The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: pinecone on April 07, 2018, 10:14:12 PM
-
I'm going to trace two flight itineraries around the earth, one northern, one southern. Travelocity gives us:
Tokyo, Japan to San Francisco, US: 9 hours
San Francisco, US to New York, US: 5.5 hours
New York, US to London, England: 7 hours
London, England to Tokyo, Japan: 11.5 hours
Total of 33 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the northern latitudes.
Johannesburg, South Africa to Sydney, Australia: 12 hours
Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile: 12.5 hours
Santiago, Chile to Sao Paulo, Brazil: 4 hours
Sao Paulo, Brazil to Johannesburg, South Africa: 8.5 hours
Total of 37 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the southern latitudes.
According to all flat earth models I've seen, South America, South Africa, and/or Australia should be the furthest away from each other. It should be at least twice as far to visit them as the northern route. How do you account for jets' ability to fly faster at southern latitudes?
-
There is a flaw with the argument, as most of those routes will be great circles, and some of the more northern ones will be over the artic, just as some of the southern routes will be over the Antarctic (which according to FE does not exist, or possibly might exist, or does exist, depends on which FE model you choose.
However as the GC is different on the flat earth, it is more of a parallel than GC.
Given the distances and flight times, knowing a commercial airlines flies around 500Knots, the one in the Southern Hemisphere would have to be travelling past the speed of sound, something no commercial airliner is built to do presently.
-
I'm going to trace two flight itineraries around the earth, one northern, one southern. Travelocity gives us:
Tokyo, Japan to San Francisco, US: 9 hours
San Francisco, US to New York, US: 5.5 hours
New York, US to London, England: 7 hours
London, England to Tokyo, Japan: 11.5 hours
Total of 33 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the northern latitudes.
Johannesburg, South Africa to Sydney, Australia: 12 hours
Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile: 12.5 hours
Santiago, Chile to Sao Paulo, Brazil: 4 hours
Sao Paulo, Brazil to Johannesburg, South Africa: 8.5 hours
Total of 37 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the southern latitudes.
According to all flat earth models I've seen, South America, South Africa, and/or Australia should be the furthest away from each other. It should be at least twice as far to visit them as the northern route. How do you account for jets' ability to fly faster at southern latitudes?
This is the most bulletproof argument for a globe. There is no way you can arrange the continents on a plane that allows for travel times/distances of flights that happen every day. There is no dispute other than silly statements like "no one knows how far it is from New York to Paris", or "these are fake flights".
-
i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?
-
i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?
Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.
-
i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?
Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.
Indeed that is the best evidence and can't be disputed.
-
i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?
Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.
so where have you sailed?
-
On different ships;
Luanda to Recife
Cape Town to Singapore
Durban to Perth
Christchurch to Cape Horn
Lots Angeles to tokyo
Shetland to Houston
Bahia Blanca (Argentina) to cape town
Cape Town to Recife
Cape Town to Cape Horn
Those are some of the longer east west routes i have sailed, plus many more north south, but they really should not have any impact on a RE or FE, as so far i dont see any objections to 1 minute of lattitude equalling 1 mile (nautical mile)
I will have to dig around for actual distances covered on those routes as compared to tabulated distances if needed.
-
you got me at Christchurch to Cape Horn
-
you got me at Christchurch to Cape Horn
It was unusual!
-
oh, you mean it took an unusually long time?
careful now.
-
Not unusual in the amount of time, more it was not a common route.
We left Argentina, bound for New Zealand, going round the cape. Not a route travelled by my company’s ships too often.
-
well this guy is obviously an illuminari.
anyone else made any of these types of journeys?
come on, guys. anybody wud think flat earth forum dudes had never left their parents basements. speak up.
-
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
-
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.
There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.
-
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.
There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.
There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.
There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.
Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.
We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.
-
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.
There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.
There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.
There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.
Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.
We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.
Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.
The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model. I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle. I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have.
As far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing. I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason. Also, the majority of these routes are over water. There would be no place to refuel. As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/
Thanks.
-
There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.
We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.
Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.
There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.
There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.
There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.
Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.
We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.
There are plenty of measurements available for you to start determining the shape of the earth. Maybe just 10 would give you a good start.
What is your problem with the WGS-84 model?
-
Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.
The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model. I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle. I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have.
There is nothing to explain. There is no Flat Earth map. What you are combating is a map used for visualization purposes only. We don't know if there are one or two poles; or the nature of those continents.
