21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Center of gravity of objects on a flat earth

« on: August 19, 2020, 08:36:09 PM »

Is there an FE explanation for why somethings are more stable than others since the conventional “center of gravity” concept wouldn’t apply (I’m assuming)?  What would cause something to be balanced or unbalanced on the flat earth?

In both the RE and the FE models someone who is accelerating upward would be unable to tell the difference from this upward acceleration and being inside of a gravitational field. Here's a video explaining this.

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: August 12, 2020, 03:25:43 PM »

The question I have is how can we determine if your position in relation to the north star is based on a flat earth and refraction or a globe earth and refraction to determine if the claims that it's based entirely on a globe earth are supported or refuted by the evidence. As of now I don't know.

The fact that the North star has a certain altitude is merely an observation. You measure it in angles. How would that tell you anything about the shape of the earth?

I tend to agree after seeing the videos about it but it's a common belief that latitude is based on the earth being a sphere instead of based on how far you are away from the north star. What test could we devise to  determine if this is true or not.

But add the fact that its angle changes by 1 degree for every 111km you travel towards it or away from it, may tell you something. Nothing is certain of course, but the very simplest theory to explain that observation is that the earth is (approximately) spherical. Doesn't mean that it is spherical, and absolutely nothing can prove it for certain. But that hypothesis is one very simple explanation.

couldn't that also mean that the earth is not a sphere with the light from the north star propagating outward in a circle?

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: August 07, 2020, 04:27:02 PM »

I agree that latitude is simpler and has been an integral part of navigation for much longer. Again it would be a good starting point to at least establish if latitude on its own is or isn't a contentious issue for FErs.

The central difficulty with longitude is that it's all about time and until the 18th C there wasn't a reliable way of keeping time accurately, by which time of course, a belief in a globe earth was pretty much universal. Having said that, unless time is somehow a concept which doesn't work on a flat earth, everything else about the method is observation of the heavens and observations are observations, the shape of the earth doesn't really affect the results.

The question I have is how can we determine if your position in relation to the north star is based on a flat earth and refraction or a globe earth and refraction to determine if the claims that it's based entirely on a globe earth are supported or refuted by the evidence. As of now I don't know.

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: August 06, 2020, 07:14:30 PM »

I'd go further and say I don't believe there is an issue with longitude either. In principle, finding your longitude is easy. Find the exact time when the sun was due south at Greenwich UK. Find the exact time when the sun is due south at your current location. Work out the time difference. If it's 1 hour, then you are 15° away from Greenwich. This can work on a flat earth just as well as a spherical one, it's simply making use of the fact that the sun appears to travel across the sky at 15° per hour, nothing more. The sun certainly does this, it's easily observed, so if the earth is flat, then it's doing this on a flat earth, so the method still works.

The main issue that I have with longitude being shape agnostic is that it a lot more complicated to calculate and was not really done by ancient navigators when the FE concept was much more mainstream than it is now.  It's more modern. It's not something you can calculate with sometime as simple as some rope and a board. Claims that it is based on a spherical coordinate system, from my perspective, are much more challenging for me to understand or offer an alternate theory to.

With latitude it seems to me that there is strong evidence that a navigator who calculated latitude and thought the earth was flat would do so in a similar way to a navigator who thought the earth was round.

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: August 04, 2020, 06:39:46 PM »

I've read a number of posts where latitude and longitude are dismissed by FErs because they are based on a globe earth.

Robin,

I've researched this and I'm also confused about the claim because we have been able to navigate using the stars without using the words "Longitude" and "Latitude"




In terms of Latitude it does not appear to me to be based on a spherical coordinate system. It appears to be based on where you are, in relation to the North star. This was made clear to me when I learned about the Kamal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamal_(navigation)


The video below discusses the Kamal around 2 minutes.



So is it only the longitude part of the system which is based on a spherical earth?

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: To be serious, FET must have a Flat Earth Map showing the shortest route.

« on: August 03, 2020, 09:28:11 PM »

That doesn't answer anything. We don't need any video of a flight. Such a flight is possible, between any 2 points, whether the flight is done or not, or whether or not it's recorded.

