Because it’s not flat. It’s spherical. You go around it, not across it.
So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?
Yeah, I'm looking for evidence to disprove JohnAdams1145 and I. Not for a warning. The earth is round, 'regardless of model.' I want answers, not a warning.
All maps, when unfolded, are flat.So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?
Regardless of what junker says, the Earth is round. And it takes about 20 seconds to circumnavigate the globe if you're at the North (or South, contrary to the garbage AE map) pole; just walk around the pole. You should take a look at the FE map; it is a series of concentric circles representing lines of latitude. This means that regardless of the model, a few hours time is reasonable. What aren't reasonable, however, are the various distances that the FE map purports to give (my favorite was South Africa to Australia). The reason why an authoritative, consistent FE map hasn't been given is because it's an impossible task. The distances between points on Earth effectively fix it to be the shape it is. If you measure a triangle on Earth, you'll find that the sum of its angles exceeds 180 degrees. This is proof enough that the Earth is round.
Those who say the Earth is flat are misinformed about the geometry of the Earth, a lot of science, the nature of the scientific method, and sometimes a lot of science.
Any evidence for this claim at all? Or just throwing it into the wind?All maps, when unfolded, are flat.So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?
Regardless of what junker says, the Earth is round. And it takes about 20 seconds to circumnavigate the globe if you're at the North (or South, contrary to the garbage AE map) pole; just walk around the pole. You should take a look at the FE map; it is a series of concentric circles representing lines of latitude. This means that regardless of the model, a few hours time is reasonable. What aren't reasonable, however, are the various distances that the FE map purports to give (my favorite was South Africa to Australia). The reason why an authoritative, consistent FE map hasn't been given is because it's an impossible task. The distances between points on Earth effectively fix it to be the shape it is. If you measure a triangle on Earth, you'll find that the sum of its angles exceeds 180 degrees. This is proof enough that the Earth is round.
Those who say the Earth is flat are misinformed about the geometry of the Earth, a lot of science, the nature of the scientific method, and sometimes a lot of science.
Flat maps have existed before the depiction of the Earth on a spherical surface {i.e., GLOBE).
It is the GLOBE that requires the alteration of the flat map to fit its surface.
Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.
Any evidence for this claim at all? Or just throwing it into the wind?
Huh? He was claiming all maps of things South of the equator have errors to this day, and sailors still find themselves hours off course. Do *you* have evidence of this, even anecdotal?Any evidence for this claim at all? Or just throwing it into the wind?
You would have to test the principle yourself in order to be truly convinced, but trust that navigators - naval, aerial, and terrestrial - factor the curvature of the earth into their calculations.
I can give you an anecdotal example, if you want.
Huh? He was claiming all maps of things South of the equator have errors to this day, and sailors still find themselves hours off course. Do *you* have evidence of this, even anecdotal?Any evidence for this claim at all? Or just throwing it into the wind?
You would have to test the principle yourself in order to be truly convinced, but trust that navigators - naval, aerial, and terrestrial - factor the curvature of the earth into their calculations.
I can give you an anecdotal example, if you want.
It appears you have a misconception on how FE believes circumnavigation occurs. Circumnavigation in the FE model is flying in concentric circles around the North (why not South? Because FE is false.) pole. This means that polar circumnavigation is impossible in the FE model (it's happened, sorry FE!). This also means that geostationary satellites are compatible with the FE model (until you take pictures of course).
I want to find a why to fall off of the edge…
Flat maps have existed before the depiction of the Earth on a spherical surface {i.e., GLOBE).True, but were those "flat maps" maps of a "flat earth"?
It is the GLOBE that requires the alteration of the flat map to fit its surface.That is rather obvious I would have thought. Oone of the earliest projections happens to be:
Compare Map ProjectionsAnd al-Bīrūnī just happened to be a very accomplished Muslim Astronomer, Geodetic Surveyor who made many quite accurate measurements of the Globe. He used the "horizon dip angle" to measure the earth's radius to within about 1% of the modern value.Azimuthal Equidistant Projection (polar aspect)Recognise it?