What you have provided may be a basis to create some kind of map, but it is not a contradiction against the Flat Earth map, since it doesn't exist.
As far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing. I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason. Also, the majority of these routes are over water. There would be no place to refuel. As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/
Thanks.
If a bus had to stop and fill up its tank at some point along its 29 stop route, would the bus company advertise that the bus made 29 stops or 30 stops?
-
Ok let me do some digging, and i will try to find distances that we sailed across oceans, and publish them here.
However i can categorically state that on cross ocean voyages that i have been doing for over 30 years i have not seen any deviation between published, calculated and actual sailed (steamed) steamed distance of more than 3%.
While Tom can just say they dont know what the flat earth looks like, it is poor argument, and in now way empirical to say that no one knows! The charts we use are published, and available to all, navigation charts have been used for hundreds of years by millions of navigators, and if there is any minor inaccuracy (such a a navigational buoy being out of place, depths changing due to silting or erosion taking place) there is a system in place to make the corrections known worldwide, to ensure we all know.
Given the above and widely available published distances between sea ports, it would be a start, and at least doing something to further the FES to possibly look at producing a chart.
However the first and primary decision would need to be whether there is a South Pole, or if Antarctica exists! So much reliance is based upon the great ice wall, that if it is not Antarctica, then no one has seen anything resembling it, and a two pole earth cannot fit in with our current RE model with Lattitude and Longitude, Magnetic poles and angles of dip, compasses, and distances, that there would be so much weight of empirical evidence (peoples observations, experiences and use of senses to verify the observations) that a bi polar plane earth would have to be dramatic in its extremes and debunk so much empirical evidence, as well as scientific evidence that it just cannot be rationalised by a normal person.
Using Occam’s razor, the bi polar flat earth cannot possibly stand up to scrutiny. Nearly every thing we know about navigation would be wrong, yet not proved, and Tom himself has said that it is not known, therefore the location of continents, magnetism, lattitude longitude would all be assumed!
So taking the model with least assumptions means we end up with the RE model, and unless Tom, or anyone else is prepared to provide this forum with empirical evidence, (actually having done observations and travelled distances, calculated their position on the earth) the FE bi polar world should be consigned to the “ i dont know, it is just a dream i had” shelf!
-
There are all kind of obvious dismissals of flat Earth theory, from the existence of the horizon, the view from space, whether or not some proponent of FE theory had a doctorate or not, and so on. But the biggie, the one that really counts, is the structure of the Earth that we all know.
Imagine taking little balls of modelling clay, each representing an airport. Then we cut lengths of wire, according to flight times. Then we join the balls together. Gradually, we get a shape. The interesting thing is that there's really only one shape possible. It's not possible to connect everything together on a flat plane. It just doesn't work. That's the real reason why no flat Earth map has ever been made. We have a shape.
And how do we know these distances aren't faked? We've heard claims here that we can never really know the distances between cities. How can we ever know?
The answer is simple. There are literally billions of people testing these distances, every day. Flights and vehicles and ships. We've an example of someone on this very thread who navigates around the world using these maps and distances.
We can believe that the maps are wrong, and the distances are unknown. But then how does anyone find their way anywhere? How is it that people can book flights, or drive cross-country, or sail around the world, unless these maps and distances are right? And literally billions of people rely on this information.
Fundamentally, the premise of FE is that there's some loophole here. There's enough wriggle room in those distances. Even if someone can drive from LA to Toronto and check the mileage, maybe there's some uncertainty, a fiddle factor. But that only works by not looking too closely. We know, if we really think honestly, that these distances are being checked over and over and over, by almost every human being on the planet. People look out of the window of their planes and see mountains and seas and fields of ice just where they are supposed to be.
Don't be fooled that the missing flat Earth map is in any way compatible with the everyday experience of ordinary people. That interlocking structure of distances only resolves to one shape.
I assume that this will shortly result in another ban, or maybe just a warning. That's to be expected. I also don't expect to convert any believers. There's an infinite capacity for rationalisation. But this is where FE loses contact with what people experience every day. It's not a matter of some piece of astronomy, or some observation that people can persuade themselves isn't real. It's the whole world. It's how people live every day.
-
Westprog, you are probably right, I recon by proving the Charlatan Rowbotham to be incorrect, we are skating a fine line, too many awkward questions and a ban results!