I gave liked 20-30 different rebuttals to the following statement:  "Known flight paths and flight times weaken the different FE models."



and I have given you a link to one or the rebuttals which says that flight path does not exist or it is impossible.

One of those rebuttals is something to the effect that "Flights that weaken the different FE models do not really exist" and, as an addition, "Without full unedited uncut video of the entire flight showing that it's real these flights will continue to be placed in the 'fake' category"

The remaining "responses" to the question, in the list noted above, are not responsive to this question.

I disagree. If you are going to predict the shorted distance between two points which are half a world apart then you would need some sort of a map. If the predicted flight path /time does not match the actual flight path/time then there is the claim that the continental configuration on the map that you are testing is simply incorrect and a new continental configuration needs to be tested.

The question is whether the shortest route would be north from Argentina (or Chile) across Canada, based on the Flat Earth map. Is there an answer to this or not?

There are different answers depending on the FE model that you believe in. In addition the rebuttal that sometimes flights are observed to fly different paths on the same flight suggesting that predicting the shortest path is not the correct thing to do as a plane may take a longer route (as shown in the SF/London flight path discussion linked in the responses) If a flight does not take a path predicted by one of the FE models it could be because of weather, it could be because of fuel, it could be because of air traffic.

Here's the flight on one FE model:



The black line on this model shows the shortest path on a different model:
The problem with is when you take the flight, and don't fly over the United States, we don't know if it's because:

1. The map is wrong/that is not the map of the earth
2. The plane flew a different route due to something like weather/air traffic
3. The flight which didn't fly that route is fake or didn't exist.
(insert listed rebuttal from above here)

Please keep in mind that I can't find a picture of a FE model in which Jerusalem is the center or a picture of one of the infinite flat earth models.

E.g., saying there is no Flat Earth map, or no map Flat-Earthers all agree on.

Not all people who believe the earth is not a sphere believe there is no map. There are many people who believe there is a map of the earth. Several of the links I sent you are from people who believe there is a map of the earth.

This whole website is really just a joke -- right?  You don't give serious answers to anything. You're just doing this for fun-and-games.

You have to understand that there are many different viewpoints and beliefs within the community. There is a flat circle map with a north pole center and a perimeter ice wall which I have seen rejected because the person said that Jerusalem is the center of the earth not the north pole. With so many different views and beliefs you will have a whole array of different responses.

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 30, 2020, 05:16:07 PM »

Well I don't consider the earth itself to have an interactive surface with a scale that changes as you move across it, so I don't particularly care that Bing has an interactive scale.

But it is. When you see something very far away that is very small your brain knows that, because that small thing is very far away, the scale of the item is large. When I see the mountains, which are just a few inches tall off on the horizon my brain passively understands. When I look out the airplane window at 30,000 feet I know the scale of the surface of the earth has changed and, what was a very small distance, from the airplane is a much larger distance from the surface of the earth. If I took a picture from the airplane and drew a scale on it that scale would be much different than the scale from a picture taken at ground level.

If anything, that makes me less likely to think it represents any kind of reality.

I just gave an example of how, in the real world, a video of the surface of the earth should have an interactive scale.

Secondly, where exactly is the south pole on a Bing map?

It's not a single point, it's a horizontal line that stretches all the way along the base of the map whether you are zoomed in or not.

That's funny because I didn't see a line. I saw an area of land on Antarctica when i search for south pole on bing.

That's no more realistic to me than the rim of the circle on model 2. At least with map 2 I can put a pin in the exact location of the north pole. Map 2 doesn't say anything about there being a wall, it's a flat 2D surface. Sure, many FErs add the ice wall part, but that's not something you can deduce just from looking at the map.

If you search for south pole Antarctica on Bing you don't see a map. Even if you did see a line that would not change the fact that one model has a south pole and no ice barrier perimeter and one does.

Also, I don't consider 1&2 to be different models at all, just different presentations of the same information.

You are seriously arguing semantics about the word "model". Fine then. What "presentation style" do you believe most closely depicts the planet that you live on.