(https://map-projections.net/img/jpg/azimutal-equidistant-gpolar.jpg?ft=59bfd4f6)
Azimuthal Equidistant Projection (polar aspect) Creator Abū Rayḥān al-Bīrūnī (1000 AD approx.) Group Azimuthal Property Equidistant
From: Map Projections (https://map-projections.net/single-view/azimutal-equidistant-gpolar)
Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.And that is also total rubbish. There are many quite accurate "flat maps" that are projections of portions of the Globe but there is no accurate Flat Earth map.
Layout of the Continents
There are several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:From: TFES.org, Layout of the Continents (https://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents)
Ice Wall model:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/4/43/Map.png)As a distinct continent:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png)
Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU
You keep posting Al-Biruni.No-one claimed that he did, and neither did he know any details of Antarctica, which is also on the example in Wikipedia.
Just one question...
What evidence do you have that Al-Biruni knew the shape of North and South America?
Answer = NONE.
He did not create the projection you trot out.
If you look at what you said:Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!FLAT EARTH - GPS DOESN'T WORK AT HIGH SEAS - VOYAGE OF A SHIP LE BOREAL TO ANTARCTICA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU)
Yes, your claim was, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Quote from: totallackeyAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
Better luck?If you look at what you said:Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!FLAT EARTH - GPS DOESN'T WORK AT HIGH SEAS - VOYAGE OF A SHIP LE BOREAL TO ANTARCTICA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU)Yes, your claim was, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Quote from: totallackeyAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
You have given one chart with possible errors of 200-300 m.
The video title claims that the GPS doesn't work, but the GPS did work and gave differences with the chart of 200-300 m.
Unless you show some independent evidence there is no way of knowing whether the error is in the GPS or the chart.
My guess is that the GPS was accurate and charts for South Georgia were not up to date.
Especially as the navigator says, "We have to round up this corner because the map is wrong. It's a little more like this."
So, you are complaining about a 200-300 m error in a remote location, when you don't even have an official flat earth map! What a joke!
In any case, it's a far cry from "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".
So try again, better luck next time.
No-one claimed that he did, and neither did he know any details of Antarctica, which is also on the example in Wikipedia.No, the evidence is he did not create the AEP.
But the evidence indicates that he did create the Azimutal Equidistant Projection - meaning the type of projection.
What?Any evidence for this claim at all? Or just throwing it into the wind?All maps, when unfolded, are flat.So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?
Regardless of what junker says, the Earth is round. And it takes about 20 seconds to circumnavigate the globe if you're at the North (or South, contrary to the garbage AE map) pole; just walk around the pole. You should take a look at the FE map; it is a series of concentric circles representing lines of latitude. This means that regardless of the model, a few hours time is reasonable. What aren't reasonable, however, are the various distances that the FE map purports to give (my favorite was South Africa to Australia). The reason why an authoritative, consistent FE map hasn't been given is because it's an impossible task. The distances between points on Earth effectively fix it to be the shape it is. If you measure a triangle on Earth, you'll find that the sum of its angles exceeds 180 degrees. This is proof enough that the Earth is round.
Those who say the Earth is flat are misinformed about the geometry of the Earth, a lot of science, the nature of the scientific method, and sometimes a lot of science.
Flat maps have existed before the depiction of the Earth on a spherical surface {i.e., GLOBE).
It is the GLOBE that requires the alteration of the flat map to fit its surface.
Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.
Better luck?If you look at what you said:Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!FLAT EARTH - GPS DOESN'T WORK AT HIGH SEAS - VOYAGE OF A SHIP LE BOREAL TO ANTARCTICA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU)Yes, your claim was, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Quote from: totallackeyAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
You have given one chart with possible errors of 200-300 m.
The video title claims that the GPS doesn't work, but the GPS did work and gave differences with the chart of 200-300 m.
Unless you show some independent evidence there is no way of knowing whether the error is in the GPS or the chart.
My guess is that the GPS was accurate and charts for South Georgia were not up to date.
Especially as the navigator says, "We have to round up this corner because the map is wrong. It's a little more like this."
