### Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

### Messages - iamcpc

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28  Next >
1
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: Today at 01:08:43 AM »
The same logic doesn't apply because we are talking about 3D versus 2D.

A quick glance around shows that i'm in a 3D room in a 3D state in a 3D country on a 3D planet so the same logic does apply.

Ask yourself what the question is that's being asked in the OP and why.

That does not answer my question. A simple yes or no would suffice. Do the Bing maps, which represent the earth as a flat plane, not count as FE maps because you believe they are based on a globe projection?

Yes =Bing maps DO NOT COUNT as FE maps
No = Bing maps do count as FE maps

2
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 15, 2019, 11:54:12 PM »
Yes, you have explained and documented this before. And from that thread, your explanation and documentation mystified everyone else. But maybe we're just all daft. But essentially the same conceptual problems you have with the common FE AE map/model are the same problems you should have with an 'FE' Bing style map/model.

FE AE map/model: Distances are all out of whack especially in the southern hemisphere. Would it make a difference if it were 'interactive'? No
'FE' Bing style map/model: Distances are all out of whack especially when traveling east or west off the map. Would it make a difference if it were 'interactive'? No

You can't travel off of the bing map. I've sent screenshots to demonstrate how you can travel east and wind up where you started as well as travel west and wind up where you started without traveling off of the edge of anything.  The map is interactive.

If you look at a map of Texas and drive outside of the Texas border does the edge of the map represent the end of all existence? no it does not.

The same logic applies to a RE model. You can't take a flat 2d static image of a globe and demonstrate these kinds of flights. You can do it with a globe because the globe is interactive and can spin.

Refusing to accept an interactive map and FORCING the use of a static not interactive image to represent a planet which is not static is the same as me doing this to you:

Draw a line on this static image of the round earth model which demonstrates a flight from San Francisco to Tokyo:

One line in the unedited image below. If you can't draw such a line the earth can't possibly be a globe!!!

these interactive maps you've referenced are globe

Ok. I got it. You believe they are globe maps. I've known that for some time now.

I never uttered the words, "does not count".

So you are saying that, even though you believe they are globe maps, they do count as FE maps?

Because if you are saying that these maps "DO NOT COUNT" as FE maps because you believe they are globe maps then my original statement stands

3
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 15, 2019, 10:46:03 PM »

A static non interactive image has a definitive edge. I am of the belief that the earth does not have an edge. If you travel in a straight line in any direction you will arrive roughly back at the same place you started without teleporting. Kind of like if you were walking on an omnidirectional treadmill

This video outlines the problems with the flat disk model as well as the problems with a static non interactive non moving Bing/mapquest model (at about the 1:39 mark).

A couple problems with this.

- Omni-directional Treadmill: If you and I are both to meet in Tokyo, both departing from San Francisco at the same time, you flying East, me flying West - your omnidirectional treadmill would be moving one way, mine would be moving the opposite way. How does that work?

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14046.msg187564#msg187564

- Interactive Bing/Mapquest Model: Doing some more digging, interactivity does not solve any problems. According to Microsoft documentation regarding the scaling (interactivity) of their Bing map, even when zoomed in the map is still based upon WGS84 datum as defined: The WGS 84 datum surface is an oblate spheroid with equatorial radius a = 6378137 m at the equator and flattening f = 1/298.257223563.

From Microsoft:
"The latitude and longitude are assumed to be on the WGS 84 datum. Even though Bing Maps uses a spherical projection, it’s important to convert all geographic coordinates into a common datum, and WGS 84 was chosen to be that datum."

Same for Mapquest as it is powered by OpenStreetMaps, which is based upon WGS84 as well.

Then you can stand up and proudly say "DOES NOT COUNT" to them as flat earth models. I don't share your view. Your "DOES NOT COUNT" quite frankly "DOES NOT COUNT" to me.

Why don't you find an interactive map, with an interactive scale, which you think does count.

4
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 15, 2019, 07:45:30 PM »
What difference should that make? unless you think land distorts in real life the further away you are a static flat earth map is just as accurate.

A static non interactive image has a definitive edge. I am of the belief that the earth does not have an edge. If you travel in a straight line in any direction you will arrive roughly back at the same place you started without teleporting. Kind of like if you were walking on an omnidirectional treadmill

This video outlines the problems with the flat disk model as well as the problems with a static non interactive non moving Bing/mapquest model (at about the 1:39 mark).

