The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: fishcake on January 07, 2019, 01:17:18 PM

Title: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 07, 2019, 01:17:18 PM
Here is the dilemma:
- Let's assume the diameter of a flat Earth is 40,000 kilometers, and this is the map which accurately represents it: https://wiki.tfes.org/images/4/43/Map.png
- This would make the distance between Australia and Argentina roughly 30,000 kilometers
- Direct flights from Australia to Argentina take roughly 16 hours, which would mean the airplane is traveling at almost 1900 km/h. How is this possible for an airliner?
- If the diameter of Earth is actually smaller, thus making a shorter flight possible at airliner speeds, then how come ground travel on shorter distances takes so long? For example, traveling between New Mexico and Kansas (via the 333 km. Tucumcari-Liberal highway) takes exactly 3 hours if you travel at 111 km/h. If the Earth were three times smaller, shouldn't that trip take 1 hour?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: JCM on January 07, 2019, 06:38:06 PM
For the first question, I will predict the reasons for the discrepancy will be the following:
1. There is no official FE map and no accepted official model.
2. The exact location of the continents isn’t known.
3. FET has no funding to make an accurate map.
4. Those flights don’t really exist.
5. Those planes are flying on jet streams and actually are flying much faster then north of the Equator.

Those answers won’t satisfy you I expect.  Your second question is a nonstarter as I find little argument the maps are incorrect above the Equator.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 08, 2019, 06:34:46 AM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
4. Which flights don't exist? Sydney to Buenos Aires in particular, or no flights exist at all? Because if Argentina and Australia are actually close, why fake a flight at all?
5. Point 5 kind of contradicts point 4. You are saying there are flights, but they are assisted by jet streams. But jet streams go in one direction - shouldn't the flight in the opposite direction be twice as slow?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 08, 2019, 08:00:30 AM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
I think the claim is that the map is an indication of how the earth is and not necessarily accurate but this is a bit slippery, it means that any criticism can be met with claims that the map isn't accurate. You can't debunk something which doesn't exist. Luckily, you can use Google Maps and the distances given on there between cities to demonstrate that no flat earth map is possible as I did here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.0

It's notable that there has been no FE response apart from Lackey not understanding what I've done.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 08, 2019, 08:45:06 AM
@AllAroundTheWorld - I'm surprised that they can't come up with an explanation, even a crazy one. Is Cuba really close to Florida, or is it on the other corner of the Earth? Is Europe close or far away? Where is Australia? Where is Africa? How do we know it's not 50 miles away from New York? Aren't they curious?

P.S.I'm still interested to hear the response about jet streams. If they can speed up an airplane in one direction, how come they don't slow it down on the return flight?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 08, 2019, 10:17:02 AM
P.S.I'm still interested to hear the response about jet streams. If they can speed up an airplane in one direction, how come they don't slow it down on the return flight?
I asked this question a month or two ago. Generally it's rare to get a reply from flat-earthers, indeed a part of the methodology is not to give replies, as I understand.

As you say, the jet stream can only plausibly work in one direction.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 10:28:03 AM
Without wishing to sound too naïve with all this, the whole flat Earth idea seems to have been done the wrong way round.  Surely such basic factors as the shape, location and size of the continents are things you would research first then ask yourself whether the figures and data you get back from that are consistent with what you would expect to get if the Earth was spherical as per popular belief. If not then you would start to examine other shapes for the Earth including a flat plane. If the data matched better for a flat plane then that would be a good basis for building a flat Earth theory.

Changes in the shape and position of the continents have been mapped very accurately by geologists using satellite data from GPS studying the behaviour of the continental plate boundaries. That information in turn can provide valuable clues about earthquake forecasts.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 08, 2019, 12:32:31 PM
I've heard "flat-Earthers have an explanation for everything, but they've given up on this question. It seems no amount of mental gymnastics can explain something like this. Like, "why aren't you curious if Africa isn't actually right next to Florida?" Why aren't you interested in really measuring distances between geographic points?" "We don't have money to make a map?" Is there anything they know at all? Is there anything they are curious about?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
I think the claim is that the map is an indication of how the earth is and not necessarily accurate but this is a bit slippery, it means that any criticism can be met with claims that the map isn't accurate. You can't debunk something which doesn't exist. Luckily, you can use Google Maps and the distances given on there between cities to demonstrate that no flat earth map is possible as I did here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.0

It's notable that there has been no FE response apart from Lackey not understanding what I've done.
You arbitrarily draw pretty kindergarten pictures of different color circles and x's on a whiteboard (mind you with absolute ZERO reference as to how anyone could actually verify scale) plus openly admit your ineptitude in formation and then have the temerity and gall to write I have no understanding of what you've done?

Simply writing when you actually do something might be a better place for you to start.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 08, 2019, 12:48:12 PM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
I think the claim is that the map is an indication of how the earth is and not necessarily accurate but this is a bit slippery, it means that any criticism can be met with claims that the map isn't accurate. You can't debunk something which doesn't exist. Luckily, you can use Google Maps and the distances given on there between cities to demonstrate that no flat earth map is possible as I did here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.0

It's notable that there has been no FE response apart from Lackey not understanding what I've done.
You arbitrarily draw pretty kindergarten pictures of different color circles and x's on a whiteboard (mind you with absolute ZERO reference as to how anyone could actually verify scale) plus openly admit your ineptitude in formation and then have the temerity and gall to write I have no understanding of what you've done?

Simply writing when you actually do something might be a better place for you to start.

I've replied to this in the other thread. But just to reiterate, the fact you think my circles are drown in an arbitrary way shows you don't understand what I have done.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 12:56:19 PM
Quote
I've heard "flat-Earthers have an explanation for everything, but they've given up on this question. It seems no amount of mental gymnastics can explain something like this

This takes me back to the point I made about earthquake shadow zones providing fairly convincing evidence for the Earth being round.  I provided details of the thickness of the various layers of the Earths internal structure and asked Tom to do the same for the flat Earth hypothesis for comparisons sake.  He never came back to me on that. If that is because they don't know the thickness of the various layers then fair enough but I couldn't see how you can get such shadow zones from parallel layers making up a flat surface.

Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 12:56:52 PM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
I think the claim is that the map is an indication of how the earth is and not necessarily accurate but this is a bit slippery, it means that any criticism can be met with claims that the map isn't accurate. You can't debunk something which doesn't exist. Luckily, you can use Google Maps and the distances given on there between cities to demonstrate that no flat earth map is possible as I did here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.0

It's notable that there has been no FE response apart from Lackey not understanding what I've done.
You arbitrarily draw pretty kindergarten pictures of different color circles and x's on a whiteboard (mind you with absolute ZERO reference as to how anyone could actually verify scale) plus openly admit your ineptitude in formation and then have the temerity and gall to write I have no understanding of what you've done?

