The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: MCToon on October 02, 2018, 08:13:50 PM
-
On a separate thread there was some discussion on real world observations of the earth that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. The discussion continues but, so far there have been no disagreements about the truth of these observations. If there are disagreements or discussions about the truth of these observations, please continue on this thread:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10818.0
For this thread we accept these observations as accurate:
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
These will guide in laying out a map. However, these are not enough to produce a complete map. In this thread I would like to ask for other observations that match the criteria: simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. Something that you could discuss at a dinner party. Something all parties can happily agree on without getting dragged into minutia or observations that are unverifiable!
How can the locations of continents be understood? How about the relative sizes and layouts of the continents. Nobody have been to all the coastlines of any continent, can we identify some fact everyone can agree is true to assist in the layout?
Again, remember, the first 6 observations are not the discussion of this thread, that goes in the other thread.
-
I know a very reliable technique that can be used to draw an accurate map of the earth, a method that will be a useful addition to what you already mentioned in your OP. In my opinion it fully matches your criteria: simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. Of course FE'ers dispute the last one, but over a period of 2 years I asked hundreds of them to debunk it, I even offered $ 1000,- to the first person who could do so, but they all failed, most of them didn't even want to try.
But there is one problem: I am not allowed to show you this method here in the upper fora. I once started a thread about it, but for some mysterious reason it was moved to "angry ranting" claiming I was angry ??? (why would I be angry, the terminator is not my pain in the ass, and I asked to debunk it, so if they try it won't make me angry).
And when I later brought up some of the data of my research in another thread to prove my point and substantiate my argument about the size and shape of Antarctica, it was again replace to the sewer of this forum and I got a warning not to present this data again in the upper fora:
(https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/e/2PACX-1vTovPowpnqpkKRYjEhKhKYTTASzRT6Xt398F4TOQu_CJ4-HmzCJzFa5VmFGzu5fOIF8RXZfFlbLyxis/pub?w=576&h=292)
So I will stick to the rules and not bring it up here, but if you want to know what it is and how it can be used to make a reliable map of the earth, I invite you to my blog where it is all explained: https://humblesball.blogspot.com/2017/06/flat-debunked.html
With regard to your map making, I want to emphasize that if you know the speed of the terminator on a certain latitude, it can not only be used to calculate a circumference, but also for the distances between every location on that particular latitude of which the time of sunrise is known, including the distances between continents separated by an ocean.
Hope that can help you.
-
So I will stick to the rules and not bring it up here, but if you want to know what it is and how it can be used to make a reliable map of the earth, I invite you to my blog where it is all explained: https://humblesball.blogspot.com/2017/06/flat-debunked.html
With regard to your map making, I want to emphasize that if you know the speed of the terminator on a certain latitude, it can not only be used to calculate a circumference, but also for the distances between every location on that particular latitude of which the time of sunrise is known, including the distances between continents separated by an ocean.
Hope that can help you.
The problem here is that there are dozens of flat earth models.
This model does a horrible job reconciling with know and measured distances, shipping times, travel times, flight times, time and position of the sun rise and sunset on any given day, as well as modern cartography and road maps.
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/4/43/Map.png/400px-Map.png)
The infinite repeating plane flat earth model does a much better job reconciling with things that you have issues with.
Here is a rough draft of the infinite repeating plane flat earth model.
http://earth3dmap.com/
Here is a rough draft of the infinite repeating plane flat earth model which corroborates sunrise, sunset and the path the sun takes for anywhere on earth.
http://suncalc.net
-
So I will stick to the rules and not bring it up here, but if you want to know what it is and how it can be used to make a reliable map of the earth, I invite you to my blog where it is all explained: https://humblesball.blogspot.com/2017/06/flat-debunked.html
With regard to your map making, I want to emphasize that if you know the speed of the terminator on a certain latitude, it can not only be used to calculate a circumference, but also for the distances between every location on that particular latitude of which the time of sunrise is known, including the distances between continents separated by an ocean.
Hope that can help you
The infinite repeating plane flat earth...
Please stop spamming your same model. I’ve already addressed glaring problem in a different thread and you have yet to respond. This thread is not for that model!