"presentation style" 1:

-depicts the earth as a defined area with a defined edge
-depicts the earth as having a great ice wall around this perimeter edge
-depicts the earth as not having a south pole
-not supported by know travel paths/times
-not taught in schools all over the world as a "presentation style" of the surface of the earth


"presentation style" 2
-depicts the earth as an interactive surface with no defined edge
-depicts the earth as not having a great ice wall (partly because there is no perimeter edge)
-depict the earth has having a south pole
-supported by know travel paths/times
-taught in schools all over the world as a "presentation style" of the surface of the earth

Both models are accurate in some respects and inaccurate in others. Model 1 is good around the equator and poor around the poles. Model 2 is good around the north pole, poor around the equator and poor around the south pole. How am I supposed to come to any kind of conclusion about which model is better than the other?

I thought you just said they were not models? Now you are saying they are models. The Bing map "presentation style" has an interactive scale which makes it much more accurate both around the poles and around the equators

I can use some GIS software to zoom in as much as I want to on a particular area of a map using either model/projection and I can use haversine to calculate distances on either model (and they will agree with each other). I know this isn't instant and interactive, but who cares? I certainly don't.

Can you show me, online, where anyone has made an interactive map out of the flat disk, great ice wall, "presentation style" of the surface of the earth

28

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 30, 2020, 02:54:47 PM »

Both models 1 & 2 represent the earth equally well

How so? One represent the earth as an interactive surface with ice at the north pole and the south pole and a second one represent the earth as a flat circle with a great ice wall around the perimeter. They are two totally different models of the earth.

If you won't answer that question would you answer the questions?

1. Does the planet that you live on have a South Pole?

Yes

2. Does the planet that you live on have a great ice wall encompassing the entire planet?

No

Yet you refuse to acknowledge that a model of the earth with a south pole and no perimeter ice wall is a more accurate representation of the planet that you live on. Why is that? How can you say that a model of our earth with a great ice wall and no south pole is just as accurate as a model of our earth with no great ice wall and a south pole??

I don’t think either proposed FE model or any proposed FE map fits our world.

I'm not asking which one fits our world. I'm asking which one most closely fits our world.

The often demonstrated weaknesses for journeys south of the tropics, such as to and from French Polynesia, the routes which jump from one side of the world to another to travel a thousand miles and other difficulties mean the FE models and maps are of no practical use. A major rethink is needed.

one of these models has a much easier time with these journeys. As a matter of fact almost all flights are mapped and tracked on one of these models.

1. Does the planet that you live on have a South Pole?
2. Does the planet that you live on have a great ice wall encompassing the entire planet?

Yes to 1.

Do you agree that lines of longitude converge at the South Pole?

If you believe that the planet has a south pole then I would like to point out that only one of the flat earth models I have shown on this thread has a south pole.

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: simple test of FLAT vs. ROUND Earth - route from Buenos Aires to Melbourne

« on: July 29, 2020, 07:09:36 PM »

Doesn't the Flat Earth shortest route go north from Argentina across the western Atlantic and Canada and North Pole and Siberia and China?

Whereas the "round" earth shortest route goes west from Argentina across the south Pacific?

Doesn't the Flat Earth map -- https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_Maps#Monopole_Models -- show the shortest route to be north across Canada etc.? which obviously is not the shortest route anyone would choose? I.e., wouldn't even a Flat-Earther choose the route west across the Pacific rather than north across Canada?

The idea that known flight times, flight paths, and flight distances weaken the various different FE models is something that has been discussed dozens, if not hundreds of times. Here is a large array of responses:



https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=16219.msg217416#msg217416
Sometimes flight paths support one FE model and sometimes they support another FE model or even the RE model when flying from point A to point B



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2046469#msg2046469

 "This flight has never been existed."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2044714#msg2044714
"Don't trust  aircraft companies such as Qantas and Latam by their claims about flight times. These are liars."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2045126#msg2045126
"If you find a video show full flight of a travel between Chile and Australia, then there will be a possiblity that path it exist."
-These flights only exist if you can produce a full video of the entire flight.