Simply writing when you actually do something might be a better place for you to start.

I've replied to this in the other thread. But just to reiterate, the fact you think my circles are drown in an arbitrary way shows you don't understand what I have done.
*drawn (since you have shown such a high regard for exactness!)

Even you gotta admit it is hard to understand BS.

Quite likely all you will do is to reply with the time worn, "NO U!", so allow me to reiterate.

NO VERIFIABLE SCALE on your OP.

Simply stating pixels isn't enough Copernicus.

Got it?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 08, 2019, 03:31:10 PM
Even you gotta admit it is hard to understand BS.
I understood his work perfectly. If you are going to be rude, at least give some reasonable explanation of why you think it's wrong, or BS or whatever.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 08, 2019, 04:59:06 PM
1-3. This is the official Flat Earth Wiki map. If it is so inaccurate that even the positions of the continents are uncertain, why post it at all? Isn't this as inaccurate as posting a rotating globe on the site?
4. Which flights don't exist? Sydney to Buenos Aires in particular, or no flights exist at all? Because if Argentina and Australia are actually close, why fake a flight at all?
5. Point 5 kind of contradicts point 4. You are saying there are flights, but they are assisted by jet streams. But jet streams go in one direction - shouldn't the flight in the opposite direction be twice as slow?

You are not the first to ask such questions and you are not the last. How can the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/cartography on the wiki map be possible when they don't match the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/modern cartography.

This has been discussed so many times. I was also VERY curious about it. I got all the responses from a flight time superthread. (Pick any one of your rebuttals from the list below) Here's a link:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.0

-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 180 degrees the earth is flat.
-Because the angles of a triangle drawn between three flight paths = 179.99984 degrees the earth is slightly concave.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121615#msg121615

-Distances between two cities which are far apart is unknown
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg121996#msg121996

-Flight GPS systems are inaccurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122030#msg122030
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122441#msg122441

-GPS systems are based on a round earth therefore will give measurements/distances which support a round earth.
-Aircraft are using instruments which assume round earth coordinates which will support a round earth.
-There is no flat earth map.
-The difference in flight time is based off of flight speed which has yet to be proven.
-The airplane speed and range is based off round systems therefore will give speeds and ranges which support a round earth
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122359#msg122359

-plane speed measurements are unreliable
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122364#msg122364

-there are no flat earth flight programs, systems, GPS etc because the flat earth aircraft navigation fund is nonexistent.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122369#msg122369

-Triangulation as a measurement of distance can be inaccurate because the "known" locations used for triangulation are based on a round earth system
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122410#msg122410

-there are almost an infinite number of continental configurations (If a flight disproves flat earth continental configuration 23985729387592873 you then need to test continental configuration 23985729387592874).
-Groundspeed measurement instruments use a round earth coordinate system therefore will give results which support a round earth
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122411#msg122411

-proof is needed that mile measurements on a highway are accurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122423#msg122423

-Google maps is based on a round earth coordinate system
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122433#msg122433

-any navigation system based on longitude and latitude is a round earth navigation system (which is most likely used in all navigation systems)
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122655#msg122655

-any map, navigation, or measurement system which uses Latitude and Longitude in any way is inaccurate
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122664#msg122664

-That's not the map of the earth (a variant of there is no map of the earth)
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.msg122672#msg122672
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 05:04:53 PM
Even you gotta admit it is hard to understand BS.
I understood his work perfectly. If you are going to be rude, at least give some reasonable explanation of why you think it's wrong, or BS or whatever.
I have written a reasonable explanation of why it is wrong.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 08, 2019, 05:13:44 PM
Even you gotta admit it is hard to understand BS.
I understood his work perfectly. If you are going to be rude, at least give some reasonable explanation of why you think it's wrong, or BS or whatever.
I have written a reasonable explanation of why it is wrong.
You haven't. You've just said some things about screen resolution and I have explained why that is irrelevant.
Come on, dude, I even checked the image quickly myself and showed you a screenshot of how you can check yourself.
Someone else has just replied to the post saying they got similar results using the same method a different tool.
And it has also been suggested to you that you can draw this out on paper using a pencil and protractor. You will get the same results.
If you think there is an error in my work then you are free to repeat it and post your findings.
It is telling that you have so far shown no inclination to do so...
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: geologyboy on January 08, 2019, 08:34:32 PM
For the first question, I will predict the reasons for the discrepancy will be the following:
1. There is no official FE map and no accepted official model.
2. The exact location of the continents isn’t known.
3. FET has no funding to make an accurate map.
4. Those flights don’t really exist.
5. Those planes are flying on jet streams and actually are flying much faster then north of the Equator.

Those answers won’t satisfy you I expect.  Your second question is a nonstarter as I find little argument the maps are incorrect above the Equator.

In reply to point 4. I lived in Australia and personally knew people who flew to South Africa and back. That flight time only works o  a ball earth.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 07:53:18 AM
You are not the first to ask such questions and you are not the last. How can the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/cartography on the wiki map be possible when they don't match the distances/flight times/travel times/shipping times/modern cartography.
This has been discussed so many times. I was also VERY curious about it. I got all the responses from a flight time superthread. (Pick any one of your rebuttals from the list below) Here's a link:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6633.0
While the links you posted actually prove the Round Earth theory from another angle, they do not address the question asked in this topic: "what about speed and scale". This isn't about the accuracy of GPS data. It's a simpler question:
- If the Earth is 40,000 km. in diameter, how can an airliner travel such a distance with so little fuel, at mach 2 speeds, in so little time? (Australia-Argentina or Australia-South Africa)
- If the Earth is smaller than 40,000 km, how come land travel between states isn't shorter as well?
- If jet streams speed up an airplane in one direction, how come they don't slow it down on the return flight?
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?

(bonus question) - Why isn't the flat-Earth movement at all curious about the actual position of the cities and continents? Why are they so resigned to self-admitted ignorance, instead of pushing to investigate the truth? You can measure distances without GPS at all - just get in your cars and boats, and start traveling between cities. Confirm each other's findings and start mapping the world. Be curious.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 10:56:26 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?

The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 11:01:58 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?

The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
I have, in the thread in the other section about the FE Map. My research demonstrates that no flat earth map is possible - if the distances on Google Maps are accurate.
You say you use Google Maps daily so you clearly trust it's accuracy. I'm not clear then why I'm unable to map 4 points out on a flat map.
I note there has been no FE response other than lackey throwing in some red herrings about screen resolution and refusing to do any checking on my work or do his own.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 11:07:24 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?

The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
I have, in the thread in the other section about the FE Map. My research demonstrates that no flat earth map is possible - if the distances on Google Maps are accurate.
You say you use Google Maps daily so you clearly trust it's accuracy. I'm not clear then why I'm unable to map 4 points out on a flat map.
I note there has been no FE response other than lackey throwing in some red herrings about screen resolution and refusing to do any checking on my work or do his own.

