airplanes. The map provided in the Wiki would describe many flight paths not currently used by airlines, and many different travel times for flights. It seems clear that flight times, and flight paths correspond to a more or less spherical Earth.

You are correct. FE doesn't have a working map, which seems kinda suspicious for a theory that is so old. The map in the wiki is claimed to only be an example.

As has been comprehensively demonstrated in other threads - the problem isn't JUST that there is no map.  The non-stop travel times (which are known to be correct) of airlines and the (hard to dispute) maximum cruise speeds of airliners allows us to deduce that the route distances claimed by the airlines are correct.   Then, you can take a group of four wide-spread cities that form a quadrilateral and try to lay them out on a flat surface such that the four distances between them and the two diagonals work out right.   If you actually do that, you find that those four cities and the routes between them cannot POSSIBLY lie on any flat surface.   Hence there is no possible flat earth map that'll "work" - so it doesn't matter that the Flat Earthers cannot make one.   We fully understand WHY they cannot.

The only way they can (and do) defend against this problem is to claim that neither the airlines, nor the airplane manufacturers know how fast their planes can fly.   Since the speeds involved on some routes would require regular airliners like the 787 to fly at more than twice the speed of sound - this is an utterly untenable claim.

So - there are no good flat earth maps because there CANNOT BE any good flat earth maps.   It is impossible.

[J-Man]

Surely people travel from one country to the next using airplanes. The map provided in the Wiki would describe many flight paths not currently used by airlines, and many different travel times for flights. It seems clear that flight times, and flight paths correspond to a more or less spherical Earth.

Forget the map, get into the plane and allow the captain to get you to your destination on time. That's their job and all airlines have stats telling you just how long you could wait on the tarmac being delayed.

The only way you will know for sure is to bump into the dome over Antarctica, but as we know, flights are not allowed and if they were, refueling is an issue.

[GiantTurtle]

J-Man, why are you asking him to ignore evidence?
There are very clear signs as to if a plane has gone supersonic, namely a loud crack and a moisture cloud behind the tail. So we know no commercial jet ever goes faster than 1234 km an hour, (800 miles an hour).
.

But then a plane can fly from mexico city to ciaro to beijin and back to mexico city in 49 hours.
The same model of plane can fly from santiago to capetown to aukland to santiago in 51 hours.
The southern route is at no point closer than 10500 km from the northen route. (And don't claim it's NASA magic as it is measured as ground distance in all but two cases but there is a lot of ground between beijing and aukland).

So from the formula for a circle we can estimate the extra travel time of the southern route as 2pi*10500 km giving an extra66 thousand kilometres that the plane is supposed to travel with just two more hours of flight time.
Even if the southern plane went at the speed of sound, it would need 53 hours just to cover that EXTRA DISTANCE ALONE!

[Iman Fozouni]

Surely people travel from one country to the next using airplanes. The map provided in the Wiki would describe many flight paths not currently used by airlines, and many different travel times for flights. It seems clear that flight times, and flight paths correspond to a more or less spherical Earth.

You are correct. FE doesn't have a working map, which seems kinda suspicious for a theory that is so old. The map in the wiki is claimed to only be an example.

There is no available map for flat earth. We can not draw a logical map for flat earth because only the global earth map supports every aspects of earth such as distances, sun angle etc.

[Pete Svarrior]

the globe earth supports the evidence

How did you arrive at this false conclusion?

[TropeADope]

the globe earth supports the evidence

How did you arrive at this false conclusion?

I would think it is because RET doesn't require magic to work. Celestial gears, a non existent map, and mysterious, unknown accelerating forces are about as plausible an explanation as saying Apollo makes the sun work.

[Shifter]

What you think is a straight line in the Flat Earth is actually curved in real life. You just don't know it because the curvature of space is not as flat or endless as we are led to believe.

If you want to travel from Sydney, Australia to South America you do not take a path 'as the crow flies'. Follow the longitude paths for the quickest route that is the same path as the globe model


Each square has roughly the same area. They are tiny in the centre but big at the edges. This is why it looks distorted. Remember you are looking at a 2D map the size of a sheet of paper of a 3D world, tens of thousands of km wide.