-
The problem here is that there are dozens of flat earth models.
This model does a horrible job reconciling with know and measured distances, shipping times, travel times, flight times, time and position of the sun rise and sunset on any given day, as well as modern cartography and road maps.
The advantage of using the terminator is that it does not depend on a model. You only use measurements and data derived from the real physical earth. This allows you to draw a map to scale, without taking any model as a starting point. After that is done, you can compare your map with all existing models of the earth, including the infinite repeating plane flat earth model and the bi-polar model, to see which of these models approach reality the most. A reliable map based on real world data can end the discussion about models.
-
Please stop spamming your same model. I’ve already addressed glaring problem in a different thread and you have yet to respond. This thread is not for that model!
I'm not spamming. I'm letting people know of a flat earth model which corroborates observed solar positions. I didn't see where you addressed a glaring problem in a different thread that I failed to respond to.
I took the liberty of looking at other threads that we have spoken on for something where you pointed out a glaring problem in a different thread and I didn't see it.
-
Please stop spamming your same model. I’ve already addressed glaring problem in a different thread and you have yet to respond. This thread is not for that model!
I'm not spamming. I'm letting people know of a flat earth model which corroborates observed solar positions. I didn't see where you addressed a glaring problem in a different thread that I failed to respond to.
I took the liberty of looking at other threads that we have spoken on for something where you pointed out a glaring problem in a different thread and I didn't see it.
This thread:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10743.0
This post in particular:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10743.msg167356#msg167356
Regardless, don't present a model in this thread, we are collecting observations from reality that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious that will then be applied to match an existing map or create a new map. That thread will be the place to present your map.
-
Regardless, don't present a model in this thread,
Don't tell me what I can and can not talk about. There are a lot of people who chose to debunk or nitpick flat earth models which are obviously struggling to match what millions and millions of people live and experience every day. There are other, less popular models, that much better explain observations that we experience in the real world. This is a forum for open communication about flat earth topics of discussion or debate. Imagine that you are creating a post in a place for flat earth discussion and debate and you are getting people talking about flat earth models. If hearing about different flat earth models offends you so much maybe a better place for this would be a cartography forum?
we are collecting observations from reality that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious that will then be applied to match an existing map or create a new map. That thread will be the place to present your map.
It seems to me like you're telling people to not talk about things in this thread instead of collecting observations.
Now as far as observations that I have made.
-Canada is north of the United States.
- Mexico is south of the United States.
-Oklahoma is south of Kansas
-Texas is south of Oklahoma
-The southern border of Texas is shared with Mexico.
-Colorado is west of Kansas
-Utah is west of colorado
-Nevada is west of Utah
-California is west of Nevada
-the Pacific ocean is west of California
-Hawaii is in the Pacific ocean.
-Florida is south of Gerogia
-part of the Florida coast is on the Gulf of Mexico
-part of the Florida coast is on the Atlantic Ocean
-The United States, Mexico, and Canada are largest countries in North America
-
Regardless, don't present a model in this thread,
Don't tell me what I can and can not talk about. There are a lot of people who chose to debunk or nitpick flat earth models which are obviously struggling to match what millions and millions of people live and experience every day. There are other, less popular models, that much better explain observations that we experience in the real world. This is a forum for open communication about flat earth topics of discussion or debate. Imagine that you are creating a post in a place for flat earth discussion and debate and you are getting people talking about flat earth models. If hearing about different flat earth models offends you so much maybe a better place for this would be a cartography forum?
I absolutely want to discuss other maps and models, I have created this thread specifically to collect observations that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. Then, in a forthcoming thread, to take these observations and apply to creating a map. Your model will absolutely be involved as it matches many observations collected here already.
we are collecting observations from reality that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious that will then be applied to match an existing map or create a new map. That thread will be the place to present your map.
It seems to me like you're telling people to not talk about things in this thread instead of collecting observations.
You have presented some observations about travel and shipping times. I love these, have no disagreement and accept them as true. Can you state them in a simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious way? I have tried to think about how to do that but have not yet figured a way to do it. Everything I come up with is either not simple or not easily verifiable.