Is sounds like you have already provided some flat earth arguments in your thread yourself. I don't see any reason for me to suggest that the long range distances might use spherical trigonometry assumptions if you are already doing that.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 11:26:59 AM
I just used distances given on Google Earth, a product you say you use "daily" and therefore must trust.
I don't know how they calculate distances, but I do know it is used by millions of people every day, including you, so if their data is inaccurate then you'd think that would have been noticed.
If you are now claiming that the distances are inaccurate then what is your basis for that? How they are calculated is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether they are correct.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 11:29:53 AM
I just used distances given on Google Earth, a product you say you use "daily" and therefore must trust.
I don't know how they calculate distances, but I do know it is used by millions of people every day, including you, so if their data is inaccurate then you'd think that would have been noticed.
If you are now claiming that the distances are inaccurate then what is your basis for that? How they are calculated is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether they are correct.

It should be pretty clear that they did not send a little robot with a measuring wheel to go and measure the distance when you made the online request, nor have they ever done that. Next you should probably consider if anyone has ever done that. If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 11:35:53 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?
The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
Several possible maps? In all Flat Earth maps, the distance between Australia and Argentina is shown to span almost the entire Earth. Hence the question - how fast, and with how much fuel does an airliner have to travel in order to traverse the whole Earth? How small does the world have to be to make that flight possible?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: ChrisTP on January 10, 2019, 11:37:20 AM
I just used distances given on Google Earth, a product you say you use "daily" and therefore must trust.
I don't know how they calculate distances, but I do know it is used by millions of people every day, including you, so if their data is inaccurate then you'd think that would have been noticed.
If you are now claiming that the distances are inaccurate then what is your basis for that? How they are calculated is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether they are correct.

It should be pretty clear that they did not send a little robot with a measuring wheel to go and measure the distance when you made the online request, nor have they ever done that. Next you should probably consider if anyone has ever done that. If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
Saying you haven't proven it to be correct or incorrect doesn't disprove it being correct. Google maps proves it's self correct when literally anyone uses it and results in the correct time estimations and destinations.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 11:39:13 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?
The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
Several possible maps? In all Flat Earth maps, the distance between Australia and Argentina is shown to span almost the entire Earth. Hence the question - how fast, and with how much fuel does an airliner have to travel in order to traverse the whole Earth? How small does the world have to be to make that flight possible?

The Flat Earth movement also has the Bi-Polar maps and models. See the bottom of this page: httpss://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_Maps

The Bi-Polar models were derived by the Flat Earth movement when the South Pole was discovered in the early 1900's and Antarctica was more fully explored. The Monopole model is the more general and popularized model because it appears in ENAG, and persists because independent access to Antarctica is difficult.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 11:53:59 AM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?
The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
Several possible maps? In all Flat Earth maps, the distance between Australia and Argentina is shown to span almost the entire Earth. Hence the question - how fast, and with how much fuel does an airliner have to travel in order to traverse the whole Earth? How small does the world have to be to make that flight possible?

The Flat Earth movement also has the Bi-Polar maps and models. See the bottom

The Bi-Polar models were derived by the Flat Earth movement when the South Pole was discovered in the early 1900's and Antarctica was more fully explored. The Monopole model is the more general and popularized model because it appears in ENAG, and persists because independent access to Antarctica is difficult.

Bi-polar maps are even worse:
(https://i.imgur.com/N7Qq3R7.jpg)
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 11:59:18 AM
I just used distances given on Google Earth, a product you say you use "daily" and therefore must trust.
I don't know how they calculate distances, but I do know it is used by millions of people every day, including you, so if their data is inaccurate then you'd think that would have been noticed.
If you are now claiming that the distances are inaccurate then what is your basis for that? How they are calculated is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether they are correct.

It should be pretty clear that they did not send a little robot with a measuring wheel to go and measure the distance when you made the online request, nor have they ever done that. Next you should probably consider if anyone has ever done that. If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
The distances Google claims between places are only theoretical until someone uses the system to get around. Luckily we have millions of people testing it every day, including you, and building confidence in their data.
It seems you trust Google Maps data enough to use it every day to get you around but you don't trust it when it shows the earth isn't flat.
It's good, confirmation bias, isn't it?  ;)
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 12:01:20 PM
- If all distances and continental positions are unknown, then why proudly post an inaccurate map on your site, if you are a movement founded in opposition to inaccurate maps?
The website presents several possible maps in the maps section. The truth is for you, the interested investigators on this forum, to research.
Several possible maps? In all Flat Earth maps, the distance between Australia and Argentina is shown to span almost the entire Earth. Hence the question - how fast, and with how much fuel does an airliner have to travel in order to traverse the whole Earth? How small does the world have to be to make that flight possible?

The Flat Earth movement also has the Bi-Polar maps and models. See the bottom

The Bi-Polar models were derived by the Flat Earth movement when the South Pole was discovered in the early 1900's and Antarctica was more fully explored. The Monopole model is the more general and popularized model because it appears in ENAG, and persists because independent access to Antarctica is difficult.

Bi-polar maps are even worse:
https://i.imgur.com/N7Qq3R7.jpg

Can you provide some evidence for the flight times? According to my sources they just make them up.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/Are-airlines-exaggerating-flight-times-so-theyre-never-late/

Quote
Are you being told the truth about flight times?

Passenger jets have never been more advanced. With Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner, introduced in 2011, leading the charge, and new models like the 737 MAX and the Airbus A320neo following in its wake, the aircraft on which we travel are safer, smoother, quieter and more fuel efficient than ever.

They also appear perfectly capable of flying faster than their predecessors. Just last month the low-cost carrier Norwegian issued a celebratory press release after one of its 787 Dreamliners whizzed from John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York to London Gatwick in five hours and 13 minutes, setting a new transatlantic record for a subsonic plane. That’s three minutes quicker than the previous best time set by British Airways in January 2015.

So why, record-breaking feats notwithstanding, are airlines claiming it takes longer and longer to fly from A to B?

That’s according to research by OAG, the aviation analyst, carried out for Telegraph Travel. It found that over the last couple of decades, despite new technology, scheduled flight times - ie. how long an airline estimates it will take to complete a journey - have actually increased by as much as 50 per cent.

