The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: ghostopia on December 07, 2017, 04:47:06 PM
-
Flat Earthers argue that there is no true Flat Earth map. If this is the case, then how do airplanes and ships know which direction to go to. They seems to know which direction to go to get to certain place and approximately how long it takes. How can this happen if there is no "true map"?
If you argue that they are sailing with approximate map, this means you KNOW the approximate orientation of the continent on the Earth. This means you can come up with approximate map which are, to some extent, accurate.
How come there is not such map. Every time we say the distance from the airplane flight disproves Flat Earth map, FE'ers argue "You cannot say that because we do not have a true map".
-
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/7/70/SunAnimation.gif/405px-SunAnimation.gif)
This is on the wiki
-
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/7/70/SunAnimation.gif/405px-SunAnimation.gif)
This is on the wiki
Well, no. If you read other thread where Round Earthers are trying to disprove Flat Earth map, Flat Earthers say that they do not have the true map. Even though we pointed out that no Flat Earth map can exist, they still continues arguing.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.0 (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.0)
-
Yup, flat-earthers cant seem to agree on anything except the earth is flat.
-
Flat Earthers argue that there is no true Flat Earth map. If this is the case, then how do airplanes and ships know which direction to go to. They seems to know which direction to go to get to certain place and approximately how long it takes. How can this happen if there is no "true map"?
The coordinate system is correct in that you can get to a location by going to a certain coordinate. The coordinate system assumes that the earth is a globe, however, and the coordinate points are mapped onto a sphere. Distances are calculated under this model, and are not directly experienced with any specific onboard tool.
We can't use distances calculated under the assumption of a globe when making a Flat Earth map. We might as well assume that the earth is a globe if we are using a spherical coordinate system. Those distances must be proven.
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
Per the Southern Hemisphere in the Flat Earth monopole model, the Flat Earth monopole map was not created based on any particular data. It is just a projection of a globe, and has no value in navigation. A true map has yet to be created. The stumbling block is that all listed distances rely upon a Round Earth spherical coordinate system.
-
The coordinate system is correct in that if you get to a location by going to a certain coordinate. The coordinate system assumes that the earth is a globe, however, and the coordinate points are mapped onto a sphere. Distances are calculated under this model, and are not directly experienced with any specific onboard tool.
There are a number of ways to calculate how far you have travelled that can be cross-referenced against GPS or other such mapping devices. This is not an impenetrable scientific mystery Tom.
We can't use distances calculated under the assumption of a globe when making a Flat Earth map. We might as well assume that the earth is a globe if we are using a spherical coordinate system. Those distances must be proven.
All of these distances are substantiated in surveys by nations and corroborated by multiple sources. Being an ostrich is not going to make this go away.
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
Per the Southern Hemisphere in the Flat Earth monopole model, the Flat Earth monopole map was not created based on any particular data. It is just a projection of a globe, and has no value in navigation. A true map has yet to be created. The stumbling block is that all listed distances rely upon a Round Earth spherical coordinate system.
[/quote]
-
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
You can't actually expect people to believe this complete and utter rubbish surely? I know that you don't believe it, so apart from amusement value why pursue it when it has been shown to be rubbish over and over again.
Any pilot flying a long distance route would have to know the exact distance to fly and would also have to know the speed to fly to maximise the fuel consumption of the aircraft. Any miscalculation due to 'Guessing' anything could and probably would have disasterous results putting a large number of peoples lives at risk including the pilot's own life. The balance between all up weight, distance to fly, speed to fly and fuel load is absolutely critical and anybody guessing any part of it would be very stupid. The speeds, payloads and fuel vary for every type of aircraft, every flight and every route, These variations are due to passenger numbers, baggage weight, aircraft performance, prevailing weather and wind conditions and several other lesser factors. To suggest that any part of it is based on unknown factors is either very ignorant or very argumentative at least.
There are a number of ways that accurate aircraft speed is ascertained and this has been covered very fully in other threads as you well know. Don't bother to reply with comments that aircraft often arrive late because they guessed wrong. Aircraft do however take longer occasionally than expected due to changes to headwind strengths, which are relayed to the pilot and also seen by the pilot and the inflight computer systems as a direct read out sourced from ground radar speed, airspeed inertial guidance instruments and gps, all of which work together to give accurate speed and position indications. Aircraft are also delayed by the need to divert around large storms. Ground stations will also be able to keep an accurate track on any aircraft position and speed from their own radar and data information transmitted from the aircraft by its satellite relay systems and transponder. If you would like to see information regularly updated for all to view, just go to any one of a number of online aircraft tracking programmes which will give you constant updates on aircraft positions, speed, height arrival times etc. All very interesting and a valuable tool for any flat earther wanting to find distances and speeds superimposed over an accurate global map. I've even used a tracking programme to follow a friends aircraft as he flew up to a local airfield to give me a flight.