-
I know a very reliable technique that can be used to draw an accurate map of the earth, a method that will be a useful addition to what you already mentioned in your OP. In my opinion it fully matches your criteria: simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. Of course FE'ers dispute the last one, but over a period of 2 years I asked hundreds of them to debunk it, I even offered $ 1000,- to the first person who could do so, but they all failed, most of them didn't even want to try.
But there is one problem: I am not allowed to show you this method here in the upper fora. I once started a thread about it, but for some mysterious reason it was moved to "angry ranting" claiming I was angry ??? (why would I be angry, the terminator is not my pain in the ass, and I asked to debunk it, so if they try it won't make me angry).
And when I later brought up some of the data of my research in another thread to prove my point and substantiate my argument about the size and shape of Antarctica, it was again replace to the sewer of this forum and I got a warning not to present this data again in the upper fora:
(https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/e/2PACX-1vTovPowpnqpkKRYjEhKhKYTTASzRT6Xt398F4TOQu_CJ4-HmzCJzFa5VmFGzu5fOIF8RXZfFlbLyxis/pub?w=576&h=292)
So I will stick to the rules and not bring it up here, but if you want to know what it is and how it can be used to make a reliable map of the earth, I invite you to my blog where it is all explained: https://humblesball.blogspot.com/2017/06/flat-debunked.html
With regard to your map making, I want to emphasize that if you know the speed of the terminator on a certain latitude, it can not only be used to calculate a circumference, but also for the distances between every location on that particular latitude of which the time of sunrise is known, including the distances between continents separated by an ocean.
Hope that can help you.
Interesting. I will review your web site and give my thoughts.
-
You have presented some observations about travel and shipping times. I love these, have no disagreement and accept them as true. Can you state them in a simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious way? I have tried to think about how to do that but have not yet figured a way to do it. Everything I come up with is either not simple or not easily verifiable.
The problem here is that it's super easy to get sucked into the Ad infinitum in terms of easy to verify. Even things like the sun path during the equinox, and solstices which is observed by millions of people every year. Schools all along the tropics and the equator go outside to observe and measure the suns path. Locations on the tropics/equator sell travel packages for the "no shadow because of the suns path today". Even after all of this it just gets dropped into the Ad infinitum well.
Flight travel times are even EASIER to verify and harder to fake. In addition they can't fall into the endless debate about limitations of perceptions, chaotic atmospheric conditions, and refraction.
Departure time
-I know the plane takes off at this time because if I show up early there is no plane for me to get on and if I show up late the plane has already left. Easily verified departure time not only by every single passenger but the staff at the airport.
Arrival time
-I know the plane arrives at this time because my Grandma is picking me up from the Airport and I have given her the arrival time. If she shows up early my plane is not here. If she shows up late i'm suck waiting. Arrival time is easily verified by not only by every single passenger but the staff at the airport.
When I explained that you can fly from Santiago to Sydney in about 14 hours it was instantly sucked into the ad infinitum well. "That flight time is a wild claim where is your evidence to back it up?"
-Show me the 14 hour video of the flight.
-There is no proof that the 14 hour video is really between these two locations.
-There is no proof that this flight took off in the time you said
-There is no proof the plane was flying during all of these 14 hours
-There is no proof this video has not been edited-
-ad infinitum
-
You have presented some observations about travel and shipping times. I love these, have no disagreement and accept them as true. Can you state them in a simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious way? I have tried to think about how to do that but have not yet figured a way to do it. Everything I come up with is either not simple or not easily verifiable.
The problem here is that it's super easy to get sucked into the Ad infinitum in terms of easy to verify. Even things like the sun path during the equinox, and solstices which is observed by millions of people every year. Schools all along the tropics and the equator go outside to observe and measure the suns path. Locations on the tropics/equator sell travel packages for the "no shadow because of the suns path today". Even after all of this it just gets dropped into the Ad infinitum well.
Flight travel times are even EASIER to verify and harder to fake. In addition they can't fall into the endless debate about limitations of perceptions, chaotic atmospheric conditions, and refraction.
Departure time
-I know the plane takes off at this time because if I show up early there is no plane for me to get on and if I show up late the plane has already left. Easily verified departure time not only by every single passenger but the staff at the airport.