Looking at Europe’s busiest international route, for example - Heathrow to Dublin - it found that in 1996 the vast majority of airlines published a scheduled flight time of between 60 and 74 minutes. Fast forward 22 years and almost all claim the journey takes between 75 and 89 minutes, while a handful bank on 90 minutes or more.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 12:17:42 PM
Can you provide some evidence for the flight times? According to my sources they just make them up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/Are-airlines-exaggerating-flight-times-so-theyre-never-late/
Except, one could fake a longer flight by taking a longer route, but one could not fake a shorter flight over such a long distance.
- For example: you board a plane in Sydney, look at your watch, you land in Melbourne. The evil pilot and GPS system could make an 800 km. trip last 16 hours... BUT they cannot make a 40,000 kilometer trip last 16 hours!  ;) They can't make a 40,000 km. trip, period.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 12:31:27 PM
Can you provide some evidence for the flight times? According to my sources they just make them up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/Are-airlines-exaggerating-flight-times-so-theyre-never-late/
Except, one could fake a longer flight by taking a longer route, but one could not fake a shorter flight over such a long distance.
- For example: you board a plane in Sydney, look at your watch, you land in Melbourne. The evil pilot and GPS system could make an 800 km. trip last 16 hours... BUT they cannot make a 40,000 kilometer trip last 16 hours!  ;) They can't make a 40,000 km. trip, period.

Planes make unscheduled fuel stops all the time.

Nonstop Flights Stop for Fuel (https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203436904577152974098241982)

Air travel: So-called nonstop flights now stop for fuel (http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/mainlinetimes/news/air-travel-so-called-nonstop-flights-now-stop-for-fuel/article_353ddf8a-b55f-5b3b-a171-9f0fba573886.html)

The airliners basically do anything they want.

These discussions are basically like plotting a route across the city with Google Maps and then expecting that your Uber driver will take the route in the map, will not stop along the way, will travel at some assumed speed, and will get to the destination in the padded time. Those estimations are more a matter of theory than anything.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 12:34:30 PM
Can you provide some evidence for the flight times? According to my sources they just make them up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/Are-airlines-exaggerating-flight-times-so-theyre-never-late/
Except, one could fake a longer flight by taking a longer route, but one could not fake a shorter flight over such a long distance.
- For example: you board a plane in Sydney, look at your watch, you land in Melbourne. The evil pilot and GPS system could make an 800 km. trip last 16 hours... BUT they cannot make a 40,000 kilometer trip last 16 hours!  ;) They can't make a 40,000 km. trip, period.
Planes make unscheduled fuel stops all the time.
Nonstop Flights Stop for Fuel (https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203436904577152974098241982)
Air travel: So-called nonstop flights now stop for fuel (http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/mainlinetimes/news/air-travel-so-called-nonstop-flights-now-stop-for-fuel/article_353ddf8a-b55f-5b3b-a171-9f0fba573886.html)
The airliners basically do anything they want.
These discussions are basically plotting a route across the city with Google Maps and then expecting that your taxi will take the route in the map, will not stop along the way, are traveling at some assumed speed, and will get to the destination in the estimated time. Those estimations are emore a matter of theory than anything.
You did not understand what I was saying. This isn't about artificially prolonging a flight, but about shortening it. A fuel stop would prolong a flight. It should be impossible to travel the whole span of the Earth on a single non-stop airliner flight in 16 hours, but there you go - people travel from Sydney to Buenos Aires, and from LA to Sydney all the time.
Or are you saying that every single transcontinental flight refuels over the Ocean?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 01:04:39 PM
Again, there is a big difference between theory and practice.

It took this person 5 days to get from Argentina to New Zealand: https://www.roamingaroundtheworld.com/surviving-5-day-flight/

If one were to spend \$1500 a seat on the "direct route" that was offered to that person, what makes you think that they wouldn't go ahead and make an unscheduled fuel stop in California anyway, like the articles say that they make such stops at the drop of a hat?

Replace Argentina to Australia with California to Australia or wherever, for a Bi-Polar model, and the same applies.

Airliners lie all the time, and do what they want. Flights are delayed, rerouted, stops added, in flight and before flight.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 01:21:40 PM
Again, there is a big difference between theory and practice.
It took this person 5 days to get from Argentina to New Zealand: https://www.roamingaroundtheworld.com/surviving-5-day-flight/
If one were to spend \$1500 a seat on the "direct route," what makes you think that they wouldn't go ahead and make an unscheduled fuel stop in California anyway like the above path, and like the articles say that they do at the drop of a hat?
Replace Argentina to Australia with California to Australia or wherever, for a Bi-Polar model and the same applies.
Airliners lie all the time, and do what they want. Flights are delayed, rerouted, stops added, in flight and before flight.
But then you have to explain how this 30-40,000 kilometer flight only takes 16 hours, and how they can refuel without the passengers noticing. Are the airlines also lying that the plane travels at 800 km/h, but it actually travels at mach 2, like a missile? Out of curiosity, have you traveled to Australia?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 01:30:45 PM
P.S. Tom, since you personally favor the Bipolar model (you offered it to explain the dilemma), you must believe that Sydney and LA are the two farthest major cities on Earth. According to the bipolar map, the distance is almost 90% that of Earth itself. But the direct flights are even shorter (13-14 hours), and they're even more frequent. If you look out the window during such a flight, you would only see ocean. But this would mean that the plane is taking an ever longer route around the continents - (>50,000 kilometers!) and has no possibility of expanding its range, aside from mid-air refueling!
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 01:34:47 PM
P.S. Tom, since you personally favor the Bipolar model (you offered it to explain the dilemma), you must believe that Sydney and LA are the two farthest major cities on Earth. According to the bipolar map, the distance is almost 90% that of Earth itself. But the direct flights are even shorter (13-14 hours), and they're even more frequent. If you look out the window during such a flight, you would only see ocean. But this would mean that the plane is taking an ever longer route around the continents - (>50,000 kilometers!) and has no possibility of expanding its range, aside from mid-air refueling!

The Bi-Polar map is for example purposes only, of the Bi-Polar model. No one made it to be based on anything. In fact, it's just a random projection that someone found of an Earth that had two poles like was described in the older flat earth books.

Whether it's that flight that is rerouted or another, the matter is unknown at present time.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 01:36:53 PM
If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
Why is the measurement of latitude and longitude relevant in any way to distances between points?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 01:38:36 PM
If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
Why is the measurement of latitude and longitude relevant in any way to distances between points?

Latitude and longitude is base don a spherical coordinate system and assumes a globe.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 01:40:04 PM
The Bi-Polar map is for example purposes only. No one made it to be based on anything.
You just gave it as an example of the correct way of solving this dilemma. You chose the bipolar map, because the other maps don't work out for this problem, so let's stick to it:
(https://i.imgur.com/PTAoU9U.png)
- How can a cross-Earth flight from LA to Sydney only take 13 hours, and only take place over the ocean (thus having to go around the continents)?
- How come the passengers don't notice the refueling, and how come they can only see ocean out the window?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 01:40:20 PM
Airliners lie all the time, and do what they want. Flights are delayed, rerouted, stops added, in flight and before flight.
Well perhaps but do passengers lie all the time? Normally they complain when a flight is delayed.