Roger
-
Flat Earthers argue that there is no true Flat Earth map. If this is the case, then how do airplanes and ships know which direction to go to. They seems to know which direction to go to get to certain place and approximately how long it takes. How can this happen if there is no "true map"?
The coordinate system is correct in that you can get to a location by going to a certain coordinate. The coordinate system assumes that the earth is a globe, however, and the coordinate points are mapped onto a sphere. Distances are calculated under this model, and are not directly experienced with any specific onboard tool.
We can't use distances calculated under the assumption of a globe when making a Flat Earth map. We might as well assume that the earth is a globe if we are using a spherical coordinate system. Those distances must be proven.
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
Per the Southern Hemisphere in the Flat Earth monopole model, the Flat Earth monopole map was not created based on any particular data. It is just a projection of a globe, and has no value in navigation. A true map has yet to be created. The stumbling block is that all listed distances rely upon a Round Earth spherical coordinate system.
Why do you want to make a flat earth map, surely what is needed is a correct map, whatever shape it might be?
-
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
This was true once upon a time, hundreds of years ago in the age of sail, when iron men steered wooden ships across poorly charted seas and gauged their speed by trailing a rope behind them and counting the knots in the rope. News flash: THOSE DAYS ARE GONE.
A true map has yet to be created. The stumbling block is that all listed distances rely upon a Round Earth spherical coordinate system.
Look, I understand why you want that to be true, why you need that to be true. Too bad for you it’s NOT true. We know the speed a modern aircraft achieves for a given engine power. We know the aircraft’s operating envelope, its upper and lower bounds on speed. We know the travel times from A to B, and from B back to A. All this (and more) gives us a very good estimate of the distance from A to B.
-
There are so many methods available for calibrating and optimizing flight distance models that the following question seems to be the only fair one to ask.
Why do you want to make a flat earth map, surely what is needed is a correct map, whatever shape it might be?
-
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
You can't actually expect people to believe this complete and utter rubbish surely? I know that you don't believe it, so apart from amusement value why pursue it when it has been shown to be rubbish over and over again.
Any pilot flying a long distance route would have to know the exact distance to fly and would also have to know the speed to fly to maximise the fuel consumption of the aircraft. Any miscalculation due to 'Guessing' anything could and probably would have disasterous results putting a large number of peoples lives at risk including the pilot's own life. The balance between all up weight, distance to fly, speed to fly and fuel load is absolutely critical and anybody guessing any part of it would be very stupid. The speeds, payloads and fuel vary for every type of aircraft, every flight and every route, These variations are due to passenger numbers, baggage weight, aircraft performance, prevailing weather and wind conditions and several other lesser factors. To suggest that any part of it is based on unknown factors is either very ignorant or very argumentative at least.
There are a number of ways that accurate aircraft speed is ascertained and this has been covered very fully in other threads as you well know. Don't bother to reply with comments that aircraft often arrive late because they guessed wrong. Aircraft do however take longer occasionally than expected due to changes to headwind strengths, which are relayed to the pilot and also seen by the pilot and the inflight computer systems as a direct read out sourced from ground radar speed, airspeed inertial guidance instruments and gps, all of which work together to give accurate speed and position indications. Aircraft are also delayed by the need to divert around large storms. Ground stations will also be able to keep an accurate track on any aircraft position and speed from their own radar and data information transmitted from the aircraft by its satellite relay systems and transponder. If you would like to see information regularly updated for all to view, just go to any one of a number of online aircraft tracking programmes which will give you constant updates on aircraft positions, speed, height arrival times etc. All very interesting and a valuable tool for any flat earther wanting to find distances and speeds superimposed over an accurate global map. I've even used a tracking programme to follow a friends aircraft as he flew up to a local airfield to give me a flight.