So, you are complaining about a 200-300 m error in a remote location, when you don't even have an official flat earth map! What a joke!
In any case, it's a far cry from "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".
So try again, better luck next time.
You asked for documentary evidence.
I provided documentary evidence; specifically, the Mighty Ships documentary.
And if you pay attention, the charts are also suspect.
So, get bent.
Nope.Better luck?If you look at what you said:Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!FLAT EARTH - GPS DOESN'T WORK AT HIGH SEAS - VOYAGE OF A SHIP LE BOREAL TO ANTARCTICA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU)Yes, your claim was, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Quote from: totallackeyAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
You have given one chart with possible errors of 200-300 m.
The video title claims that the GPS doesn't work, but the GPS did work and gave differences with the chart of 200-300 m.
Unless you show some independent evidence there is no way of knowing whether the error is in the GPS or the chart.
My guess is that the GPS was accurate and charts for South Georgia were not up to date.
Especially as the navigator says, "We have to round up this corner because the map is wrong. It's a little more like this."
So, you are complaining about a 200-300 m error in a remote location, when you don't even have an official flat earth map! What a joke!
In any case, it's a far cry from "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".
So try again, better luck next time.
You asked for documentary evidence.
I provided documentary evidence; specifically, the Mighty Ships documentary.
And if you pay attention, the charts are also suspect.
So, get bent.
You have not presented evidence that "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day". Can you at least admit that?
It's awesome that you have presented evidence of one map being incorrect, but how does that prove or disprove that all maps are wrong?In and of itself, it does not.
Is it possible that over time the science of drawing maps has improved and some older maps were not drawn correctly, and they are getting better over time?Yep, hence my original statement included the words, "becoming fewer and fewer," in reference to the amount of errors.
And how does any of that prove or disprove that the earth is flat?Who said my purpose in my post was to prove or disprove anything?
Yep, hence my original statement included the words, "becoming fewer and fewer," in reference to the amount of errors.
Please take a remedial reading course in terms of comprehension.
That video did not provide any evidence that the GPS failed, just that the GPS and chart disagreed by 200-300 m.Better luck?If you look at what you said:Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!FLAT EARTH - GPS DOESN'T WORK AT HIGH SEAS - VOYAGE OF A SHIP LE BOREAL TO ANTARCTICA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANyoaWph-nU)Yes, your claim was, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Quote from: totallackeyAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.Unless you can provide some documentary evidence of that, I am going to insist that it is totally fabricated rubbish!
You have given one chart with possible errors of 200-300 m.
In any case, it's a far cry from "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".
So try again, better luck next time.
You asked for documentary evidence. I provided documentary evidence; specifically, the Mighty Ships documentary.
And if you pay attention, the charts are also suspect.
So, get bent.
Ignorance in its lowest form!No-one claimed that he did, and neither did he know any details of Antarctica, which is also on the example in Wikipedia.No, the evidence is he did not create the AEP.
But the evidence indicates that he did create the Azimutal Equidistant Projection - meaning the type of projection.
"Al-Bīrūnī, in full Abū al-Rayḥān Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al-Bīrūnī, (born Sept. 4, 973 CE, Khwārezm, Khorāsān [now in Uzbekistan]—died c. 1052, Ghazna [now Ghaznī, Afg.), Muslim astronomer, mathematician, ethnographist, anthropologist, historian, and geographer." Encyclopedia Britannica
"Al-Biruni is regarded as one of the greatest scholars of the medieval Islamic era and was well versed in physics, mathematics, astronomy, and natural sciences, and also distinguished himself as a historian, chronologist and linguist.[11]" - Wikipedia
Care to point out the word cartography in either of those descriptions?
Disingenuity at its highest form...