5
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 15, 2019, 04:54:27 PM »
In my question about airline flight times, I have suggested a very simple method to create a flat earth map, using flight times between cities. See this post:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15105.msg196360#msg196360

Can someone from the FE community do this and report back with the result?

Many people including myself have attempted to do exactly what you suggested.  In fact in this very thread.  The problem has been that the few FE'ers that respond derail the concept with claims of distances being unknown.  The infamous quote by Tom Bishop was that no one knows how far it is from New York to Paris.

I suggest you do what you are saying and lay out a map between major points and see what you come up with.  This will not produce accurate compass directions but will show the general layout.   Start with one point and draw a circle with the radius to the next point. Look for intersections of the circles as you add more points.

I have done it and it starts falling apart very quickly as distances increase.  The real breakdown comes with points in the southern hemisphere.

his topic has been discussed hundreds of times. The flat disk model is considerably weakened by known flight times/distances, known travel times/distances, known shipping times/distances. This is why I presented an alternate model in which the earth is represented as a flat plane and is much less weakened by these things. Generally the problem is that, when a flight time does not support a specific model for the person making the map, that flight does not count (it does not exist, it's a lie, it's inaccurate, etc.).

For supporters of the models that are severely weakened by this evidence and these observations I got all the rebuttals 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

6
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 14, 2019, 11:02:09 PM »
I'll stop here to see if we're on the same page. Are we on the same page?

yes. I just want to reiterate that the most accurate FE model that iIve ever seen is interactive and not a static image.

7
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 13, 2019, 01:18:19 AM »
At least it doesn't pac man like is shown in your model.

That is not my FE model. The depiction of the Earth which most closely resembles my FE model is bing maps which you have rejected. You demanded that I draw lines on a non interactive static image which I believe is much less accurate to what the world really looks like because that map does not even have a scale on it. Unfortunately any map that I found that had a scale, or was interactive, which was closer to my FE model you proudly said "DOES NOT COUNT"

My model does not pac man.

In addition that map has a large circle, which I assume to be the moon shown to be static over Africa. I could easily look at that and say "DOES NOT COUNT" but I don't because it's lame when done by FE people saying that flights don't count just like it's lame when done by you saying that maps or models or lines drawn between countries don't count.

I have no idea if it's based on a globe projection or not. But there is a lot of the world missing from the image.

Much like there is a lot of the world missing in a flight between California and Japan.

You see, it's not. Not clear at all.

I really question your sincerity when you say that it's unclear. I've explained this to you before, in great detail, as I am doing again. I believe that you are of at least slightly above average intelligence therefore capable of googling this flight path and seeing it shown, on least a dozen different websites.

What is unclear about the flight described below?

The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes hawaii, lands in Japan.

8
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 13, 2019, 12:29:36 AM »

I simply raised a problem with this type of flat earth model/map. It's called the "Pac-man" effect. I'm sure you've read about it here. In this model, my plane is magically "pac-manning" off the left side of the map and magically appearing on the right side. How did it sneak from the left side to the right unnoticed?

Unfortunately for me you rejected every interactive map i found so I was limited to one that was not interactive.

I drew this line many times in many different ways using many different maps. I guess all of those "DO NOT COUNT"
Apparently you also rejected my explanation.

You don't teleport from one end to the other. Let me describe the flight in words again:

The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes Hawaii, lands in Japan.

It's very clear.

Here is an image. Are you able to prove that this image is from a map which is based on a globe, sphere, or oblate spheroid projection? I believe you can and will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

9
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 10:42:47 PM »

You can't draw my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map.

I already did. I'm sure you will say it "DOES NOT COUNT"

Oh no sir. This is not my flat earth map. I just kept presenting maps until you stopped saying "DOES NOT COUNT!"

It's pretty clear what you're doing. When finally allowed your map

I was never allowed my map. I was not allowed my top 10 maps. I just had to keep linking maps until you FINALLY stopped saying they didn't count.

and given a problem to solve with it that you can't, you dodge the issue.

I drew the line on the map. How is that dodging the issue?

I'm very disappointed you would do such a thing. Verging on disingenuous.

You're right I could resort to countering your "DOES NOT COUNT" with my own. Normally these "THAT DOES NOT COUNT" tactics come from the FE side.

