[KnuckleJoe]

So I'm new here, but I've been leaning toward believing a flat earth model makes much more sense than a globe for a couple years now. I've only been doing more research the last month or so after losing my job but honestly, the more I read, the more I realize how much of society is just fake and fabricated. I'm still educating myself but I've hit a big mental roadblock that I'm struggling to understand.

My father is an airline pilot, and has been one since I've been a child. The idea of plane paths wasn't something I thought about much before, but with everything I'm reading about odd flights or misleading flight info on here, is there reason to think that maybe my dad knows more than he's letting on? I've only made some passing "jokes" about flat earth to gauge his responses but he just said it was "crazy" and said he can see the curve from his cockpit?? I'm worried now because I don't know what to trust...

[Longtitube]

Sorry to hear about your job! What have you been reading and why do you trust that instead of anything else? Have you good reason to mistrust your dad or is he a decent sort who’s generally done right by you? The internet rabbit holes are often obsessive without reason but there’s a whole world out there which isn’t necessarily out to get you. Apart from the IRS...

You’ll find all sorts of opinions here, don’t just latch on to the first you find.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Also sorry about your job, Joe.  Times are tough. 

So.....

Do you go with your father, the world traveller who raised you.  Or someone on the Internet. 

Thats a tough one to call .......

Perhaps, when you are next looking at the aircraft tracking websites, ask yourself how likely it is that, without exception, all of those pilots are lying to their kids? 

[KnuckleJoe]

Sorry to hear about your job! What have you been reading and why do you trust that instead of anything else? Have you good reason to mistrust your dad or is he a decent sort who’s generally done right by you? The internet rabbit holes are often obsessive without reason but there’s a whole world out there which isn’t necessarily out to get you. Apart from the IRS...

You’ll find all sorts of opinions here, don’t just latch on to the first you find.

Well I've also read things about pilot instruments just showing manipulated data too? I mean that would make sense I think since it'd be hard to keep every pilot quiet...

[Pete Svarrior]

Welcome, KnuckleJoe. I hope you enjoy your stay here.

is there reason to think that maybe my dad knows more than he's letting on?

I strongly doubt it. The claims that pilots would be able to tell the two models aparts are vastly exaggerated. Part of the reason the globe model has historically been so successful is that it's not an entirely terrible approximation of reality. Sure, it gets some details wrong, but it works well enough for day-to-day living.

[he] said he can see the curve from his cockpit??

This is something you can challenge him on, should you wish to. Even if you assume that the globe Earth model holds, you would not be able to visually discern any curvature from the cruising altitutde of an airliner. Indeed, for this to be possible, the globe Earth model would have to be incorrect - the Earth would have to be much smaller than advertised. It's important to note that this is something you can point out without insisting that the Earth is flat - his observation contradicts the mainstream.

In short, I wouldn't distrust your father on a fundamental level. He seems to be a fairly normal guy, and just another victim of a somewhat nasty system. Work with him, not against him.

Finally: I would echo Longtitube's sentiment - you shouldn't trust anyone on the Internet, or at least not take anything people say at face value. This notably includes not trusting me. Analyse the information you're presented with and make your own conclusions. Taking someone else's word for it is never a good path.

[Longtitube]

Well I've also read things about pilot instruments just showing manipulated data too? I mean that would make sense I think since it'd be hard to keep every pilot quiet...

Where did you read that? Did they offer facts, real evidence to back up that claim? Who or what would that benefit? After all, if flight instruments give false readings there may be serious safety implications and I don't want to take a flight, say, over the Rockies if manipulated flight instruments put an aircraft on a heading and height which will pile it into Mt HighSteepAndUgly. Or is there a chance someone was talking out the back of his/her head?

[Dr David Thork]

So I'm new here, but I've been leaning toward believing a flat earth model makes much more sense than a globe for a couple years now. I've only been doing more research the last month or so after losing my job but honestly, the more I read, the more I realize how much of society is just fake and fabricated. I'm still educating myself but I've hit a big mental roadblock that I'm struggling to understand.

Sorry you lost your job. Let me give you some flat earther advice.

It doesn't matter what shape the earth is or who lied to you about it. Finding out those things won't change your life one jot or put bread on the table. A lot of people descend into these spirals of research when they are depressed and feeling helpless. They use it as escapism. Don't do that. Right now, you need to use that time constructively. Find a new job or build a new business. Then when you're back on your feet ... use your free time to out those sneaky b*****ds at NASA. 

Good luck.

[Tumeni]

Well I've also read things about pilot instruments just showing manipulated data too?

Where did you read this?

And when do you reckon this process, of showing manipulated data, might have started? With the Wright Brothers? Bleriot? Lindbergh?

[KnuckleJoe]

Welcome, KnuckleJoe. I hope you enjoy your stay here.

is there reason to think that maybe my dad knows more than he's letting on?