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74707.msg2045413#msg2045413
-flying from Santiago, Chile to Sydney Australia in about 14 hours is impossible


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121615#msg121615
-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 180 degrees the earth is flat.
-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 179.99984 degrees the earth is slightly concave.



https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121996#msg121996
-Distances between two cities which are far apart is unknown


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122030#msg122030
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122441#msg122441
-Flight GPS systems are inaccurate


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122359#msg122359
-GPS systems are based on a round earth therefore will give measurements/distances which support a round earth.
-Aircraft are using instruments which assume round earth coordinates which will support a round earth.
-There is no flat earth map.
-The difference in flight time is based off of flight speed which has yet to be proven.
-The airplane speed and range is based off round systems therefore will give speeds and ranges which support a round earth


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122364#msg122364
-plane speed measurements are unreliable

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122369#msg122369
-there are no flat earth flight programs, systems, GPS etc because the flat earth aircraft navigation fund is nonexistent.


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122410#msg122410
-Triangulation as a measurement of distance can be inaccurate because the "known" locations used for triangulation are based on a round earth system


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122411#msg122411
-there are almost an infinite number of continental configurations (If a flight disproves flat earth continental configuration 23985729387592873 you then need to test continental configuration 23985729387592874).
-Groundspeed measurement instruments use a round earth coordinate system therefore will give results which support a round earth


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122423#msg122423
-proof is needed that mile measurements on a highway are accurate

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122433#msg122433
-Google maps is based on a round earth coordinate system

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122655#msg122655
-any navigation system based on longitude and latitude is a round earth navigation system (which is most likely used in all navigation systems)

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122664#msg122664
-any map, navigation, or measurement system which uses Latitude and Longitude in any way is inaccurate

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122672#msg122672
-That's not the map of the earth (a variant of there is no map of the earth)

30

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 29, 2020, 06:11:58 PM »

First of all thank you for acknowledging that you had misinterpreted your interrogation of the Flight Record; I think you will earn respect for that from the other posters. 

Thanks. Now I would really appreciate it if you would answer my question. Which of the two proposed FE models do you believe most closely resembles the planet that you live on and why?

If you won't answer that question would you answer the questions?

1. Does the planet that you live on have a South Pole?
2. Does the planet that you live on have a great ice wall encompassing the entire planet?



If you think the earth does have a south pole and no great perimeter ice wall then then you would believe that a bing map type interactive FE model would most accurately depict the planet that you live on.

The problem with all of these projections is the distortion of the image, generally the further from the centre of the Polar Map, or from the equator of the Mercator Projection, more distortion is introduced.  Look at Australia in the Polar Map; if it was that long and thin, don't you think the Aussies would have noticed? 

This is why the more modern online maps have an interactive scale which changes depends on where you look and how far in you zoom.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 29, 2020, 03:06:12 PM »

The evidence you were shown passed the threshold for "beyond reasonable", carried on mounting up and left "beyond reasonable" as a distant spec in the rear view mirror. Bing is simply not using an FE model.

Then everyone else can use Bing and you can use https://earth3dmap.com/

Same model, different documentation and levels of interactivity.

32

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 29, 2020, 03:00:03 PM »

First, you say you have documented instances of altered records.  You haven't. 
Will you please promise that you will check history on this particular flight for the next couple of days and advise the Forum when it gets altered?

You are right. I didn't realize that, when i clicked the link, it shows the most recent BAW6B flight. Because I clicked the link the next day the flight path that I saw was from the following day. Human error.

In answer to your question I'm not sure I understand.  You want me to propose a flight which supports one of 2 FE models?

Let's start here. Which, of the two proposed FE models that I have shown, do you think most closely resembles the world you live in?

Oh no, not that again. The Mercator projection is not a flat Earth model. On a flat Earth, you can't go forever in a straight line and never reach an edge.

you can if that FE model is infinite. There are infinite flat earth models.

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 28, 2020, 05:03:59 PM »

Sorry what models are you talking about?