FlatEarthWiki.com (http://FlatEarthWiki.com) is an encyclopedia, and an encyclopedia needs people to write it. Unlike most other reference works, we don't pay people to write for us, and there are very few incentives, perks or privileges associated with contributing. As such, our most valuable resource is neither money nor webspace, but Flat Earth Wiki's contributors, those dedicated people who take time out of their lives to edit, improve or maintain articles. In short, editors matter; and one of the important priorities of the Flat Earth community must be to recruit and retain good contributors.You might also look at:We currently have 471 articles (http://flatearthwiki.com/index.php?title=Special:AllPages) about Flat Earth THANKS TO 2 ACTIVE EDITORS (http://flatearthwiki.com/index.php?title=Special:ActiveUsers)Azimuthal Equidistant Projection
The azimuthal equidistant projection is an azimuthal map projection. It has the useful properties that all points on the map are at proportionately correct distances from the center point, and that all points on the map are at the correct azimuth (direction) from the center point. A useful application for this type of projection is a polar projection which shows all meridians (lines of longitude) as straight, with distances from the pole represented correctly. The flag of the United Nations contains an example of a polar azimuthal equidistant projection.
This projection is used by the USGS in the National Atlas of the United States of America, and for large-scale mapping of Micronesia. It is useful for showing airline distances from center point of projection and for seismic and radio work.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
History
While it may have been used by ancient Egyptians for star maps in some holy books, the earliest text describing the azimuthal equidistant projection is an 11th-century work by al-Biruni.
The projection appears in many Renaissance maps, and Gerardus Mercator used it for an inset of the north polar regions in sheet 13 and legend 6 of his well-known 1569 map. In France and Russia this projection is named "Postel projection" after Guillaume Postel, who used it for a map in 1581. Many modern star chart planispheres use the polar azimuthal equidistant projection.
Go read the rest for yourself in: Flat Earth Wiki, Azimuthal Equidistant Projection (http://flatearthwiki.com/index.php?title=Azimuthal_Equidistant_Projection)
Al Biruni: One of the Greatest Pioneers of SciencePlenty more where they came from!
A statue of Biruni adorns the southwest entrance of Laleh Park in Tehran, Iran.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Biruni’s works number 146 in total. These include 35 books on astronomy, 4 on astrolabes, 23 on astrology, . . . . 9 on geography, 10 on geodesy and mapping theory, 15 on mathematics (8 on arithmetic, 5 on geometry, 2 on trigonometry), . . . .
Read the rest in: Al Biruni: One of the Greatest Pioneers of ScienceThe Muslim Times, (https://themuslimtimes.info/2012/01/01/al-biruni-the-great-pioneer-of-science/)
Though it's a bit late for some people.It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
My original claim stands and always will stand.
Yep, hence my original statement included the words, "becoming fewer and fewer," in reference to the amount of errors.
Please take a remedial reading course in terms of comprehension.
Excellent, then you agree that your evidence for your claim is without merit. Thank you!
Bunch of crapola Geoff normally writes when he gets pwned...You asked for documentary evidence right?
The regular drivel of inane text one posts when caught with their tit in the wringer...All maps contain errors.
And why is that an issue?My original claim stands and always will stand you moran.
Yep, hence my original statement included the words, "becoming fewer and fewer," in reference to the amount of errors.
Please take a remedial reading course in terms of comprehension.
Excellent, then you agree that your evidence for your claim is without merit. Thank you!
All maps contain errors because they are man made.
Are you normally this dense?
Totally irrelevant to your original claim. Don't move the goalposts.My original claim stands and always will stand.Yep, hence my original statement included the words, "becoming fewer and fewer," in reference to the amount of errors.Excellent, then you agree that your evidence for your claim is without merit. Thank you!
Please take a remedial reading course in terms of comprehension.
All maps contain errors because they are man made.
Are you normally this obtuse?Totally irrelevant to your original claim. You showed one documentary that showed the possibility of one small error in one chart.<<< Lying forged quote deleted >>You asked for documentary evidence right? I provided a documentary. Showed exactly what I stated.
All maps, being man made, will contain errors.
Now go lay down somewhere and sleep it off.No, Mr Totally Lacking, you claimed, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".
Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
Totally irrelevant to your original claim. Don't move the goalposts.Did not move the goalposts.
Totally irrelevant to your original claim. You showed one documentary that showed the possibility of one small error in one chart.Which is what you asked for.
No, Mr Totally Lacking, you claimed, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Because the specific example I provided demonstrated exactly that...