If Charlatan Rowbotham is the person the FEers all quote and follow with lemming like faithfulness, i would suggest they read and understand the words of his preface to EnaG.
“The true business of a critic is to compare what he reads with known and provable data, to treat impartially the evidence he observes, and point out logical deficiencies and inconsistencies with first principles, but never to obtrude his own opinions. He should, in fact, at all times take the place of Astrea, the Goddess of Justice, and firmly hold the scales, in which the evidence is fairly weighed.
I advise all my readers who have become Zetetic not to be content with anything less than this; and also not to look with disfavour upon the objections of their opponents. Should such objections be well or even plausibly founded, they will only tend to free us from error,”
When weighing up Evidence, on one side on the side of RE is the overwhelming evidence, the empirical observations, (that Zetetics place so much reli
Acne upon, indeed a founding principle) the experiences of millions, if not billions of people, on the other hand, the flawed, crude and often misunderstood results of “experiments (only 15 of them to “prove” that the earth is flat in chapter 2), the lack of a map, the age of the writings, dismissing any science or research done in the last 170 years, then if a GENUINE zetetic were to balance that evidence, they would surely be able to come to one conclusion, that the earth was an oblate spheroid, or at the very least (possibly by not understanding the basic laws of physics or science) they didnt have a damn clue what the shape was!
-
Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.
The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model. I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle. I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have.
There is nothing to explain. There is no Flat Earth map. What you are combating is a map used for visualization purposes only. We don't know if there are one or two poles; or the nature of those continents.
What you have provided may be a basis to create some kind of map, but it is not a contradiction against the Flat Earth map, since it doesn't exist.
Yes it is a basis for a map: it suggests that the times to get around the northern latitudes are similar to those of southern. So any map that doesn't have a "wrap around" problem would have to account for that. The earth could be a tube and it would work out, but I don't see how any arrangement of continents on a flat surface would account for this data.
As far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing. I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason. Also, the majority of these routes are over water. There would be no place to refuel. As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/
Thanks.
If a bus had to stop and fill up its tank at some point along its 29 stop route, would the bus company advertise that the bus made 29 stops or 30 stops?
Perhaps you missed the phrase "the airplane is not scheduled to land"? That suggests not going to the ground for whatever reason. Also there's still the question of where you would land as the trips are over oceans.
Thanks.
-
Yes it is a basis for a map: it suggests that the times to get around the northern latitudes are similar to those of southern. So any map that doesn't have a "wrap around" problem would have to account for that. The earth could be a tube and it would work out, but I don't see how any arrangement of continents on a flat surface would account for this data.
When you've a choice between a map that doesn't actually exist, and a map that actually works, it shouldn't be very difficult to choose between them. We travel constantly around the world, and rely for that travel on a single understanding of the shape of the world. If we didn't have that understanding, we couldn't set out over the open sea and expect to arrive thousands of miles away without an error.
I don't know what FE advocates think happens on ships and planes when they're planning a journey. Do they think there's a set of The Real Plans hidden away, which they use? Or do they think that the fact that the distances and directions they use, which work on a round Earth, somehow also work on some flat Earth map that hasn't been figured out yet? I tend to think that they've just decided that despite all the evidence, we're all using a flat Earth map, but just don't know what map it is.
-
Yes it is a basis for a map: it suggests that the times to get around the northern latitudes are similar to those of southern. So any map that doesn't have a "wrap around" problem would have to account for that. The earth could be a tube and it would work out, but I don't see how any arrangement of continents on a flat surface would account for this data.
When you've a choice between a map that doesn't actually exist, and a map that actually works, it shouldn't be very difficult to choose between them. We travel constantly around the world, and rely for that travel on a single understanding of the shape of the world. If we didn't have that understanding, we couldn't set out over the open sea and expect to arrive thousands of miles away without an error.
I don't know what FE advocates think happens on ships and planes when they're planning a journey. Do they think there's a set of The Real Plans hidden away, which they use? Or do they think that the fact that the distances and directions they use, which work on a round Earth, somehow also work on some flat Earth map that hasn't been figured out yet? I tend to think that they've just decided that despite all the evidence, we're all using a flat Earth map, but just don't know what map it is.
I can promise you that it is not a conspiracy, we do not have any magical extra set of distances or secret charts.
We calculate the distances using spherical trigonometry, and more these days put in our route to the electronic chart display and information system which calculates the distance of the route we plot.
We use on line and on board published distance tables to calculate ETA, and, more importantly, to work out how much fuel to carry, and food to stock up with.