The two different FE models shown on this thread:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=16219.msg217167#msg217167


I'll link them again:

Here is a model of the earth in which the earth is represented as a flat plane:
https://www.bing.com/maps

I will call this FE model 1



Here is a model of the earth in which the earth is represented as a flat plane:
https://wiki.tfes.org/images/4/43/Map.png

I will call this FE model 2


Now what flight could we take in which the flight path evidence and observations could support one of those two models and weaken the other?

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 28, 2020, 03:21:57 PM »

Quite agree that BAW6B (aircraft reg G-ZBKI) did not fly over Greenland on 26/27 July.  I don't think anyone claimed it did. 

Yes they did. They did it here:

[EDIT 2] And now, London time 12:28 (BST) BAW6B has neatly crossed the tip of Greenland and most of the North Atlantic, just approaching the coast of Ireland.  Scheduled to arrive at Heathrow 14:05. I live underneath the flight path so I will be able to see it come in.

In any case, check the history for this aircraft and please come back and tell everyone that it crossed Greenland.  Or not.  And remember, we are talking here about G-ZBKA on 27/28 July. 

The website indicated that it crossed Greenland. Unfortunately there have been instances, which I have already documented, in which the flight was shown as having crossed Greenland just to have been deleted and replaced with a flight which has not crossed Greenland.
Now that I have answered your question, Can you answer mine? What is a flight that we can take in which the path that we fly would support one of the two presented FE models?

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 27, 2020, 11:38:51 PM »

You do understand that a Flight Number is not unique? 

How many flights from SF to london have flight number BAW6B which arrived today? Both of these show a flight path not over Greenland

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW6B/history/20200727/0245Z/KSFO/EGLL
https://www.radarbox.com/data/flights/BA286/1439853660

On the live tracker it showed the flight going over greenland and on this website it shows the flight not going over Greenland. It's funny how the live tracker gets "deleted" and replaced with the new flight path.

Most flights on popular routes take place several times a week, under the same Flight Number.  So you need to specify which date you are talking about for a particular Flight Number.  If you think the "flight path changes after the plane lands", then you are looking at the same Flight Number on a different day.

I'm talking about the BAW6B which was in the air today referenced earlier in this thread which left SF 7/26/2020 and arrived in London 7/27/2020.

The route will be different each day.

Can you find me one nonstop flight from SF to London  which flies over Brasil?

According to https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW6B/history the flight from SF to London never passed over Greenland. Even though the live tracker shows the flight over Greenland. Can you send me one link to a completed nonstop flight between SF to London in which the flight tracker shows the flight passing over Greenland?


It might be worth it to add these inconsistencies to the wiki because something is clearly off.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 27, 2020, 08:42:11 PM »

That very website shows it did fly over Greenland on 24 July, the date of my post.

So which version of the flight is correct? Is it the 7/24 version of the flight or is it the current version of the flight?

This really makes me question this website because it appears that the flight path changes after the plane lands. I wonder why that is?

Since this flight path appears to have some sort of deviation which support both of the FE models shown on this post which is a flight path that can be taken and observed which would only support one of the two FE models?

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 27, 2020, 03:29:26 PM »

[EDIT] As I write, check out BAW6B, San Francisco-London, currently over the Hudson Bay and heading directly for Greenland. Using the ‘measure distance’ function on Google maps, the flight appears to be on the great circle route.

[EDIT 2] And now, London time 12:28 (BST) BAW6B has neatly crossed the tip of Greenland and most of the North Atlantic, just approaching the coast of Ireland.  Scheduled to arrive at Heathrow 14:05. I live underneath the flight path so I will be able to see it come in.

this website shows that it didn't fly over greenland:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW6B

38

Flat Earth Community / Re: I am a Pilot and an FCC licenced radio technician: Ask me anything!

« on: July 23, 2020, 10:01:46 PM »

Where have you flown to and from? And how many times have you flown there? Did you ever fly internationally? Do you have any proof that you are a pilot?

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 23, 2020, 09:48:04 PM »

Whoa there, tiger. Flight across busy airspace is heavily organised and the North Atlantic is no exception. All commercial flights are organised, corralled, controlled by air traffic control in distinct lanes whether they are flying east or west, to avoid mid-air collisions. Flights across the continental US are also heavily organised.