I or may family have flown some of the flights we are talking about. When the actual journey time exceeds the advertised time, it is always noted. I always make a note of time from take off to landing.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 01:42:24 PM
If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.
Why is the measurement of latitude and longitude relevant in any way to distances between points?

Latitude and longitude is based on a spherical coordinate system and assumes a globe.
Why would the shape of the earth affect the measurement of these quantities? Take longitude. That is determined by the time the sun is at its zenith. You can measure it if you have an accurate timepiece, and a simple instrument. Why would this measurement be biased by any theory about the shape of the earth?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 01:43:16 PM
The Bi-Polar map is for example purposes only. No one made it to be based on anything.
You just gave it as an example of the correct way of solving this dilemma. You chose the bipolar map, because the other maps don't work out for this problem, so let's stick to it:
https://i.imgur.com/PTAoU9U.png
- How can a cross-Earth flight from LA to Sydney only take 13 hours, and only take place over the ocean (thus having to go around the continents)?
- How come the passengers don't notice the refueling, and how come they can only see ocean out the window?

I gave you links showing that they lie about flight times and that they lie about non-stop flights. Yet, you keep insisting that they are truth.

There is also not a Bi-Polar map, only a Bi-Polar model. Are we supposed to design a map around lies?

We haven't even yet discussed the jet streams that are admitted to allow for supersonic flight of commercial airlines...
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 01:53:44 PM
The Bi-Polar map is for example purposes only. No one made it to be based on anything.
You just gave it as an example of the correct way of solving this dilemma. You chose the bipolar map, because the other maps don't work out for this problem, so let's stick to it:
https://i.imgur.com/PTAoU9U.png
- How can a cross-Earth flight from LA to Sydney only take 13 hours, and only take place over the ocean (thus having to go around the continents)?
- How come the passengers don't notice the refueling, and how come they can only see ocean out the window?
I gave you links showing that they lie about flight times and that they lie about non-stop flights. Yet, you keep insisting that they are truth.
We haven't even discussed jet streams.
There is also not a Bi-Polar map, only a Bi-Polar model. Are we supposed to design a map around lies?
No, you just missed the part where we discussed jet streams and how they can't speed up the plane in both directions. They should slow it down on the return flight.
- You just offered the bipolar map as a solution to the problem. This means you like this map, because it seems most plausible to you in this discussion. So please explain what route a plane would have to take between LA and Sydney in order for the passengers to only see ocean. And how they would refuel over the ocean.
(https://i.imgur.com/PTAoU9U.png)
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: ChrisTP on January 10, 2019, 01:58:08 PM
The Bi-Polar map is for example purposes only. No one made it to be based on anything.
You just gave it as an example of the correct way of solving this dilemma. You chose the bipolar map, because the other maps don't work out for this problem, so let's stick to it:
https://i.imgur.com/PTAoU9U.png
- How can a cross-Earth flight from LA to Sydney only take 13 hours, and only take place over the ocean (thus having to go around the continents)?
- How come the passengers don't notice the refueling, and how come they can only see ocean out the window?

I gave you links showing that they lie about flight times and that they lie about non-stop flights. Yet, you keep insisting that they are truth.

We haven't even discussed jet streams.

There is also not a Bi-Polar map, only a Bi-Polar model. Are we supposed to design a map around lies?
If you are able-bodied there should be nothing really stopping you from getting a license to fly and taking a holiday to pilot yourself to different locations, right? It's not as if it's impossible to test these things out for yourself or even for anyone. Since GPS works and functions as it should, the burden of proof is really on you if you're going to claim that it's all a lie.

The bi-polar map really presents more problems than it solves in terms of flat earth. Not a great example. Before you ask me what a better model would be I'm only going to say that the globe model just works perfectly as it should... The fact that any flat map is having trouble working with real life experiences of travel is surely quite telling?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 02:00:43 PM
There is no Bi-Polar map. It's a Bi-Polar model. When I get around to it I'll replace that image with a circle that has two dots in it for the North Pole and the South Pole.

It is unknown what the map of the earth looks like, mainly because of the lies previously described. The matter is unstudied. Non-stop flights aren't always non-stop. Airline times aren't reliable. Flights are delayed, rescheduled, all the time.

Further, there are wind streams that travel both Eastwards and Westward directions in the southern and northern hemispheres.

If anyone wants to try to make a map based on such lies and vague concepts they are kidding themselves.

I would suggest providing real data, not an Uber driver's itinerary.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 02:03:20 PM
There is no Bi-Polar map. It's a Bi-Polar model. When I get around to it I'll replace that image with a circle that has two dots in it for the North Pole and the South Pole.
It is unknownn what the map of the earth looks like, mainly because of the lies previously described. Non-stop flights aren't always non-stop. Airline times aren't reliable. Flights are delayed, rescheduled, all the time. If you wants to try to make a map based on that they are joking.
Further, there are wind streams that travel both Eastwards and Westward directions in the southern and northern hemispheres.
Then why did you give it as an example of a solution to the problem? Because on the bipolar model, the continents are moved around, so Argentina would seem closer to Australia. But this creates even more problems for you - the distance between LA and Sydney is even longer, but flights are even shorter. So why did you bother offering something that you know is inaccurate?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 02:03:42 PM
If the airlines lie, why not have a thread here or a forum for interested contributors to discuss flights that they have taken?

For example, I flew from LHR to Delhi last year on 8 March, departing 20:40 UK time. The advertised time was 8h:40m, and I remember the actual time being close to that.

More generally, if flights were taking two to three times longer than passengers expected, would nobody have noticed this, with articles in the popular press etc?

[EDIT] And what about business meetings which are carefully planned around timing. If the airlines were completely and utterly lying, how is it that no one has written about this?

To be sure, planes are often late. But the reason they are 'late' is because of the discrepancies people have noticed between expected and actual flight times.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 02:08:44 PM
How does the measurement of longitude depend on which theory we hold about the shape of the earth?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 02:10:09 PM
Quote
More generally, if flights were taking two to three times longer than passengers expected, would nobody have noticed this, with articles in the popular press etc?

There are articles. I just linked to a bunch which said that the airplanes were diverting from course and making unscheduled fuel stops on supposed non-stop flights and annoying a lot of people.

And business people usually schedule their meetings for the next day, FYI.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 02:18:06 PM
Quote
More generally, if flights were taking two to three times longer than passengers expected, would nobody have noticed this, with articles in the popular press etc?

There are articles. I just linked to a bunch which said that the airplanes were diverting from course and making unscheduled fuel stops on supposed non-stop flights and annoying a lot of people.

And business people usually schedule their meetings for the next day, FYI.
And arrange a time to be at their hotel, meet for dinner etc.