I strongly doubt it. The claims that pilots would be able to tell the two models aparts are vastly exaggerated. Part of the reason the globe model has historically been so successful is that it's not an entirely terrible approximation of reality. Sure, it gets some details wrong, but it works well enough for day-to-day living.

[he] said he can see the curve from his cockpit??

This is something you can challenge him on, should you wish to. Even if you assume that the globe Earth model holds, you would not be able to visually discern any curvature from the cruising altitutde of an airliner. Indeed, for this to be possible, the globe Earth model would have to be incorrect - the Earth would have to be much smaller than advertised. It's important to note that this is something you can point out without insisting that the Earth is flat - his observation contradicts the mainstream.

In short, I wouldn't distrust your father on a fundamental level. He seems to be a fairly normal guy, and just another victim of a somewhat nasty system. Work with him, not against him.

Finally: I would echo Longtitube's sentiment - you shouldn't trust anyone on the Internet, or at least not take anything people say at face value. This notably includes not trusting me. Analyse the information you're presented with and make your own conclusions. Taking someone else's word for it is never a good path.

Okay thanks, honestly hearing a lot of that helps me relax a bit. I've never had a reason to distrust my dad on something like that, but thinking about it lately just had my head spinning in circles. I mean he says he can see a curve, but in that case maybe it's just how it looks to him? I dunno. That's just good to know I don't have a reason to distrust him. It was just kind of a freakout moment, and it's been tough to be able to ask anything because I don't want my folks knowing of my "alternative views" quite yet.

[KnuckleJoe]

Well I've also read things about pilot instruments just showing manipulated data too?

Where did you read this?

And when do you reckon this process, of showing manipulated data, might have started? With the Wright Brothers? Bleriot? Lindbergh?

I don't know, I'm just going off various things I've read. I'm pretty new to a lot of this, but I'm trying to get better educated. It's hard to tell the difference between what's true and what's speculatory in some of these posts too...

[KnuckleJoe]

So I'm new here, but I've been leaning toward believing a flat earth model makes much more sense than a globe for a couple years now. I've only been doing more research the last month or so after losing my job but honestly, the more I read, the more I realize how much of society is just fake and fabricated. I'm still educating myself but I've hit a big mental roadblock that I'm struggling to understand.

Sorry you lost your job. Let me give you some flat earther advice.

It doesn't matter what shape the earth is or who lied to you about it. Finding out those things won't change your life one jot or put bread on the table. A lot of people descend into these spirals of research when they are depressed and feeling helpless. They use it as escapism. Don't do that. Right now, you need to use that time constructively. Find a new job or build a new business. Then when you're back on your feet ... use your free time to out those sneaky b*****ds at NASA. 

Good luck.

Yeahh I admit that a lot of my time off work has been just doing a lot of reading into stuff like this. I do have a job interview though coming up so I'm hopeful for that at least.

[Pete Svarrior]

I mean he says he can see a curve, but in that case maybe it's just how it looks to him?

Yes, that's probably it. Many people think they should be able to see some curvature, so they kinda trick themselves into thinking they're seeing one.

Good luck with your job interview!

[OutsourcedGuru]

I would say that unless your father routinely flies in the southern hemisphere then he likely wouldn't realize what's going on (within a FE context). A pilot in Rio de Janeiro and wishing to fly eastward "straight" to Cape Town would definitely get themselves into trouble in an FE reality, running out of fuel as the likeliest scenario.

https://www.expedia.com/Flights-Search?trip=roundtrip&leg1=from:Rio%20de%20Janeiro,%20Brazil%20(GIG),to:Cape%20Town,%20South%20Africa%20(CPT),departure:09/25/2020TANYT&leg2=from:Cape%20Town,%20South%20Africa%20(CPT),to:Rio%20de%20Janeiro,%20Brazil%20(GIG),departure:09/29/2020TANYT&passengers=adults:1,children:0,seniors:0,infantinlap:Y&options=cabinclass:economy&mode=search&origref=www.expedia.com&flexibleSearch=true

For example, we see the (only) really available flight options in Expedia: multiple stops (Rio -> Sao Paulo, BR -> Addis Ababa, Ethiopia -> Cape Town, South Africa. I defy anyone to try to find a non-stop flight from the southern area of South America to the southern regions of Africa; the flight will always be shaped like the carat symbol on your keyboard. I would love if a cocky round-Earth fanatic were forced to jump into a plane with 120% of the fuel necessary in a RE scenario to fly this itinerary. They would be betting their life and safety on their certainty. And in a FE scenario they would be in the drink and in very cold waters.



Watch especially the dual camera lenses versions of this. The "for the public" views of the Earth are done through fisheye lens. Freeze-frame at 2:44 into this when the hatch opens and the standard lens camera behind the jumper sees the real story. You clearly see the unaltered image of the Earth's horizon and it's not the fake-curvy one that results from the ubiquitous fisheye version you always see from NASA, for example.