Roger
Tom has said that no one knows distances, GPS is unreliable, speeds of aircraft are unknown and many other whacky ideas he has thrown up to derail a great thread on distances. He knows the Achilles heel of FE is that no flat map can be drawn that accounts for what happens every day in airline flights. It's all about fear. If he concedes any truth then his whole flat world transforms into a globe. Case closed.
(https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ne78u.gif)
-
There are a number of ways to calculate how far you have travelled that can be cross-referenced against GPS or other such mapping devices. This is not an impenetrable scientific mystery Tom.
Incorrect. There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
All of these distances are substantiated in surveys by nations and corroborated by multiple sources. Being an ostrich is not going to make this go away.
Like everything else, the distances listed in "surveys by nations" overwhelmingly use a Round Earth coordinate system.
-
There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
Let's keep this to distances. Distances are the fundamental. There are numerous independent ways to calibrate, check, measure, and optimize the distances traveled by commercial aircraft. This is not a mystery. And it doesn't require any prior assumptions about the shape of the earth. Start flat. Start round. Start with anything. But accept the conglomerate testimony of the measurements. Thank you so much for hanging with this topic and with this forum.
-
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
You can't actually expect people to believe this complete and utter rubbish surely? I know that you don't believe it, so apart from amusement value why pursue it when it has been shown to be rubbish over and over again.
Any pilot flying a long distance route would have to know the exact distance to fly and would also have to know the speed to fly to maximise the fuel consumption of the aircraft.
How do you suppose you would calculate that a Boeing plane would have a cruise speed of 550 miles per hour?
You travel a distance based on the Round Earth coordinate system while running on optimal engine performance, divide by the trip time taken, and find a cruising speed.
Now you have a guestimate on how far your plane can travel according to the Round Earth coordinate distances.
Your experience is that original gauge you made in determining the average cruising speeds. You can apply that old experience to other distances of the Round Earth coordinate system to come up with a guess of what future travel times will be.
-
If you had a Boeing with a cruise speed of 550 miles per hour, how do you suppose you would have calculated that cruise speed?
Wind tunnels? Short trials? I don't know. Tell us.
You travel a distance based on the Round Earth Coordinate, divided by the trip time taken, and find a cruising speed.
Why Round Earth? Why make such an assumption? Why not just use road distances?
Now you have a guestimate on how far your plane can travel according to the Round Earth Coordinate distances.
Only if you want to. Why do that?
-
What I have described is how cruising speeds are determined on airplanes. They fly a route on optimal performance and divide by time. The distance they use is, of course, based on the Round Earth coordinate system, and therefore the cruising speed calculated is based on that schema.
When you use that cruising speed against other Round Earth coordinate system distances you are flying based on a past experience, not a controlled truth.
-
Like everything else, the distances listed in "surveys by nations" overwhelmingly use a Round Earth coordinate system.
Evidence? I deny this claim until you show otherwise.
-
There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
Let's keep this to distances. Distances are the fundamental. There are numerous independent ways to calibrate, check, measure, and optimize the distances traveled by commercial aircraft. This is not a mystery. And it doesn't require any prior assumptions about the shape of the earth. Start flat. Start round. Start with anything. But accept the conglomerate testimony of the measurements. Thank you so much for hanging with this topic and with this forum.
Can you describe some of these independent methods which don't rely on assumptions about the shape of the earth?
-
What I have described is how cruising speeds are determined on airplanes. They fly a route on optimal performance and divide by time. The distance they use is, of course, based on the Round Earth coordinate system, and therefore the cruising speed calculated is based on that schema.
When you use that cruising speed against other Round Earth coordinate system distances you are flying based on a past experience, not a controlled truth.
Tom, cruise speed is closely approximated during the design process. I know you are not familiar with this topic, so here is a youtube video from an aeronautical engineer on the design process. It includes all formulas in case you want to work the math yourself. It also includes some of the regulatory requirements for designing a plane. (you can't just slap wings and an engine on a tube and sell it as a plane) This is for light aircraft, not airliners. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the requirements are a little more tight for a jumbo jet. Cruise speed has nothing to do with round Earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8)
-
What I have described is how cruising speeds are determined on airplanes. They fly a route on optimal performance and divide by time. The distance they use is, of course, based on the Round Earth coordinate system, and therefore the cruising speed calculated is based on that schema.
When you use that cruising speed against other Round Earth coordinate system distances you are flying based on a past experience, not a controlled truth.