A major logical flaw in your argument based on airlines increasing advertised flight times is that they were publishing the 'right' times before. How is that possible if the right time was always a significant multiple of the advertised time? Makes no sense.

[EDIT] And please explain how the measurement of longitude depends on the shape of the earth.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 02:24:28 PM
There are articles. I just linked to a bunch which said that the airplanes were diverting from course and making unscheduled fuel stops on supposed non-stop flights and annoying a lot of people.
And business people usually schedule their meetings for the next day, FYI.
- How can an airliner speed up to mach 2, in both directions between Sydney and LA, or Sydney and Buenos Aires.
- How come the passengers only see the ocean.
- How come you don't notice the refueling. And how many times do you have to refuel to travel 50,000 kilometers!!
- How come your wristwatch shows a 13-16 hour flight duration. Is it linked to the GPS system, too?
- How do you know Africa is not right next door to Florida, if you have no idea where the continents actually are?
- Why aren't you curious?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 03:06:05 PM
Apps like this https://www.flightradar24.com are great to track actual times of aircraft. I can verify the accuracy at least for LHR bound flights as I live close to the flight path and can actually see the aircraft out of the window as they come in.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 06:44:15 PM
- How can a cross-Earth flight from LA to Sydney only take 13 hours, and only take place over the ocean (thus having to go around the continents)?
- How come the passengers don't notice the refueling, and how come they can only see ocean out the window?

I gave you links showing that they lie about flight times and that they lie about non-stop flights. Yet, you keep insisting that they are truth.

There is also not a Bi-Polar map, only a Bi-Polar model. Are we supposed to design a map around lies?

We haven't even yet discussed the jet streams that are admitted to allow for supersonic flight of commercial airlines...

Tom,

Your article does nothing but outline how it is IMPOSSIBLE to lie about flight times. Padding flight time by 15-20 minutes is totally different than outright lying about flight times.

Furthermore look at the information in your article:

The flight time for LHR-DUB has been between 1-1.75 hours going back to 1996.

The flight time for LHR-EDI flight has been between 1:10 to 1:30 going back to 1996.

Madrid to Barcelona flight has been between 1-2 hours going back to 1996.

New york to Chicago has been between 2:10-3:10 hours going back to 1996.
TOkyo to Fukuoka has been between 1:45 to 2:05 going back to 1996.

See the pattern here?

There is a time the plane departs and a time the plane lands. A good estimate to the flight time is the amount of time that passes between these two points in time.

In order to lie about flight times you have to lie about the departure time, lie about the arrival time, or lie about both.

How could someone POSSIBLY lie about the departure time. They have to be honest about it in order to have people board the plane. If they lied and said the plane departed at 2 PM when it really departed at noon I would arrive at 2 PM and I would have missed my flight. If they lied and said the flight departed at 2 PM and it really departed at 4 PM i would have to wait 2 hours to board the plane (the departure time would say 2 PM and my digital, analog, or mechanical clock would say 4 PM).  Even then if the plane departed at 4 PM I could easily look at my clock and accurately determine my departure time.  Literally hundreds of thousands of people can verify this. Myself included. I show up for a 2 PM flight and the plane is taking off and my mechanical wristwatch is showing the time to be about 2 PM, my digital phone clock is showing the time to be 2 PM.

They can't lie about the arrival time either. I tell Grandma my plane is arriving at 3 PM and lo and behold there she is at 3 PM to pick me up from the plane. They say the plane arrives at 3 PM and my mechanical wristwatch says 3 PM and my digital phone clock shows 3 PM. If they were lying about the arrival time Grandma would arrive hours before I arrive or hours after I arrive. Hundreds of thousands of people all over the world can independently verify this literally EVERY day. Test it yourself. Take a flight from LA to Sidney and arrange for someone to pick you up from the airport.

Either way I can still look at my clocks when I depart and look at my clocks when I arrive and see what time it is that I arrived. At this point having know the time I departed and the time I landed gaining a rough estimate about the amount of time that I spent flying.

Secondly how could you lie about a non-stop flight? Is every passenger mind controlled into believing that the plane never landed?

Even assuming that no such non-stop flights exist then that further calls into question several of the flat earth models. It's already borderline impossible that planes are traveling these massive distances in the short amount of times without a stop. How are these planes able to travel such massive distances with a stop? Even if there was 1,000 MPH winds pushing the plane an hour long refueling pit stop would still make these flight times impossible.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 06:55:47 PM
Exactly. You take off from LA, look at your watch, then land in Sydney, look at your watch again. 14 hours would have passed. According to the bi-polar flat Earth model, you have just traveled 50,000 kilometers at missle-like speeds, around Asia and Alaska, carried by a powerul bi-directional wind, and the plane refueled 4 times over the ocean without you noticing. Or, more plausibly, the Earth is actually a globe, and the distance is more like 12,000 km.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 07:08:20 PM
Exactly. You take off from LA, look at your watch, then land in Sydney, look at your watch again. 14 hours would have passed. According to the bi-polar flat Earth model, you have just traveled 50,000 kilometers at missle-like speeds, around Asia and Alaska, carried by a powerul bi-directional wind, and the plane refueled 4 times over the ocean without you noticing. Or, more plausibly, the Earth is actually a globe, and the distance is more like 12,000 km.

Tom's source just outlines how, since 1996 there has been very little variance in flight times. It also shows that lying about flight times is outright impossible. This does not have to mean the earth is a globe. It just means that a flat circle shaped model fails HORRIBLY to match up to known and verified flight times/distances, verified road travel times/distances, verified shipping times/distances, and modern cartography.

The earth could be flat and these flights could be possible but it requires a flat earth model that I believe I am the only one who can relate to. It does not have a great ice wall, does not have a dome, does not have a firmament etc so it's very unpopular.   It does a VERY good job reconciling with known and verified flight times, flight distances, road travel times, road travel distances, verified shipping times/distances, and modern cartography. It's the earth represented as a flat repeating plane.

www.mapquest.com
www.suncalc.net
maps.yahoo.com
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/

Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 07:25:02 PM
Exactly. You take off from LA, look at your watch, then land in Sydney, look at your watch again. 14 hours would have passed. According to the bi-polar flat Earth model, you have just traveled 50,000 kilometers at missle-like speeds, around Asia and Alaska, carried by a powerul bi-directional wind, and the plane refueled 4 times over the ocean without you noticing. Or, more plausibly, the Earth is actually a globe, and the distance is more like 12,000 km.
The earth could be flat and these flights could be possible but it requires a flat earth model that I believe I am the only one who can relate to. It does not have a great ice wall, does not have a dome, does not have a firmament etc.   It does a VERY good job reconciling with known and verified flight times, flight distances, road travel times, road travel distances, verified shipping times/distances, and modern cartography.
Could you post a picture of that model? As a mathematical exercise, it would be fun! There have been attempts to "square the circle", but I don't think any of them work - http://www.3dham.com/blog/flatearth2.html
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 10, 2019, 07:35:45 PM
Totallackey, would you like me to send you the AutoCAD file I drew to verify allaroundtheworlds results? I can also take screen shots of the google map distances and send those, as well. I am not trying to be pretentious or anything. I am trying to show willingness to provide further evidence above and beyond.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: shootingstar on January 10, 2019, 07:39:40 PM
Just to add to the list of questions that Tom hasn't so far answered is mine from earlier today.  Why do you seem to jump from one side of the fence to the other selectively when it comes to anything to do with NASA?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: RonJ on January 10, 2019, 07:39:53 PM
Yes, airline flight times can vary a lot.  I've been on countless 12 hour plus flights back & forth between Asia and the USA.  There's lots of good reasons why flights are delayed or take longer.  I've actually been on some flights were we arrived AHEAD of schedule too.  Some flights can't be conducted between airports because of international regulations.  Airliners always have to be a certain distance from an airport where they can land in an emergency while in transit.  That airport and distance depends upon the type of aircraft.  You wouldn't want to land a 747 on and airstrip that 3000 feet long.  Some longer direct routes just don't have a usable, approved emergency airport along the route, so a direct flight is impossible.  Other reasons might be that the airline just doesn't have the passenger count to justify a direct route either.

It's all an irrelevant argument anyway.  The important (and relevant) argument is the measured distances between the airports where the non-stop flights are made.  Those distances are well known and very accurate.  Just ask a pilot who makes a flight twice a week between two airports thousands of miles apart.  Any flat earth map would also have to accurately represent the distances between all the airports whose coordinates are well known and where the distances to other airports are also accurate.  While you are at it, add in all the seaports as well.

The problem becomes that all the locations are based upon a 3 dimensional globe geometry.  It would be impossible to construct a flat plane 2 dimensional representation of that and have all the accurately measured distances come out the same.

That's not my speculation.  It's the math.  The first thing any flat earth geometer would have to do is show mathematically how the distances between any two points on a sphere could accurately be represented as two points on a flat plane.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 07:43:06 PM
The earth could be flat and these flights could be possible
Yet again, exactly how is this possible. See AATW's other post about the impossibility of representing the distances between 4 places on a flat surface. The map has a curved geometry. Sigh.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 08:33:56 PM
Exactly. You take off from LA, look at your watch, then land in Sydney, look at your watch again. 14 hours would have passed. According to the bi-polar flat Earth model, you have just traveled 50,000 kilometers at missle-like speeds, around Asia and Alaska, carried by a powerul bi-directional wind, and the plane refueled 4 times over the ocean without you noticing. Or, more plausibly, the Earth is actually a globe, and the distance is more like 12,000 km.
The earth could be flat and these flights could be possible but it requires a flat earth model that I believe I am the only one who can relate to. It does not have a great ice wall, does not have a dome, does not have a firmament etc.   It does a VERY good job reconciling with known and verified flight times, flight distances, road travel times, road travel distances, verified shipping times/distances, and modern cartography.
Could you post a picture of that model? As a mathematical exercise, it would be fun! There have been attempts to "square the circle", but I don't think any of them work - http://www.3dham.com/blog/flatearth2.html

www.mapquest.com has an interactive model of the earth represented and a flat infinite repeating plane.

Here are many more:
maps.yahoo.com
suncalc.net
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/

It should be pretty clear that they did not send a little robot with a measuring wheel to go and measure the distance when you made the online request, nor have they ever done that.

A robot? No. Google has sent hundreds (or thousands) of cars driving all over the world. Measuring distances and backing up those measurements with hundreds of thousands of photographs Here's the link which has proof:

If you don't believe they did test it. Go to the google maps street view and look at your house. They sure took a picture of my block and house and neighborhood and county and city and state.

Next you should probably consider if anyone has ever done that. If you decide that no one has done that then we must be talking about something theoretical that has to do with how the latitude and longitude numbers are determined.

Maybe you should consider that maybe someone has done it.

Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 08:49:01 PM

www.mapquest.com has an interactive model of the earth represented and a flat infinite repeating plane.

Here are many more:
maps.yahoo.com
suncalc.net
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/
These are just pictures. How do you solve the 4-point problem posed by AATW here https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.msg178193#msg178193

It's a simple geometrical challenge.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 08:59:41 PM

www.mapquest.com has an interactive model of the earth represented and a flat infinite repeating plane.

Here are many more:
maps.yahoo.com
suncalc.net
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/
These are just pictures. How do you solve the 4-point problem posed by AATW here https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11747.msg178193#msg178193

It's a simple geometrical challenge.

first off when I checked the distances on other websites they were different than the OP.

Secondly they are not just pictures several of them are very detailed interactive maps of the earth. Mapquest.com is used by hundreds of thousands of people to navigate.

I didn't even attempt to solve that 4 point problem because allaroundtheworld already did here:

(https://i.ibb.co/sC0SgqQ/FEMap-England.jpg)
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 09:17:32 PM
Iamcpc, your idea is too psychadelic even for flat-earthers. A flat, endlessly repeating plane, my word! :) I think you're just pushing that model because it's interesting and because it's yours, not because it's more plausible than a round Earth. :)
Anyway, thers is a problem. The sun and moon add a third dimension to your model, so if there are an endless number of suns and moons above each repetition of the Earth, how come we can't see them with a telescope from different angles?
Man, the mental gymnastics Olympics are fun indeed!
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 09:31:03 PM
Iamcpc, your idea is too psychadelic even for flat-earthers. A flat, endlessly repeating plane, my word! :) I think you're just pushing that model because it's interesting and because it's yours, not because it's more plausible than a round Earth. :)
Anyway, thers is a problem. The sun and moon add a third dimension to your model, so if there are an endless number of suns and moons above each repetition of the Earth, how come we can't see them with a telescope from different angles?
Man, the mental gymnastics Olympics are fun indeed!

I'm not pushing that idea because it's more plausible than a round earth. I'm pushing that idea because it's based on my research, the most plausible flat earth model based on things like lunar cycles, solar cycles, known and verified flight times, flight distances, road travel times, road travel distances, verified shipping times/distances, and modern cartography.

It can't be that psychedelic because mapquest.com uses it. yahoo maps and apple maps both use it. Also suncalc.net uses it. Not only do they use it but hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people use it to navigate this earth.

You really think the earth as a flat disk with impossible fight times/distances, impossible travel times/distances, impossible shipping times/distances, impossible lunar cycles, impossible cartography, a dome, a firmament (whatever that may be) and a great ice wall around the perimeter is less psychedelic?