Arrival time
-I know the plane arrives at this time because my Grandma is picking me up from the Airport and I have given her the arrival time. If she shows up early my plane is not here. If she shows up late i'm suck waiting. Arrival time is easily verified by not only by every single passenger but the staff at the airport.
When I explained that you can fly from Santiago to Sydney in about 14 hours it was instantly sucked into the ad infinitum well. "That flight time is a wild claim where is your evidence to back it up?"
-Show me the 14 hour video of the flight.
-There is no proof that the 14 hour video is really between these two locations.
-There is no proof that this flight took off in the time you said
-There is no proof the plane was flying during all of these 14 hours
-There is no proof this video has not been edited-
-ad infinitum
I have seen all these claims, they are without basis. You have submitted evidence, they deny the evidence without providing support for the denial. The solution is to not get pulled into the ad infinitum well, kindly point the lack of support at the beginning of a post and continue to add to the discussion instead of allowing the derailing.
So, there is significant proof of these flights already provided in many other threads. Let's add this observation.
Observation: There are flights that have flown nonstop between southern locations. The relative times of these flights are known. The types of airplanes and the maximum speed limitations of these airplanes are known.
Here's 6 of the relevant flights. Can we get times and plane info for these to add as corollaries?
QF63 SYD - JNB
QF64 JNB - SYD
SA222 JNB - GRU
SA223 GRU - JNB
QF27 SYD - SCL
QF28 SCL - SYD
-
Now as far as observations that I have made.
-Canada is north of the United States.
- Mexico is south of the United States.
-Oklahoma is south of Kansas
-Texas is south of Oklahoma
-The southern border of Texas is shared with Mexico.
-Colorado is west of Kansas
-Utah is west of colorado
-Nevada is west of Utah
-California is west of Nevada
-the Pacific ocean is west of California
-Hawaii is in the Pacific ocean.
-Florida is south of Gerogia
-part of the Florida coast is on the Gulf of Mexico
-part of the Florida coast is on the Atlantic Ocean
-The United States, Mexico, and Canada are largest countries in North America
Thank you, good observations. They are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious.
These can be expanded and generalized, for example:
* Antarctica is due south of South America.
* Antarctica is due south of Africa.
* Antarctica is due south of Australia.
* Antarctica is due south of New Zealand.
* Africa is due east of Brazil.
* ...And other continental type observations.
These continent type observations are easy to understand and non-contentious. They may not be easy to verify. Verification would require over-sea travel which can be contentious. Rowbotham's AE style map has circumnavigation going due east or west but defined due east and west as curved lines, this is contentious.
Maybe intra-continent is all we can get to match the criteria. Intra-continent locations and distances are very well documented. GPS mapping software produces accurate distances, I haven't seen any arguments that these are incorrect.
-
These can be expanded and generalized, for example:
* Antarctica is due south of South America.
* Antarctica is due south of Africa.
* Antarctica is due south of Australia.
* Antarctica is due south of New Zealand.
* Africa is due east of Brazil.
* ...And other continental type observations.
These continent type observations are easy to understand and non-contentious. They may not be easy to verify. Verification would require over-sea travel which can be contentious. Rowbotham's AE style map has circumnavigation going due east or west but defined due east and west as curved lines, this is contentious.
Maybe intra-continent is all we can get to match the criteria. Intra-continent locations and distances are very well documented. GPS mapping software produces accurate distances, I haven't seen any arguments that these are incorrect.
When you start making overseas claims that's when many people will start questioning things. We have things like odometers and surveying equipment to corroborate land distances.
long distances overseas or in the air is where directions/distances will definitely have some nit picking. Many people adhere to some sort of model where the earth is a flat circle with the north pole in the center (even though it has the hardest time matching real world observations).
-
These can be expanded and generalized, for example:
* Antarctica is due south of South America.
* Antarctica is due south of Africa.
* Antarctica is due south of Australia.
* Antarctica is due south of New Zealand.
* Africa is due east of Brazil.
* ...And other continental type observations.