Tom, cruise speed is closely approximated during the design process. I know you are not familiar with this topic, so here is a youtube video from an aeronautical engineer on the design process. It includes all formulas in case you want to work the math yourself. It also includes some of the regulatory requirements for designing a plane. (you can't just slap wings and an engine on a tube and sell it as a plane) This is for light aircraft, not airliners. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the requirements are a little more tight for a jumbo jet. Cruise speed has nothing to do with round Earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8)
Any such analysis of new engines is comparing to past planes and past cruise speeds as a baseline.
-
It’s weird, it’s almost like we have had equations for 400 years that describe the relationship between energy, mass and velocity.
-
It’s weird, it’s almost like we have had equations for 400 years that describe the relationship between energy, mass and velocity.
Engines are not lossless mathematical entites and their performance must be gauged in some way to how they are experienced to perform.
-
It’s weird, it’s almost like we have had equations for 400 years that describe the relationship between energy, mass and velocity.
Engines are not lossless mathematical entites and their performance must be gauged in some way to how they are experienced to perform.
Like a wind tunnel?
-
What I have described is how cruising speeds are determined on airplanes. They fly a route on optimal performance and divide by time. The distance they use is, of course, based on the Round Earth coordinate system, and therefore the cruising speed calculated is based on that schema.
When you use that cruising speed against other Round Earth coordinate system distances you are flying based on a past experience, not a controlled truth.
Tom, cruise speed is closely approximated during the design process. I know you are not familiar with this topic, so here is a youtube video from an aeronautical engineer on the design process. It includes all formulas in case you want to work the math yourself. It also includes some of the regulatory requirements for designing a plane. (you can't just slap wings and an engine on a tube and sell it as a plane) This is for light aircraft, not airliners. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the requirements are a little more tight for a jumbo jet. Cruise speed has nothing to do with round Earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnspsMprpa8)
Any such analysis of new engines is comparing to past planes and past cruise speeds as a baseline.
You sure about that or are you just making things up again? The video I linked used straight mathematics for calculating the cruise speed. It didn't reference a table of past designs.
At it's simplest, cruise speed is nothing more than when thrust = drag. Manufacturers know the thrust the engines produce and they know the coefficient of drag of their aircraft.
It is abundantly clear that you know very little about aviation and I don't fault you for that. What I do take issue with is your baseless assertions. Either start showing some proof or let it go already.
-
You sure about that or are you just making things up again? The video I linked used straight mathematics for calculating the cruise speed. It didn't reference a table of past designs
You don't think its possible to create a mathematical equation to how an engine equates to a speed from such tables?
At it's simplest, cruise speed is nothing more than when thrust = drag. Manufacturers know the thrust the engines produce and they know the coefficient of drag of their aircraft.
Again, engines are not lossless mathematical entities and an experiment or experience must have been the basis for those equations.
It is abundantly clear that you know very little about aviation and I don't fault you for that. What I do take issue with is your baseless assertions. Either start showing some proof or let it go already.
Are you honestly arguing that engineers are designing these engines and coming up with equations with no knowledge of how engines perform and fly in the real world?
-
It’s weird, it’s almost like we have had equations for 400 years that describe the relationship between energy, mass and velocity.
Engines are not lossless mathematical entites and their performance must be gauged in some way to how they are experienced to perform.
Like a wind tunnel?
Like flying the airplane, which they obviously do when assessing the performance of the craft.
-
It’s weird, it’s almost like we have had equations for 400 years that describe the relationship between energy, mass and velocity.
Engines are not lossless mathematical entites and their performance must be gauged in some way to how they are experienced to perform.
Like a wind tunnel?
Like flying the airplane.
If you think power is determined when they fly the plane, you're being more absurd than usual.
-
Again, engines are not lossless mathematical entities and an experiment or experience must have been the basis for those equations.
I've not seen anyone make such a claim. Frictional losses are surely factored in.
Are you honestly arguing that a engineers are designing these engines and coming up with equations with no knowledge of how engines perform and fly in the real world?
Again, no one is making a claim that real world testing isn't used. Of course it is. The only way to validate a design is to test it.
Care to get back to your claims that airlines figure out cruising speeds by flying the aircraft and have no idea how far said planes have traveled??? lol
-
Are you honestly arguing that a engineers are designing these engines and coming up with equations with no knowledge of how engines perform and fly in the real world?
No that is what you are arguing. What has been counter-pointed is that there are multiple ways to corroborate real world flight data.