[JSS]

said he can see the curve from his cockpit?

This is certainly possible. At 35,000ft the math says you should see a slight curve on a round Earth. You couldn't see this from a window seat, but from the cockpit it's another story.

You need approximately a 60 degree field of view to see a curve at that altitude with normal human eyesight. A 747 has a 200 degree field of view from the cockpit windows, more than enough to be able to discern a curve with some careful observation.  I don't know what kind of plane he flies, but it likely has a similar wide field of view.

So a passenger taking a few flights a year looking out a tiny window with not perfect viewing conditions will not be able to see a curve. A pilot with a large amount of flight time certainly would have the time on those long trips to see it if it exists when the weather conditions were perfect.

What that curve represents can be debated, but the math is pretty clear that you don't need to worry about your Dad lying to you about seeing it.

[varenflat]

I defy anyone to try to find a non-stop flight from the southern area of South America to the southern regions of Africa; the flight will always be shaped like the carat symbol on your keyboard.

LATAM Airlines has a direct non-stop flight from Johannesburg, South Africa to Sao Paulo, Brazil.  Flight number LA 8059.  You can see it online here: https://flights.app.goo.gl/9BXMb

[Tumeni]

Watch especially the dual camera lenses versions of this. The "for the public" views of the Earth are done through fisheye lens. Freeze-frame at 2:44 into this when the hatch opens and the standard lens camera behind the jumper sees the real story. You clearly see the unaltered image of the Earth's horizon and it's not the fake-curvy one that results from the ubiquitous fisheye version you always see from NASA, for example.

... yet if you look at the ground, and map out the landmarks or significant geographic features, it can readily be seen that the limit of the view is entirely consistent with the limit that would apply for someone looking at a Spherical Cap from that height.

Fisheye lens or not, on a globe or sphere, you are limited in how much of the globe you can see, and this limit varies with height or distance from the surface. This is basic geometry and trig. Apply this to the stated altitude of the Red Bull capsule, and you reach the conclusion it was hovering above a globe, not a flat plain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cap



The approximate limit of visibility, derived by geometrical means given the stated height of the capsule and textbook figure for
radius of Earth



Shots from the capsule indicating landmarks consistent with view of a spherical cap

[RhesusVX]

I strongly doubt it. The claims that pilots would be able to tell the two models aparts are vastly exaggerated. Part of the reason the globe model has historically been so successful is that it's not an entirely terrible approximation of reality. Sure, it gets some details wrong, but it works well enough for day-to-day living.

Hiya, I've just joined here, first post so a warm hello.  I've been intrigued by the flat Earth model since interest in it exploded in 2017.  I'm man of science, observation and empirical judgement, with my own opinions and beliefs on various things including the world as it is presented to me.  I'm also able to respect other peoples differing opinions and beliefs, and hope to engage in some critical thinking to discuss, challenge, educate and be educated.  At no point will I say one person is right and another person is wrong, nor just insult people by asking them to prove something just because I disagree.  So, with that said...

Please don't take this as direct confrontation, but I'm genuinely interested to know which aspects of reality the globe model gets wrong.

[reer]

@KnuckleJoe
You may want to ask your dad why he, and all other long-distance pilots, consistently follow "great-circle" paths to minimise fuel.

I live in Sydney, Australia. If I fly to Santiago, Chile, the plane follows a path that curves far to the south, close to Antarctica. In fact, depending on weather and winds, it is sometimes possible to see the continent from the plane. If FE maps were correct, this would be sheer madness; it would be far quicker and cheaper to fly northwards, across the USA. The same thing happens when I fly to Johannesburg, South Africa. Again the plane flies far south, rather than going across Asia.

Now compare the normal Sydney-Santiago flight with one that follows a straight line on a FE. A flight via a great circle takes about 13.5 h, as measured by the watches of both pilots and passengers. The "straight-line" one would take over 25 h. That figure becomes clear when you realise the straight-line flight would take you over Los Angeles. Sydney-LA takes 14.5 h, and LA-Santiago 11 h, for a total of 25.5 h, again as measured by pilots and passengers alike. For more explanation and pictures see:

https://flatearth.ws/sydney-santiago

Now ask your dad which route he prefers to fly; I bet he won't fly "straight-line".

The only way out of this dilemma is to assume that the airlines somehow reset all the personal watches of everyone onboard a plane. And yes, all watches would need to be changed: mechanical, quartz, wristwatches, alarm clocks, in carry-on luggage, in checked luggage, the one you didn't even realise you'd packed, the plane's clocks, clocks in shipping containers, every single damn clock on the plane. It's either that, or someone will realise there's funny business going on.