These continent type observations are easy to understand and non-contentious. They may not be easy to verify. Verification would require over-sea travel which can be contentious. Rowbotham's AE style map has circumnavigation going due east or west but defined due east and west as curved lines, this is contentious.
Maybe intra-continent is all we can get to match the criteria. Intra-continent locations and distances are very well documented. GPS mapping software produces accurate distances, I haven't seen any arguments that these are incorrect.
When you start making overseas claims that's when many people will start questioning things. We have things like odometers and surveying equipment to corroborate land distances.
long distances overseas or in the air is where directions/distances will definitely have some nit picking. Many people adhere to some sort of model where the earth is a flat circle with the north pole in the center (even though it has the hardest time matching real world observations).
Yes...
In fact, I'm wondering how Zetetic thinking would examine and document something larger that their personal ability to perceive. How can someone determine the size and shape of an ocean or continent through personal empirical observations.
I'm not trolling so please don't send me to the lower fora. It smells funny down there.
-
These can be expanded and generalized, for example:
* Antarctica is due south of South America.
* Antarctica is due south of Africa.
* Antarctica is due south of Australia.
* Antarctica is due south of New Zealand.
* Africa is due east of Brazil.
* ...And other continental type observations.
These continent type observations are easy to understand and non-contentious. They may not be easy to verify. Verification would require over-sea travel which can be contentious. Rowbotham's AE style map has circumnavigation going due east or west but defined due east and west as curved lines, this is contentious.
Maybe intra-continent is all we can get to match the criteria. Intra-continent locations and distances are very well documented. GPS mapping software produces accurate distances, I haven't seen any arguments that these are incorrect.
When you start making overseas claims that's when many people will start questioning things. We have things like odometers and surveying equipment to corroborate land distances.
long distances overseas or in the air is where directions/distances will definitely have some nit picking. Many people adhere to some sort of model where the earth is a flat circle with the north pole in the center (even though it has the hardest time matching real world observations).
Yes...
In fact, I'm wondering how Zetetic thinking would examine and document something larger that their personal ability to perceive. How can someone determine the size and shape of an ocean or continent through personal empirical observations.
I'm not trolling so please don't send me to the lower fora. It smells funny down there.
I agree, Zetetic doesn't scale since you can't trust anyone else's findings. I suspect to be truly zetetic, you can't even trust your own findings as the reality of them may have changed since you last checked, in the end you get paralyzed doing nothing but rechecking everything that has already been checked. This is a dead end, I prefer skeptical to zetetic, though they do overlap. I do see that we must take into account other people's findings but they should not be blindly trusted. Multiple findings from different sources with corroborating results removes layers of skepticism.
Long distances over sea observations can include flight times. These are easy to verify, easy to look up, there's a large amount of evidence, many flights have been taken over many years, many people have documented their flights. Denying them is a high bar.
Intra continent distance observations can include information from numerous mapping software solutions. There are several freely available from different vendors. I have not seen anyone argue against the accuracy of these solutions. Denying them is a high bar.
-
I agree, Zetetic doesn't scale since you can't trust anyone else's findings. I suspect to be truly zetetic, you can't even trust your own findings as the reality of them may have changed since you last checked, in the end you get paralyzed doing nothing but rechecking everything that has already been checked. This is a dead end, I prefer skeptical to zetetic, though they do overlap. I do see that we must take into account other people's findings but they should not be blindly trusted. Multiple findings from different sources with corroborating results removes layers of skepticism.
Long distances over sea observations can include flight times. These are easy to verify, easy to look up, there's a large amount of evidence, many flights have been taken over many years, many people have documented their flights. Denying them is a high bar.
The problem is that in order to calculate distance you also need to know the speed. Even if the speed was constant throughout variables such as aircraft, pilot, flight conditions, and airline company you would not be estimating the distance from one airport to another you would be estimating the distance the plane flew. If it went 100 miles out of it's way to avoid a hurricane that does not mean that one airport moved 100 miles further away from another.
So for now we should just stick to mapping the land portions of the earth with observations that anyone with a method of transportation and a road map (or GPS) can easily verify. This would be a MASSIVE improvement over the claim made by many people here that no accurate map of the earth exists.