-
Any such analysis of new engines is comparing to past planes and past cruise speeds as a baseline.
What is your source for that comment Tom?
-
There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
Let's keep this to distances. Distances are the fundamental. There are numerous independent ways to calibrate, check, measure, and optimize the distances traveled by commercial aircraft. This is not a mystery. And it doesn't require any prior assumptions about the shape of the earth. Start flat. Start round. Start with anything. But accept the conglomerate testimony of the measurements. Thank you so much for hanging with this topic and with this forum.
Can you describe some of these independent methods which don't rely on assumptions about the shape of the earth?
Measurements over land OK, like across the US?
-
Until recently I believed completely in a round earth (like most people) but lots of things made me start to question this.
Rodents on mars
(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/trending/2013/05/29/SNC130530_rat_640.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
Engineer fixing mars rover.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/2508586300000578-2925341-One_of_the_new_pictures_released_by_Nasa_of_the_Mars_Curiosity_R-a-12_1422178045137.jpg)
Tom your answers can be vague (to me). If the earth is flat then the distance from A to B is a very simple formula (much more simple that on a bulging spherical earth). If the earth is flat I believe there are maps of the flat earth similar to the one provided below.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Google maps taking pictures from above and making maps is real (I can zoom in on my house on satelite view) whether the ISS is real or not.
-
The round earth coordinate system gives highly accurate positioning of anywhere on the planet and ties in absolutely with maps and charts available to everybody from professionals to amateurs. The round earth coordinates system is used simply because the earth is round, you know and I know it and so does everyone else with one iota of interest in the world about them. You can amuse yourself as much as you want with intellectual sparring and ignoring all the evidence going back centuries, but it works beautifully because it is correct. The round earth coordinates system is used accurately by millions of people across the GLOBEevery day simply because it is based on the real global planet not some fairy tale flat world claptrap. Nothing works out on a mythical flat world and you have zero evidence, not even a map to show that it does. Even you favoured Bedford Levels experiment by the conman Rowbotham will be revealed as rubbish during next year, as I live about 15 miles from the Bedford Levels and will be taking my own readings there to show what a load of rubbish that particular Rowbotham conclusion is.
As for aircraft design and flight planning, you obviously know little about it so I'l not bother to waste my time discussing it further :-)
Enjoying the game though,
Roger
-
Until recently I believed completely in a round earth (like most people) but lots of things made me start to question this.
Rodents on mars
(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/trending/2013/05/29/SNC130530_rat_640.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
Engineer fixing mars rover.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/2508586300000578-2925341-One_of_the_new_pictures_released_by_Nasa_of_the_Mars_Curiosity_R-a-12_1422178045137.jpg)
Tom your answers can be vague (to me). If the earth is flat then the distance from A to B is a very simple formula (much more simple that on a bulging spherical earth). If the earth is flat I believe there are maps of the flat earth similar to the one provided below.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Google maps taking pictures from above and making maps is real (I can zoom in on my house on satelite view) whether the ISS is real or not.
As a round earth believer, all those pictures are completely fake. I dont accept pictures and video as evidence because they are too easily photoshopped
-
Until recently I believed completely in a round earth (like most people) but lots of things made me start to question this.
Rodents on mars
(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/trending/2013/05/29/SNC130530_rat_640.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
Engineer fixing mars rover.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/2508586300000578-2925341-One_of_the_new_pictures_released_by_Nasa_of_the_Mars_Curiosity_R-a-12_1422178045137.jpg)
Tom your answers can be vague (to me). If the earth is flat then the distance from A to B is a very simple formula (much more simple that on a bulging spherical earth). If the earth is flat I believe there are maps of the flat earth similar to the one provided below.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Google maps taking pictures from above and making maps is real (I can zoom in on my house on satelite view) whether the ISS is real or not.
Google pareidolia and get back to us.
-
There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
Let's keep this to distances. Distances are the fundamental. There are numerous independent ways to calibrate, check, measure, and optimize the distances traveled by commercial aircraft. This is not a mystery. And it doesn't require any prior assumptions about the shape of the earth.
Can you describe some of these independent methods which don't rely on assumptions about the shape of the earth?
Tom, your "we don't know how far apart things are" argument really is weak, and you know it. You really can't think of an "independent method" for determining distances? How about you drive a car from Chicago to Seattle. Note the odometer reading. Sure, the highway didn't follow the perfect shortest route, but it gives you a pretty good idea of the distance. (My odometer has no idea what shape the earth is, by the way, just the shape of my tires.)
