Show Posts
1
Flat Earth Theory / The Bipolar Model- An Investigation.
« on: March 19, 2022, 04:59:19 PM »
In my experience with the Flat Earth Models, I've most frequently come across 3 models- Monopole North-Centered seems to be the most common, and then Monopole South-Centered and Bipolar crop up sometimes. This trifold nature presents a certain difficulty- many Round Earth arguments only address Monopole North-Centered. As such, argument for each model is used interchangeably. I think it would be valuable to address each of these one at a time.
I'm starting with Bipolar because it presents the most immediate problem. The wiki itself says "The continental layout is unknown and has yet to be fully researched due to ambiguities of jet streams, flight routing, and non-direct flights". Any single attempt at finding a hole in one continental layout can be addressed with another layout. So lets knock them out all at once.
All arguments will reference "splits". These are simply divisions in the bipolar model which are not present in the globe model. I'm coming at this from a Globe point of view because that's the predominant model, and thus the frame of reference the average person would expect. For example, in this model,
there is a "split" in the Pacific.
The first layout which can be discarded is any layout which splits populated landmasses. I don't expect this to be a point of contention- if there was a split through North America, people would notice. Even if there was a split through Siberia, people would notice, because of the Trans-Siberian Railroad.
The second layout which can be discarded is any split through the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic has been regularly traversed by ships since the late 15th to early 16th century, and trade routes are well documented. It also is the shortest route between North America and Europe, and is regularly traversed by planes and ships. This discards maps such as this:
The third layout is the predominant one for bipolar models. This places the split somewhere in the Pacific ocean, and is most common likely due to the size of the Pacific Ocean. Because of the this, civilians do not traverse the Pacific ocean as often as they do the Atlantic. These images have the split in the Pacific ocean:
However, there are a multitude of problems with this configuration of the bipolar model.
First of all, there is yours truly. I have flown from Brisbane, Australia, to Dallas, Texas, probably 8 to 10 times. The flight took approximately 17 hours. After a while, Qantas stopped running the Brisbane to Dallas route, and since then I've taken the Brisbane to Los Angeles route. This is an extremely long flight in either of these, passing over either Asia, or Africa. I'm one of many who have flown from Australia to America.
Additonally, many other flights exist which cross the Pacific. These include Auckland to Santiago, Manila to Los Angeles, and Tokyo to Mexico City, to name but a few. https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-tokyo-nrt allows anybody to see almost every flight route in existence, just by clicking on a departure airport. I'm aware of the Issues in Flight Analysis article- but that deals mainly with using flight time to analyze distance, not with the existence of a flight route that would pass off the edge of the earth in a certain model.
Finally there's the existence of shipping lanes. Living in America, many goods will come from China, and they are brought on cargo ships. The Pacific might see fewer civilian crossings than the Atlantic, but it sees a great deal of commercial traffic. https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:135.9/centery:16.8/zoom:2 shows the amount of traffic crossing the Pacific at every latitude.
This discards splits in the Pacific. So what's left? Where could the split possibly be drawn other than the Pacific, Atlantic, or somewhere it bisects populated land?
Looking forwards to debating this.
I'm starting with Bipolar because it presents the most immediate problem. The wiki itself says "The continental layout is unknown and has yet to be fully researched due to ambiguities of jet streams, flight routing, and non-direct flights". Any single attempt at finding a hole in one continental layout can be addressed with another layout. So lets knock them out all at once.
All arguments will reference "splits". These are simply divisions in the bipolar model which are not present in the globe model. I'm coming at this from a Globe point of view because that's the predominant model, and thus the frame of reference the average person would expect. For example, in this model,
there is a "split" in the Pacific.
The first layout which can be discarded is any layout which splits populated landmasses. I don't expect this to be a point of contention- if there was a split through North America, people would notice. Even if there was a split through Siberia, people would notice, because of the Trans-Siberian Railroad.
The second layout which can be discarded is any split through the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic has been regularly traversed by ships since the late 15th to early 16th century, and trade routes are well documented. It also is the shortest route between North America and Europe, and is regularly traversed by planes and ships. This discards maps such as this:
The third layout is the predominant one for bipolar models. This places the split somewhere in the Pacific ocean, and is most common likely due to the size of the Pacific Ocean. Because of the this, civilians do not traverse the Pacific ocean as often as they do the Atlantic. These images have the split in the Pacific ocean:
However, there are a multitude of problems with this configuration of the bipolar model.
First of all, there is yours truly. I have flown from Brisbane, Australia, to Dallas, Texas, probably 8 to 10 times. The flight took approximately 17 hours. After a while, Qantas stopped running the Brisbane to Dallas route, and since then I've taken the Brisbane to Los Angeles route. This is an extremely long flight in either of these, passing over either Asia, or Africa. I'm one of many who have flown from Australia to America.
Additonally, many other flights exist which cross the Pacific. These include Auckland to Santiago, Manila to Los Angeles, and Tokyo to Mexico City, to name but a few. https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-tokyo-nrt allows anybody to see almost every flight route in existence, just by clicking on a departure airport. I'm aware of the Issues in Flight Analysis article- but that deals mainly with using flight time to analyze distance, not with the existence of a flight route that would pass off the edge of the earth in a certain model.
Finally there's the existence of shipping lanes. Living in America, many goods will come from China, and they are brought on cargo ships. The Pacific might see fewer civilian crossings than the Atlantic, but it sees a great deal of commercial traffic. https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:135.9/centery:16.8/zoom:2 shows the amount of traffic crossing the Pacific at every latitude.
This discards splits in the Pacific. So what's left? Where could the split possibly be drawn other than the Pacific, Atlantic, or somewhere it bisects populated land?
Looking forwards to debating this.