You post one video indicating that in one remote location one chart may be 200-300 m in error!
So what?
You posted no evidence at all that "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day"All maps contain errors because they are man-made.
nor that "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Specific example already posted.
Now Mr Totally Lacking, This morning I saw a video of a white rabbit. So, according to your logic all rabbits are white.False equivalency.
Rubbish, just as the one video you showed is not evidence that your original claim was proved.Again, quit posting your rubbish. I provided exact evidence of my claim.
All your blustering and idiotically confusing me with Geoff won't prove anything. You really have lost the plot on this one.I know you JREF-ugees by heart there Geoff...
So, run away before prove yourself more foolish still.
totallackey, you said:Aside from this sentence I am writing, point out where I have written the word, "vast."
"that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time."
You then provided an example of a 200 meter error.
How fast do you think boats go?
When someone accuses you of moving the goalposts, this is what they mean. You claim VAST inaccuracies in southern hemisphere maps, and then find one TINY inaccuracy.
You are right that all human maps are made with tiny inaccuracies. So what? Your claim was "several hours of travel time."You can look at the documentary and see there was several hours of travel time lost on the cruise.
No! I repeat that you showed ONE example. You did not show that:No, Mr Totally Lacking, you claimed, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Because the specific example I provided demonstrated exactly that...
You posted one video indicating that in one remote location one chart may be 200-300 m in error!
So what?
Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.
All maps contain errors because they are man-made.That I will grant you, but all diagrams and even engineering drawings contain "error".
Not "False equivalence" because if I find a chart that does not have significant errors I disprove the claim that claim that "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".nor that "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Specific example already posted.Now Mr Totally Lacking, This morning I saw a video of a white rabbit. So, according to your logic all rabbits are white.False equivalency.
So you are confirming plus/minus 200m is as accurate as we have achieved.No! I repeat that you showed ONE example. You did not show that:No, Mr Totally Lacking, you claimed, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Because the specific example I provided demonstrated exactly that...
You posted one video indicating that in one remote location one chart may be 200-300 m in error!
So what?QuoteAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.
Please tell us about this secret accurate "flat map" the "The explorer" should be "trusting"! I thought that there was no definitive flat earth map!Quote from: totallackeyAll maps contain errors because they are man-made.That I will grant you, but all diagrams and even engineering drawings contain "error".
Any map can only be as accurate as the best survey of the region.
Before satellite mapping there was no better method of finding a location in a remote region of the earth than celestial navigation.
According to all I can find that accuracy can never be better than to within about ±200 m.
From a number of base locations, geodetic surveyors can then map out the rest of the region. When aerial mapping became feasible that was used to fill in the detail.
So it is unlikely that navigation charts in the pre-satellite mapping era ever had an absolute accuracy better than this ±200 m whatever the shape of the earth.
And even that ±200 m is very optimistic.
Not "False equivalence" because if I find a chart that does not have significant errors I disprove the claim that claim that "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Okay.
All I have to do if present that map "to any explorer south of the Equator" and your case is blown out of the water.
But all you seem interested in is "scoring points" and that does nothing towards settling the Flat/Globe shape of the earth.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
If you could present a flat earth map that was as accurate as the pre-satellite mapping maps of countries it would help your case no end.
I have a fairly high-resolution map of Australia published in 1855.
Simply scaling from that map gives the width of Australia along the 30°S latitude to within about 30 km of current the value.
Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.
And in closing, Mr Totallackey, you are an ignorant idiot if you think that Geoff and I are the same person.(https://media.giphy.com/media/9Nflg4Hb3yOIg/giphy.gif)
Bye bye Mr Totally Lost it!
Accuracy and repeatibility of GPS measurements are 4m for the civilian system.So you are confirming plus/minus 200m is as accurate as we have achieved.No! I repeat that you showed ONE example. You did not show that:No, Mr Totally Lacking, you claimed, "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day" so you have not made a case especially when you go on to say "that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time".Because the specific example I provided demonstrated exactly that...
You posted one video indicating that in one remote location one chart may be 200-300 m in error!