Need more data? Okay, drive a car from Seattle to San Diego.
From San Diego to Atlanta.
From Atlanta to Minneapolis.
From Minneapolis to City X.
From there to City Y.
This isn't hard.
-
Like flying the airplane, which they obviously do when assessing the performance of the craft.
Exactly, they fly know a course and the speeds are checked by radar among other things. The speeds are well known and easy to find. Open your eyes. Look around you.
-
How do you suppose you would calculate that a Boeing plane would have a cruise speed of 550 miles per hour?
Here's one way: fly from LA to NY, or Sydney to Perth, or any other over land distance that is easily calibrated. That gets us speeds of around 850-950km/h. Would you agree?
-
How do you suppose you would calculate that a Boeing plane would have a cruise speed of 550 miles per hour?
Here's one way: fly from LA to NY, or Sydney to Perth, or any other over land distance that is easily calibrated. That gets us speeds of around 850-950km/h. Would you agree?
Also Birds migrate in summer/winter. We have birds in the UK that migrate to Africa : http://ww2.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/read-and-learn/fun-facts-and-articles/migration/which-birds-migrate.aspx we can see how fast these birds fly, we can tag them and find out how long their journey takes which gives us a general idea of the distance.
Also pigeon racers have accurately flown their birds up to 100 miles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homing_pigeon from the point they release them (empirical) back to their lofts. These birds are tagged so easily identifiable. Their flying speed can be measured and this adds further weight to the fact that the distances from places on earth is not a mystery!
Once Tom has accepted that he can no longer dispute the fact that the globe earth distances are true we can get on with proving earth cannot be flat because it is impossible to plot these known distances on a flat map. Hence why he will never admit the distances are known, sad really.
-
Sadly, we will never know how far it is from LA to NY, Lisbon to Shanghai, or Sydney to Perth. Do we know how far it is from Tom's hometown to the capital of his country or the source of his bananas?
-
There are a number of ways to calculate how far you have travelled that can be cross-referenced against GPS or other such mapping devices. This is not an impenetrable scientific mystery Tom.
Incorrect. There is no true way to know how fast you are flying through the air without relying on a Round Earth coordinate device.
I bet Mr. Bernoulli can figure out how fast an airplane is flying.
Per Mr. Bernoulli, an airplane flying too slow will fall out of the sky. I have personally experienced this on many occasions. It’s called a stall. In my plane, at say 125,000 lbs, with the flaps up, I need to fly 230 mph to stay in flight. So, a pilot that decides to fly at or just ever so slightly above the minimum flight speed would only need to make wind corrections to determine their ground speed.
-
But wind, wind, wind. Why not just ask an old-timey surveyor how far it is from LA to NY or Lisbon to Shanghai?
-
Until recently I believed completely in a round earth (like most people) but lots of things made me start to question this.
Rodents on mars
(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/trending/2013/05/29/SNC130530_rat_640.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
Engineer fixing mars rover.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/2508586300000578-2925341-One_of_the_new_pictures_released_by_Nasa_of_the_Mars_Curiosity_R-a-12_1422178045137.jpg)
Tom your answers can be vague (to me). If the earth is flat then the distance from A to B is a very simple formula (much more simple that on a bulging spherical earth). If the earth is flat I believe there are maps of the flat earth similar to the one provided below.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Google maps taking pictures from above and making maps is real (I can zoom in on my house on satelite view) whether the ISS is real or not.
As a round earth believer, all those pictures are completely fake. I dont accept pictures and video as evidence because they are too easily photoshopped
They aren't fake. The first photo (rodent) was just a rock. People tend to see familiar objects in rocks, especially on Mars. Apperently people saw a facehugger, a dinosaur skeleton, and an elongated skull on Mars. The second photo is just a misinterpretation of what clearly is a robot arm. If NASA really wanted to hide 'the truth' they would have deleted the images a long time ago. Heck, these photos don't even prove the Earth is Flat.
-
But wind, wind, wind. Why not just ask an old-timey surveyor how far it is from LA to NY or Lisbon to Shanghai?
Because old-timey surveyors use a round earth coordinate system. A flat earth coordinate system is yet to be developed.