If we were wrong we would run out of fuel!
Our positions, although calculated by GPS these days. (Dont know how that works without satellites!) are also backed up by all of the navigating officers (4 of them) taking regular sun and star sights to calculate our position using spherical trigonometry, that they learn in navigation schools and colleges.
How any one of them happen to luck out and get a position right if the earth is flat, the sun is 3000 miles away along with the moon and stars is a miracle!
Or we could actually be on a round earth, and what we do is correct, and we are not lying through our back teeth!
I think i will need to i start a new topic and pick apart Charlatan Rowbothams fanciful lies one at a time where i can, and i certainly can where he has made pretty obvious errors when it comes to navigation and talking about ships, or navigation, magnetism, cartography, tides, etc of which was obvious he had no clue about.
-
There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.
There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.
Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.
We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.
It is quite obvious that non-stop flights between continents do not stop for fuel. Serious question Tom, have you ever done any intercontinental travel? Say the US to Europe, Australia or any south pacific points?
It is quite obvious that airliner speeds are well known as are flight durations. I attempted to get you into a discussion on mapping based on flight times converted to miles with an acceptable margin of error. Where were you?
-
I can promise you that it is not a conspiracy, we do not have any magical extra set of distances or secret charts.
Ah, but you would say that!
We calculate the distances using spherical trigonometry, and more these days put in our route to the electronic chart display and information system which calculates the distance of the route we plot.
We use on line and on board published distance tables to calculate ETA, and, more importantly, to work out how much fuel to carry, and food to stock up with.
If we were wrong we would run out of fuel!
Our positions, although calculated by GPS these days. (Dont know how that works without satellites!) are also backed up by all of the navigating officers (4 of them) taking regular sun and star sights to calculate our position using spherical trigonometry, that they learn in navigation schools and colleges.
How any one of them happen to luck out and get a position right if the earth is flat, the sun is 3000 miles away along with the moon and stars is a miracle!
Or we could actually be on a round earth, and what we do is correct, and we are not lying through our back teeth!
I think i will need to i start a new topic and pick apart Charlatan Rowbothams fanciful lies one at a time where i can, and i certainly can where he has made pretty obvious errors when it comes to navigation and talking about ships, or navigation, magnetism, cartography, tides, etc of which was obvious he had no clue about.
Navigation is now taken for granted. We all have access to devices that will tell us where we are, and direct us to somewhere else, and tell us how long it will take. But for most of human history, it was a fundamental limitation of human history. Finding longtitude was a puzzle that baffled humanity for hundreds of years.
And it has always, always been predicated on a spherical Earth. Anyone who's tried to travel across the sea to other lands has needed to plan their route with the basic assumption that the Earth is round. There are log books preserved from thousands of voyages, all of which rely on the sphere.
-
Are there any actual FE's here? I'm interested in a serious conversation!
-
The fundamental problem with any flat map of Earth is it is geometrically impossible given the distances between all pairs of 4 points on Earth. There is no need to point to a specific map. Said map cannot exist by the rules of geometry.
This is addressed in a thread that quickly turned upside-down. https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121952#msg121952
Here, the geometry is shown to be inconsistent with a Flat Earth, and therefore the FE people decide to deny that the distances were measured correctly.
-
Are there any actual FE's here? I'm interested in a serious conversation!
Which do you want?
-
The fundamental problem with any flat map of Earth is it is geometrically impossible given the distances between all pairs of 4 points on Earth. There is no need to point to a specific map. Said map cannot exist by the rules of geometry.
This is addressed in a thread that quickly turned upside-down. https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121952#msg121952
Here, the geometry is shown to be inconsistent with a Flat Earth, and therefore the FE people decide to deny that the distances were measured correctly.
This is the fundamental hole in the theory. I gave a facetious (possible ban-garnering) answer when someone asked for a serious engagement with FE theorists on this idea. This is not possible, because when you have billions of people making use of calculated travel distances for their daily lives, the pretence that they are all wrong is simply not credible. It's a ludicrous, reality denying claim. The distances/travel times we all know to be real aren't compatible with anything but a sphere.
-
Are there any actual FE's here? I'm interested in a serious conversation!
Which do you want?
Refrain from off-topic, low-content posting in the upper fora. Since you have a lot of warnings already and a ban, it seems you still haven't grasped how to post in the upper fora. Have a week off to review the rules.