Oh and the sun is mapped very accurately on this model here:

http://suncalc.net
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 09:49:07 PM
Iamcpc, I love this! :) You are giving the flat-earthers a run for their money, let's just say that. I can't honestly say what's more psychadelic, a disk Earth with impossible flight times, or an endless, repeating piece of floating rock in space.
But you didn't understand the problem. If there is a sun and a moon floating some distance above that piece of rock, and they are also floating 40,000 kilometers to the east, and again, 80,000 kilometers to the east, over the next repetition, then if we aim a telescope at the Eastern horizon, shouldn't we see multiple suns, each smaller and lower, converging in a bright, white line pointing downwards?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: edby on January 10, 2019, 09:59:49 PM
I didn't even attempt to solve that 4 point problem because allaroundtheworld already did here:
His point is that the problem cannot be solved except by supposing curvature.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 10:00:12 PM
Iamcpc, I love this! :) You are giving the flat-earthers a run for their money, let's just say that. I can't honestly say what's more psychadelic, a disk Earth with impossible flight times, or an endless, repeating piece of floating rock in space.
But you didn't understand the problem. If there is a sun and a moon floating some distance above that piece of rock, and they are also floating 40,000 kilometers to the east, and again, 80,000 kilometers to the east, over the next repetition, then if we aim a telescope at the Eastern horizon, shouldn't we see multiple suns, each smaller and lower, converging in a bright, white line pointing downwards?

I'm not giving a flat earthers a run for their money. I'm giving a very specific subset of flat earth models a run for its money when it comes to very specific observations. I'm just pointing out that there is a flat earth model which is much more widely accepted and much easier to verify.

Honestly I don't know a lot about optics but i would guess that, In this model you can make the same claim that all the FE models do. You can't see that far through the air.
In the flat disk model you run into the same problem. How come you can't see the sun at night with a telescope on one of the flat disk models. Well the same thing applies here.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 10, 2019, 10:25:50 PM
Iamcpc, ah, but you can see stars on the horizon, and they are supposedly farther than the sun. And you can also see the sun itself rising from the horizon. If the Repeating Earth model is true, we should be able to see the next repeating sun, and the one after that, etc. There would be a bright vertical line on the horizon that would spawn a new sun each morning, moving West, and sinking into another vertical line on the opposite side! It's a fun thought experiment! Here is the thing though: you can explain why we don't see that line, very simply, with a round Earth model.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 10, 2019, 10:34:07 PM
Iamcpc, ah, but you can see stars on the horizon, and they are supposedly farther than the sun. And you can also see the sun itself rising from the horizon. If the Repeating Earth model is true, we should be able to see the next repeating sun, and the one after that, etc. There would be a bright vertical line on the horizon that would spawn a new sun each morning, moving West, and sinking into another vertical line on the opposite side! It's a fun thought experiment! Here is the thing though: you can explain why we don't see that line, very simply, with a round Earth model.

This is the same problem you run into with a flat disk model. You can say the same thing. How can you can see stars which are much further away from the sun but you can't go to the top of a building with a telescope and see the sun. You can claim this is a problem with both models and both can have the same answer/explanation. It's a tie.

Notice how in the disk model the light from the sun is not visible far away because the light from the sun has a limited viewing distance.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sun
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 11:03:56 PM
first off when I checked the distances on other websites they were different than the OP.
I imagine that if others try to repeat what I did they will get slightly different distances - people might put their “pins” in slightly different places to where I did.
I’d be surprised if they were significantly different distances though and the resulting picture would show the same problem.

When I “solved” the problem I did so by trying the same method with cities that were much closer together. Over shorter distances the discrepancy between a flat earth and a globe is less.

FE’s only explanation can be that the distances on Google Maps are wrong. But Google Maps is used by people every day to get around. As has been noted in this thread, Google have sent cars round much of the world. It has been proven reliable. The idea that their maps are inaccurate is ludicrous.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 11, 2019, 05:17:09 AM
This is the same problem you run into with a flat disk model. You can say the same thing. How can you can see stars which are much further away from the sun but you can't go to the top of a building with a telescope and see the sun. You can claim this is a problem with both models and both can have the same answer/explanation. It's a tie.
Notice how in the disk model the light from the sun is not visible far away because the light from the sun has a limited viewing distance.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Sun
Except, you can see the light of a spotlight from a distance, even if it isn't directly aimed at you. You would clearly see the sun as a star on the horizon before it has risen. And in your model, you would see a line of multiple stars. The disk Earth version has the same problem, but it would be one star which suddenly turns big and bright above the horizon. There would be no gradual sunrise, such as we observe each morning.
PS, if the sun is a sphere, it should emit omnidirectional light unless only part of its surface emits light. According to your model, is it a sphere?
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 11, 2019, 10:22:54 AM
www.mapquest.com has an interactive model of the earth represented and a flat infinite repeating plane.
maps.yahoo.com
suncalc.net
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/
Iamcpc, by the way, these maps use the Mercator projection, which is inaccurate in itself. Aside from the obvious question: how come you don't see multiple suns, and how can there be a repeating piece of rock with endless copies of yourself - the map would make Greenland as big as Africa.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: iamcpc on January 11, 2019, 04:10:22 PM
www.mapquest.com has an interactive model of the earth represented and a flat infinite repeating plane.
maps.yahoo.com
suncalc.net
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/
Iamcpc, by the way, these maps use the Mercator projection, which is inaccurate in itself. Aside from the obvious question: how come you don't see multiple suns, and how can there be a repeating piece of rock with endless copies of yourself - the map would make Greenland as big as Africa.

There could be one earth and it could be like pac man where you west you eventually end up east of where you started and if you go eat you eventually wind up west of where you started.

This statement is inaccurate. If you zoom to Greenland on mapquest.com it shows, very clearly, that Greenland is about 1200-1400 miles north to south. If you then look at Africa you can see that Africa is much much larger than Greenland.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 11, 2019, 06:31:33 PM
There could be one earth and it could be like pac man where you west you eventually end up east of where you started and if you go eat you eventually wind up west of where you started.
This statement is inaccurate. If you zoom to Greenland on mapquest.com it shows, very clearly, that Greenland is about 1200-1400 miles north to south. If you then look at Africa you can see that Africa is much much larger than Greenland.
While I am tempted to say that pac-man could be taking place on a sphere, which would eliminate the mystery of an endlessly looping object, let's just say that the MapQuest map does not lose the Mercator distortion when zoomed in, and doesn't use the pixel data as coordinates, but instead, uses coordinates from a projected and unfolded globe. Here is an explanation of the distortion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection . Moreover, the map cannot loop vertically, since there is a big Antarctic continent down South.
Title: Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
Post by: fishcake on January 11, 2019, 07:15:31 PM