And don’t even start talking about radian coordinates. That would never work on a flat disk earth.
https://www.wyzant.com/resources/lessons/math/trigonometry/unit-circle
Ohh...wait???????
-
Because old-timey surveyors use a round earth coordinate system. A flat earth coordinate system is yet to be developed.
And don’t even start talking about radian coordinates. That would never work on a flat disk earth.
https://www.wyzant.com/resources/lessons/math/trigonometry/unit-circle
Ohh...wait???????
Well, there's always the notoriously and intentionally inaccurate automobile odometer.
-
Flat Earthers argue that there is no true Flat Earth map. If this is the case, then how do airplanes and ships know which direction to go to. They seems to know which direction to go to get to certain place and approximately how long it takes. How can this happen if there is no "true map"?
The coordinate system is correct in that you can get to a location by going to a certain coordinate. The coordinate system assumes that the earth is a globe, however, and the coordinate points are mapped onto a sphere. Distances are calculated under this model, and are not directly experienced with any specific onboard tool.
We can't use distances calculated under the assumption of a globe when making a Flat Earth map. We might as well assume that the earth is a globe if we are using a spherical coordinate system. Those distances must be proven.
They know "approximately" how long routes take from past experience, and guess their speed from the theoretical distance traveled.
Per the Southern Hemisphere in the Flat Earth monopole model, the Flat Earth monopole map was not created based on any particular data. It is just a projection of a globe, and has no value in navigation. A true map has yet to be created. The stumbling block is that all listed distances rely upon a Round Earth spherical coordinate system.
Why is relying on a RE spherical co-ordinate system a "stumbling block"?
I'm just trying to imagine how WW2 would have panned out if the Japs had become fed up of trying to guess where Pearl Harbor was, or how tricky it would have been for the USAAF to find mainland Japan in their bombing raids.
US Navy pilots? "Attack the Jap ships at RE co-ordinate x,y. We'll rendezvous at a,b in 50 minutes. Or just turn left at the next wave." I simply cannot imagine how anyone could have operated carriers and planes without very accurate navigation technology, backed up by a paper map in case something technical got damaged.
How many mission records in each category:
- success
- missing in action
- aborted, bad weather
- aborted, tech problem
- aborted, couldn't find it
-
You sure about that or are you just making things up again? The video I linked used straight mathematics for calculating the cruise speed. It didn't reference a table of past designs
You don't think its possible to create a mathematical equation to how an engine equates to a speed from such tables?
At it's simplest, cruise speed is nothing more than when thrust = drag. Manufacturers know the thrust the engines produce and they know the coefficient of drag of their aircraft.
Again, engines are not lossless mathematical entities and an experiment or experience must have been the basis for those equations.
It is abundantly clear that you know very little about aviation and I don't fault you for that. What I do take issue with is your baseless assertions. Either start showing some proof or let it go already.
Are you honestly arguing that engineers are designing these engines and coming up with equations with no knowledge of how engines perform and fly in the real world?
LOL, this from the guy that says that engineers don't know how fast a plane flies or how far points are from each other in the real world (real world, that's ironic) it seems the rules are pretty lax.
-
Until recently I believed completely in a round earth (like most people) but lots of things made me start to question this.
Rodents on mars
(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/trending/2013/05/29/SNC130530_rat_640.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
Engineer fixing mars rover.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/2508586300000578-2925341-One_of_the_new_pictures_released_by_Nasa_of_the_Mars_Curiosity_R-a-12_1422178045137.jpg)
Tom your answers can be vague (to me). If the earth is flat then the distance from A to B is a very simple formula (much more simple that on a bulging spherical earth). If the earth is flat I believe there are maps of the flat earth similar to the one provided below.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Google maps taking pictures from above and making maps is real (I can zoom in on my house on satelite view) whether the ISS is real or not.
As a round earth believer, all those pictures are completely fake. I dont accept pictures and video as evidence because they are too easily photoshopped
They aren't fake. The first photo (rodent) was just a rock. People tend to see familiar objects in rocks, especially on Mars. Apperently people saw a facehugger, a dinosaur skeleton, and an elongated skull on Mars. The second photo is just a misinterpretation of what clearly is a robot arm. If NASA really wanted to hide 'the truth' they would have deleted the images a long time ago. Heck, these photos don't even prove the Earth is Flat.
I'm fully aware that they arn't fake, I was just making a point that flat earthers call everything fake, then cherry pick some pictures and call them real.