So what?QuoteAny map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day (becoming fewer and fewer) and that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time.
The reason? The explorer ASSUMES A SPHERICAL EARTH, rather than just trusting the flat map.
Please tell us about this secret accurate "flat map" the "The explorer" should be "trusting"! I thought that there was no definitive flat earth map!Quote from: totallackeyAll maps contain errors because they are man-made.That I will grant you, but all diagrams and even engineering drawings contain "error".
Any map can only be as accurate as the best survey of the region.
Before satellite mapping there was no better method of finding a location in a remote region of the earth than celestial navigation.
According to all I can find that accuracy can never be better than to within about ±200 m.
From a number of base locations, geodetic surveyors can then map out the rest of the region. When aerial mapping became feasible that was used to fill in the detail.
So it is unlikely that navigation charts in the pre-satellite mapping era ever had an absolute accuracy better than this ±200 m whatever the shape of the earth.
And even that ±200 m is very optimistic.
Great!Not "False equivalence" because if I find a chart that does not have significant errors I disprove the claim that claim that "Any map presented to any explorer south of the Equator has errors to this day".Okay.
All I have to do if present that map "to any explorer south of the Equator" and your case is blown out of the water.But all you seem interested in is "scoring points" and that does nothing towards settling the Flat/Globe shape of the earth.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
If you could present a flat earth map that was as accurate as the pre-satellite mapping maps of countries it would help your case no end.
I have a fairly high-resolution map of Australia published in 1855.
Simply scaling from that map gives the width of Australia along the 30°S latitude to within about 30 km of current the value.
Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.And in closing, Mr Totallackey, you are an ignorant idiot if you think that Geoff and I are the same person.(https://media.giphy.com/media/9Nflg4Hb3yOIg/giphy.gif)
Bye bye Mr Totally Lost it!
totallackey, you said:Aside from this sentence I am writing, point out where I have written the word, "vast."
"that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time."
You then provided an example of a 200 meter error.
How fast do you think boats go?
When someone accuses you of moving the goalposts, this is what they mean. You claim VAST inaccuracies in southern hemisphere maps, and then find one TINY inaccuracy.You are right that all human maps are made with tiny inaccuracies. So what? Your claim was "several hours of travel time."You can look at the documentary and see there was several hours of travel time lost on the cruise.
But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
And in closing, Mr Totallackey, you are an ignorant idiot if you think that Geoff and I are the same person.
Bye bye Mr Totally More Lost it!
As soon as you can point out my use of the word, "vast," we will move forward.totallackey, you said:Aside from this sentence I am writing, point out where I have written the word, "vast."
"that explorer will soon find themselves off-heading, sometimes up to several hours of travel time."
You then provided an example of a 200 meter error.
How fast do you think boats go?
When someone accuses you of moving the goalposts, this is what they mean. You claim VAST inaccuracies in southern hemisphere maps, and then find one TINY inaccuracy.You are right that all human maps are made with tiny inaccuracies. So what? Your claim was "several hours of travel time."You can look at the documentary and see there was several hours of travel time lost on the cruise.
I saw several hours lost due to a storm around 8:00 minutes into the video you shared. I did not see any loss of time due to being several hours off course. Please help me find it - can you tell me what minutes of this I should review? I watched the whole thing and the only thing that seemed to delay the voyage was storms.
How do you know?But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
Heap big difference!
And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?How is your question related to the OP?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.
But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.
Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!How do you know?But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
Heap big difference!
Even this Flat Earth Society makes no such claim and presents these two "continental layouts":Quote from: TFES.org WikiLayout of the ContinentsIf you disgree, post your ;) accurate flat earth map! ;)
There are several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:From: TFES.org, Layout of the Continents (https://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents)
Ice Wall model:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/4/43/Map.png)As a distinct continent:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png)Quote from: totallackeyCan you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.
You could buy one British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference: BA3597, $39.15 (https://mdnautical.com/w-antarctica-falkland-islands-islands-in-the-southern-ocean/9146-british-admiralty-nautical-chart-3597-south-georgia.html).Quote from: totallackeyBecause the OP is about the an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?How is your question related to the OP?