-
When you start making overseas claims that's when many people will start questioning things. We have things like odometers and surveying equipment to corroborate land distances.
long distances overseas or in the air is where directions/distances will definitely have some nit picking. Many people adhere to some sort of model where the earth is a flat circle with the north pole in the center (even though it has the hardest time matching real world observations).
I think it's fine to question. However, plane travel (as well as sea travel) is excruciatingly well documented. And, most of us have done moderate to extensive amounts of it ourselves. And there's even another angle to document distances, granted down in the weeds a bit; historical events. Take for example the bombing of Pearl Harbor. There's tons of data around routes and times traveled that give a great indication for distances between, say, Japan and Hawaii.
I would say that anyone claiming a distance is unknown would have prove how the distances used 1000's of times per day by 10's of thousands of people are actually still unknown.
(https://i.imgur.com/q3UvOpq.jpg)
-
I agree, Zetetic doesn't scale since you can't trust anyone else's findings. I suspect to be truly zetetic, you can't even trust your own findings as the reality of them may have changed since you last checked, in the end you get paralyzed doing nothing but rechecking everything that has already been checked. This is a dead end, I prefer skeptical to zetetic, though they do overlap. I do see that we must take into account other people's findings but they should not be blindly trusted. Multiple findings from different sources with corroborating results removes layers of skepticism.
Long distances over sea observations can include flight times. These are easy to verify, easy to look up, there's a large amount of evidence, many flights have been taken over many years, many people have documented their flights. Denying them is a high bar.
The problem is that in order to calculate distance you also need to know the speed. Even if the speed was constant throughout variables such as aircraft, pilot, flight conditions, and airline company you would not be estimating the distance from one airport to another you would be estimating the distance the plane flew. If it went 100 miles out of it's way to avoid a hurricane that does not mean that one airport moved 100 miles further away from another.
So for now we should just stick to mapping the land portions of the earth with observations that anyone with a method of transportation and a road map (or GPS) can easily verify. This would be a MASSIVE improvement over the claim made by many people here that no accurate map of the earth exists.
Yeah, that's reasonable. How about using local noon on the equator on the equinox and the time it happens to layout continents on the equator? This would place Africa, South America, Indonesia and a few islands.
This would also require first accepting that the sun's speed on the equator on the equinox is constant. I doubt there will be any argument about this as a true observation. It is simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. I'll add to the list, if anyone thinks this is untrue, please discuss.
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
7. On the equinox the sun travels at a constant speed across the sky when observed from the equator.
Supporting evidence is that there are numerous freely available web sites to have accurately been predicting sun time and locations for many years. These sites predict future times and locations for the sun on the equator that match these observations. Discussions about the legitimacy of these sources is welcome on this other thread: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10818.0
-
Yeah, that's reasonable. How about using local noon on the equator on the equinox and the time it happens to layout continents on the equator? This would place Africa, South America, Indonesia and a few islands.
This would also require first accepting that the sun's speed on the equator on the equinox is constant. I doubt there will be any argument about this as a true observation. It is simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. I'll add to the list, if anyone thinks this is untrue, please discuss.
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
7. On the equinox the sun travels at a constant speed across the sky when observed from the equator.
Supporting evidence is that there are numerous freely available web sites to have accurately been predicting sun time and locations for many years. These sites predict future times and locations for the sun on the equator that match these observations. Discussions about the legitimacy of these sources is welcome on this other thread: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10818.0
Again it sounds like you are making a map of the sky here. I'm not interested in what we can expect to see in the sky 100 miles south of my current location. I'm interested in what country/city/state/continent/mountain/lake/ocean is 100 miles south of here.
In addition you are making claims that many flat earth models would have significant problems with. You are exposing your self to nit picking ad infinitum while making no progress on creating an actual map of the earth. Maybe you should start a new thread and call it map of the sky for different positions at different times of year on earth.
-
Yeah, that's reasonable. How about using local noon on the equator on the equinox and the time it happens to layout continents on the equator? This would place Africa, South America, Indonesia and a few islands.
This would also require first accepting that the sun's speed on the equator on the equinox is constant. I doubt there will be any argument about this as a true observation. It is simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. I'll add to the list, if anyone thinks this is untrue, please discuss.