I agree  but there is also a limited amount of fuel that an airplane can hold. Flights can easily avoid collision by going a mile or two out of the way or Increasting/decreasing altitude.

Do you know anyone who looked out the window and saw Greenland when flying from LA to London? I don't. I was on two separate flights with hundreds of people. I checked on 50 flights online and never saw one that flew over Greenland. My Mother also flew to London and verified she didn't fly over Greenland. I asked some of my coworkers who work in LA on my team if they have been to Europe. One said he flew to France and didn't fly over Greenland. I've found 10 people who have all confirmed my initial observations. In addition when checking dozens of flight tracking websites they have all confirmed the observations. The score is 100 points for non flat disk model flight path and 0 points flat disk model flight path.

An airliner is not free to pick the most direct route in any circumstances, even if that would save a ton of fuel, because midair collisions make even worse headlines than the price of a ticket and you're talking about some of the busiest airspace in the world.

Airplanes have a maximum flight distance and airlines are definitely profit driven so flights will always take the most direct route possible while avoiding collisions. If you look in the air above LA you will notice very clearly that the skies are not crowded even though it has a huge airport. They never have to fly hundreds or thousands of miles out of the way to avoid an airplane.

If you want a long-distance flight that more resembles the "great circle" route, try London to Tokyo.

I've never flown from London to Tokyo. It would be pretty easy to test. The flat disk model has the flight flying over Norway. Based on my observations matching flight maps I've seen online I'm betting that they don't.

I did call my Uncle who is a retired pilot just to ask and he said that the London Tokyo flights don't fly over Norway and that generally the flight tracker websites online are decently accurate. I have no reason to think he's lying.

I dated a girl in high school who's dad was a pilot and I messaged her to see if she would ask her dad for me. I'll update my post if/when she responds.

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are flights from and to French Polynesia a hoax?

« on: July 23, 2020, 08:24:58 PM »

They STILL cannot get around that international flights take the shortest route (which results in a nearly straight line on the flat earth map), and make no sense at all on a globe. That is because the earth is flat.

The earth can be flat and not shaped like a flat circle with a north pole center, no south pole, and a great ice wall.

The most glaring controversy  is flight paths and flight times.  I have flown nonstop from LA to London twice in my life. Both times I looked out the window. Both times I noticed that I didn't fly over Greenland. I have mapped the path that I believe that I took based on the flight information online and based on my own personal observations on two different FLAT earth models shown below:


This FLAT earth model represent the earth as a FLAT plane and is interactive with an adjustable scale. The red path represents the "straight line" path on the flat disk model. Not very straight here is it? Notice how the flat circle flight path curves way out of the way to go over greenland?
Please keep in mind that, based on my observations, I'm able to confirm that the red path is NOT the path that I took. Once we hit the ocean we didn't fly over the southern tip of Greenland. Once we hit the ocean we didn't fly over any land until we hit the British islands.




This model also represents the earth as a flat plane and is NOT interactive. Notice how, two different representations of the earth as a flat plane, have two totally different flight paths. One is overwhelmingly supported by flight paths and flight times and one is significantly weakened by flight paths and flight times.Notice how the red "straight line" path passes over Greenland. This is VERY easy to test. Fly from LA to London, once you hit the ocean, look out the window every few minutes to see if you see land. If you don't then you have shown the red line flight path to be incorrect.

If that is the case, and it is, it is no small feat to fake a flight.

I'm not talking about fake flights. I'm talking about flights in which an airplane full of people can all verify the flight information was decently accurate when they check it online. In addition all the friends/family of those passengers who dropped them off at the airport to board the plan can confirm the flight is real. PLUS all the friends/family who picked them up from the airport at their destination can verify that their flight was real.

When Grandma says i'm on flight 1704 from Ohio to Dallas which departs at 1:00 PM and arrives at gate 4 at 4:00 PM and I'm at gate 4 at 4:00 PM and I see grandma depart the plane saying I left from Ohio at 1:00 PM to me it's shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the flight was real.