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.
But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.
How is your post relate to the OP?So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.
Circular reasoning noted.Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!How do you know?But, it was not a "flat map" of "the flat earth" it was a projection of small portion of the Globe onto a flat surface.Show me any FE map of comparable accuracy.If the chart you were looking at was "flat," then it was, "flat."
Heap big difference!
If you disgree, post your ;) accurate flat earth map! ;)I like the USGS AEP.
Lack of supporting evidence for your claim is noted.Quote from: totallackeyCan you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.
You could buy one British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference: BA3597, $39.15 (https://mdnautical.com/w-antarctica-falkland-islands-islands-in-the-southern-ocean/9146-british-admiralty-nautical-chart-3597-south-georgia.html).You buy it.
Yeah, the OP is not even about maps...Quote from: totallackeyBecause the OP is about the an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?Depictions of the Earth on a flat map existed before globe depiction.
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.How is your question related to the OP?
How is your post relate to the OP?So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.
Incorrect. It's not "Circular reasoning", but a bit of simple logical deduction.Because there is no accurate flat earth, so it cannot be a flat earth map!Circular reasoning noted.
Your liking a map is no evidence of its accuracy! But the "USGS AEP" is fine, provided you take due note of the changing E-W scale factor.If you disgree, post your ;) accurate flat earth map! ;)I like the USGS AEP.
Evidence:Lack of supporting evidence for your claim is noted.Quote from: totallackeyCan you show the complete chart in question, along with the author and any writing on it indicating what type of projection it was, along with the basis?No, and I won't bother trying! Since TFES does not even claim to know whether the flat earth has one or two poles, there can hardly be any accurate FE charts.
Claim dismissed.
Layout of the ContinentsIf you don't even know the basic continental layout, you clearly cannot have an accurate flat earth map.
There are several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:From: TFES.org, Layout of the Continents (https://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents)
Ice Wall model:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/4/43/Map.png)As a distinct continent:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png)
Not on you sweet Nellie! Lack of an accurate map is your problem not mine! I know what shape the earth is!You could buy one British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3597 South Georgia, Reference: BA3597, $39.15 (https://mdnautical.com/w-antarctica-falkland-islands-islands-in-the-southern-ocean/9146-british-admiralty-nautical-chart-3597-south-georgia.html).You buy it.
I did not claim that the OP was correct, just that the implication was about the difference between a Globe and a flat earth map.Yeah, the OP is not even about maps...Quote from: totallackeyBecause the OP is about an accurate flat earth map - had you forgotten?And how does a projection of the Globe onto a flat surface help prove that the earth is flat?Depictions of the Earth on a flat map existed before globe depiction.
I guess it doesn't, all you ever try to prove is that you are technically correct.But, I asked you for "any FE map of comparable accuracy" - I guess you are admitting that you can't do that.How is your question related to the OP?
How is your post relate to the OP?So if the earth is flat, why does it only take a couple hours to fly from one side of the world to another? Wouldn't you have to fly directly across the whole world if it was flat?Not that I agree with the wording of the OP.
Were you the first one to post off-topic?
Or was I?
Either way, I suggest we get back to the OP.
It takes longer than a couple of hours to fly from one side of the US to the other side so the OP is dismissed.
But I so love to remain off-topic as it soothes me brain!Sorry Geoff!
You poor confused Mr Lackey! There's no member Geoff here. You really should get medical help.<< Lying editing of quote deleted >>Sorry Geoff!
Well, why did you waste so much time with your silly claims about an error of only 200-300 m, when the usual FE map has thousands of kilomteres of error in Australia?
The OP is totally inaccurate and can be dismissed.
You poor confused Mr Lackey! There's no member Geoff here. You really should get medical help.<< Lying editing of quote deleted >>Sorry Geoff!Quote from: totallackeyWell, why did you waste so much time with your silly claims about an error of only 200-300 m, when the usual FE map has thousands of kilomteres of error in Australia?
The OP is totally inaccurate and can be dismissed.
Bye bye Mr Totally Lost it.