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
7. On the equinox the sun travels at a constant speed across the sky when observed from the equator.
Supporting evidence is that there are numerous freely available web sites to have accurately been predicting sun time and locations for many years. These sites predict future times and locations for the sun on the equator that match these observations. Discussions about the legitimacy of these sources is welcome on this other thread: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10818.0
Again it sounds like you are making a map of the sky here. I'm not interested in what we can expect to see in the sky 100 miles south of my current location. I'm interested in what country/city/state/continent/mountain/lake/ocean is 100 miles south of here.
In addition you are making claims that many flat earth models would have significant problems with. You are exposing your self to nit picking ad infinitum while making no progress on creating an actual map of the earth. Maybe you should start a new thread and call it map of the sky for different positions at different times of year on earth.
I have seen nobody claiming these observations are untrue, though I have been asking. Please bring on the claims of untrue, I want to be sure these are true.
I think this is pretty good progress:
* In order to match these real world observations, the equator must be straight east-west.
* We can use sun position at local noon to place the continents on the map.
* We have discussed the accuracy of publicly available mapping services to place intra-continent locations, this expands the continents a great deal north and south of the equator before mapping software accuracy can be cast to doubt.
* We have discussed long flights to give rough distances between major cities. This only gives a min and max straight line distance though so is only useful for crude placements.
Now, we need to identify observations that can guide in more accurate placement of farther northern and southern locations. Does local noon on the tropic of cancer of capricorn help? I don't know. Anybody have thoughts on these?
-
I have seen nobody claiming these observations are untrue, though I have been asking. Please bring on the claims of untrue, I want to be sure these are true.
Well the flat earth model that i most closely relate to does not have an issue with those observations. The people who believe in the more "traditional" flat earth models with domes, ice walls, firmaments etc. are not replying.
If they were to provide observations it would be something like "there is a great ice wall around the perimeter of the earth
-
I have seen nobody claiming these observations are untrue, though I have been asking. Please bring on the claims of untrue, I want to be sure these are true.
Well the flat earth model that i most closely relate to does not have an issue with those observations. The people who believe in the more "traditional" flat earth models with domes, ice walls, firmaments etc. are not replying.
If they were to provide observations it would be something like "there is a great ice wall around the perimeter of the earth
I am confused by the lack of participation by regular contributors to produce an FE map that matches observations. It's a glaring omission that there is no working map. To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult. A flat map with no distortions of the flat earth is possible.
Since there is global transportation that is reliable and predictable, someone must have the map to handle this transportation. The software pilots use to plot courses have to internally transpose to the real map. This map is absolutely known. We just need to figure it out.
The other attempts at a flat map were sloppy and didn't even test against observations. For example, I see that Limitless and Awake Souls recently put out a map, it's terrible, I don't understand how they thought it was accurate.
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
1.
A valid point. We have been discussing this at length for several days now and we have mapped about 0% of the earth. Based on my observations and experiences I can comfortably corroborate known maps of sections of the earth like North and South America.
2.
Tom, he is making some observations before he is going to start making the map. He wants to make observations that are universally (more or less) accepted as true among the flat earth community. I most closely relate to a rather unorthodox flat earth model. He is trying to ask people most closely relate to other flat earth models if they have any objections about these observations (and if so why). I have continuously made the objection that sun observations are a flimsy way to lay down a framework of map observations.
Do you have any objections to the "framework" observations made before starting the map making process? Or do you believe that these are unproven observations?
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
7. On the equinox the sun travels at a constant speed across the sky when observed from the equator.
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
This is an issue that has been mentioned before. How does one map the world using only personal empirical observations?
If the Zetetic Council had unlimited resources, what methodology would they use to map the world?
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
Do you have any reason to disagree with WGS84? As requested before how would you produce a map of the world?
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
But that has already been done. The world has been mapped and, guess what? It turns out it matches with a globe model. The fact that the worldwide shipping and airline industries get people and goods around reliably gives confidence in that model.
There is no flat earth map which matches with things like flight times and known distances between places. And that is because...the world isn’t flat.