The flat earth map works. You guys just need to stop thinking like a brainwashed globetard

[douglips]

What you think is a straight line in the Flat Earth is actually curved in real life. You just don't know it because the curvature of space is not as flat or endless as we are led to believe.

If you want to travel from Sydney, Australia to South America you do not take a path 'as the crow flies'. Follow the longitude paths for the quickest route that is the same path as the globe model

Following longitude lines is not the quickest path and isn't the way airplanes fly.
Examples:
Johannesburg to Sydney:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/QFA64/history/20171105/1650Z/FAOR/YSSY

JFK to Hong Kong goes just about right over the north pole:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPA845
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CPA845/history/20171105/0455Z/KJFK/VHHH

Each square has roughly the same area. They are tiny in the centre but big at the edges. This is why it looks distorted. Remember you are looking at a 2D map the size of a sheet of paper of a 3D world, tens of thousands of km wide.

The flat earth map works. You guys just need to stop thinking like a brainwashed globetard

"Each quare has roughly the same area, they are tiny in the centre but big at the edges."

Can you help me understand what you're saying? Those two things sound like opposites - they are the same area but they are tiny vs. big. Are you talking about some optical illusion or something?

[mtnman]

Each square has roughly the same area. They are tiny in the centre but big at the edges. This is why it looks distorted. Remember you are looking at a 2D map the size of a sheet of paper of a 3D world, tens of thousands of km wide.

They are tiny and big and roughly the same. What?

Projecting a flat Earth onto flat sheet of paper compresses the scale, but would not distort the relationships. Projecting a round Earth onto flat paper would distort, but that's why there are different map projections used. Typically the maps indicate which projection is used.

[GiantTurtle]

What you think is a straight line in the Flat Earth is actually curved in real life. You just don't know it because the curvature of space is not as flat or endless as we are led to believe.

So the earth is flat, but it is only flat relative to a curved surface?
Is this curved surface possibly a sphere with a six thousand kilometre radius and that is why all observation match it being a globe?

[Shifter]

This is not a debate forum. I can't help that you can't get through that globe head conditioning to understand. For now, don't question flat earth answers in the Q&A.  Just accept

[StinkyOne]

This is not a debate forum. I can't help that you can't get through that globe head conditioning to understand. For now, don't question flat earth answers in the Q&A.  Just accept

What magically bends spacetime in just the right way to force your fake map to match what we observe in reality? More magic to attempt to make FET match reality.

[3DGeek]

This is not a debate forum. I can't help that you can't get through that globe head conditioning to understand. For now, don't question flat earth answers in the Q&A.  Just accept

Actually, the rules here say that the FIRST answer in Q&A should come from an FE'er (or at least explain the FET perspective) - after that contrary viewpoints are allowed.

[mtnman]

This is not a debate forum. I can't help that you can't get through that globe head conditioning to understand. For now, don't question flat earth answers in the Q&A.  Just accept

My question was, what does your statement mean when you answered they are tiny and big and roughly the same. Seems like Q&A to me.

[devils advocate]

This is not a debate forum. I can't help that you can't get through that globe head conditioning to understand. For now, don't question flat earth answers in the Q&A.  Just accept

Just accept?? How very zetetic

That would be easier if there was A flat earth position, which there is not on so many issues here so why should we accept your answer? Are you better than Tom, Junker, Rushy or Pete? What if they have a different view?

What if your answer makes no sense can we not ask for clarification? If I ask how perspective accounts for sunsets and you answer "Lemons" just because you are a flat earther does not make your answer unquestionable.

[juner]

Actually, the rules here say that the FIRST answer in Q&A should come from an FE'er (or at least explain the FET perspective) - after that contrary viewpoints are allowed.

And where in the rules does it say that is the case? I thought I had made it fairly clear how Q&A is supposed to work in the only stickied topic in this forum (since the forum's general rules don't address it specifically).

I am starting to think that Pete is correct about your inability to tell the truth.

[douglips]

I'm not trying to debate, I just honestly don't understand "the squares are the same size, tiny in the middle and large at the edges." I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm asking for your help in understanding it.

[Tom Bishop]

There is no Flat Earth map.