-
I can definitely say that the earth is spherical based on my personal observations. Before I retired I had a career in the Merchant Marine. I've made countless trips all over the world. In the last 4 years those trips were mostly between the US and China. Every trip we made I had to change our satellite communications equipment to a different satellite because the other one would go below the horizon and I would loose the signal. Our radars would only work out to about 20 miles because even other huge ships would go below the horizon. We still knew they were there because of the other tracking equipment we had. Thousands of times, you could see a large ship, that you knew was coming, appear slowly over the horizon. Sometimes we would have to communicate so we didn't collide. I know for sure how many miles we traveled between Shanghai, China and Long Beach, Ca. Those miles were based upon a great circle route. We even had a 'top of the world' party when we stopped going North and started going towards the South on our return trip to home. A flat earth would have been a whole lot easier, but it was not to be. People say that going to sea is the worlds second oldest profession so maybe everything I've said could be considered a 'Sea Story'.
-
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
You are saying you would accept my personal observations, thanks for the vote of confidence. Unfortunately, I'm not outfitted to do this, neither am I skilled in these mapping skills. People other than myself have already done this, will you accept their mappings and data in lieu of mine?
For now, I'll continue in this interesting project.
You are correct, unproven assumptions are to be avoided. That's why I have chosen things that are well documented. I have also carefully selected things that are easily verifiable for anyone that doesn't trust the source of the documentation. The documentation I have used is freely available on suncalc.org, timeanddate.com, and Stellarium. However, I'm always open to input. If you don't think the observations are accurate, please bring it up. I've asked before and you have not stated that you think these are inaccurate. I'll keep you marked as in agreement with the accuracy of the observations.
Update: I'm starting on a map using the below observations as guidance.
To review:
Current list of observations:
1. On the equinox the sun traces a very nearly straight line across the sky for every location on the equator.
2. On the northern solstice the sun is very nearly directly almost overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of cancer.
3. On the southern solstice the sun is very nearly directly overhead at solar noon for every location on the tropic of capricorn.
4. On the equinox the sun rises almost exactly due east and sets almost exactly due west for every location on the earth, except for the polar regions.
5. For all points in northern latitudes, when looking due north observers see the northern pole star, Polaris. In the north polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
6. For all points in southern latitudes, when looking due south observers see the Southern Cross constellation. In the south polar region observers will see this by looking nearly directly up.
7. On the equinox the sun travels at a constant speed across the sky when observed from the equator.
Corollaries for Observation #1
a. Before sunset in Aranuka island in Kiribati the sun has risen in Ganggo Hilia, Indonesia.
b. Before sunset in Ganggo Hilia, Indonesia the sun has risen in Nanyuki, Kenya.
c. Before sunset in Nanyuki, Kenya the sun has risen in Macapá, Brazil.
d. Before sunset in Macapá, Brazil the sun has risen in Quitsato Monument, Ecuador.
e. Before sunset in Quitsato Monument, Ecuador, the sun has risen in Aranuka island in Kiribati.
-
I can definitely say that the earth is spherical based on my personal observations. Before I retired I had a career in the Merchant Marine. I've made countless trips all over the world. In the last 4 years those trips were mostly between the US and China. Every trip we made I had to change our satellite communications equipment to a different satellite because the other one would go below the horizon and I would loose the signal. Our radars would only work out to about 20 miles because even other huge ships would go below the horizon. We still knew they were there because of the other tracking equipment we had. Thousands of times, you could see a large ship, that you knew was coming, appear slowly over the horizon. Sometimes we would have to communicate so we didn't collide. I know for sure how many miles we traveled between Shanghai, China and Long Beach, Ca. Those miles were based upon a great circle route. We even had a 'top of the world' party when we stopped going North and started going towards the South on our return trip to home. A flat earth would have been a whole lot easier, but it was not to be. People say that going to sea is the worlds second oldest profession so maybe everything I've said could be considered a 'Sea Story'.
Thank you, RonJ. I appreciate your addition.
In this thread we are attempting to collect observations that are simple, easy to understand, easy to verify, and non-contentious. The observations will then be used to lay out a flat map. All are welcome to participate regardless of their opinion of the roundness or flatness of the earth. For yourself, consider it a fun thought-experiment.