The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

oh wait my image was a snip of the original map and not the entire original map picture. it's still the same freaking thing. The plane departs from California, heads East over the Pacific Ocean, passes hawaii, lands in Japan.

let me save the image instead of a print screen of the image and do it that way. I've drawn these lines so many times. i'm sure after all of this you will just say "DOES NOT COUNT"

10
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 10:13:58 PM »
No. Show my flight from SF to Tokyo on the timeanddate map, your flat earth map, in one shot. The whole journey on the map of the world as shown above.

first off that is no my flat earth map. That is the only map of the earth that you have not stood up and said "DOES NOT COUNT" to.

I don't see the point of continuing this discussion.

I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"
I present a map you say "DOES NOT COUNT"

I present a map that you have not yet said "DOES NOT COUNT" and you ask me to describe a plane flight.
I describe the plane flight "DOES NOT COUNT" It must be described differently

I could try to describe it differently and I know where this is going. You're going to say "DOES NOT COUNT"

Using the exact same non interactive image that you have given me here is the flight diagrammed between California and Japan. I'm sure, for whatever reason you come up with, you will proudly say "DOES NOT COUNT"

This is not a discussion or even a debate. It's me jumping through hoop after hoop after hoop and you saying that hoop didn't count jump through this one.

Here is the flight you described diagrammed from a simple google search of SF to Tokyo flight path.

I'm sure you will respond with "DOES NOT COUNT". Maybe because the map is a different color? I bet so.

Here's one that is using the same map and the same colors

I'm waiting to hear now why this one "DOES NOT COUNT"

11
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 07:31:18 PM »
Cool, here's your flat earth map, now what? For one, now you'll have to explain how a plane flying West gets from San Francisco to Tokyo.

I've already done this for you 3/21/2019 here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14046.msg187564#msg187564

I described it and took print screens and drew arrows on them. Please don't make me do it again.

12
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 04:24:52 PM »
iamcpc, I don't think you understand why people are rejecting the Bing map as a 'flat earth' map. If you understood then you wouldn't simply be saying you disagree.

I understand and I disagree.

Tell me, if you saw earth from really far away so that you could see the entire surface of earth, do you think it'd look exactly, 100% like the shape of the Bing map visually? Do you think Greenland is literally that big compared to other countries nearer the equator?

I'm not a cartographer. Even if I was i'm not interested in what a cartographer would imagine he would see from outer space. I'm interested in what the cartographer KNOWS the map should look like in a way that

1. Has countries the correct size (based on the interactive scale of the map).
2. Shows countries the correct distance away from each other (based on the interactive scale of the map).
3. Has countries the correct direction relative to each other.
4. Is usable to accurately navigate every country on earth.

13
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 03:34:33 PM »
What is your definition? I`m sorry if you already laid it out earlier in this tread, but I could not find it. You clearly disagree with Microsofts definition, and other definitions of distortions when it comes to projecting a sphere to a flat surface; ["Representing the earth's surface in two dimensions causes distortion in the shape, area, distance, or direction of the data. A map projection uses mathematical formulas to relate spherical coordinates on the globe to flat, planar coordinates. Different projections cause different types of distortion."[/i]

It meets all of the criteria listed below I consider that map to undistorted:

1. The map has countries the correct size (based on the interactive scale of the map).
2. The map shows countries the correct distance away from each other (based on the interactive scale of the map).
3. The map has Countries the correct direction relative to each other
4. The map is usable to accurately navigate every country on earth

"It looks kind of like a map that has a globe projection! therefore it does not count"  thus FORCING this conversation to remain on the red herring.

Ummm, so far there is only one where I can't find documentation for, timeanddate. You've seen the list. All the others are documented globe projections.

Finally. That is a Flat earth map!

And it's not a "does not count" thing for the millionth time its that a true flat earth map should have NO projection - Again, the entire point of this thread.

For the millionth time it is a "does not count" thing.

Why don't you present a layout or even just a methodology that would be a good framework for starting a flat earth map.

I presented several different ideas on how to create a flat earth map and they were all ignored.

I presented like a dozen different layouts and everyone stood up, pointed at the layout, and proudly proclaimed that it does not count because of "projection".

Many, many people have tried to create a true and accurate flat earth map that matches reality. ALL have failed. And I can see why.

Because any time a map is presented which is true based on the scale of the map, accurate  based on the scale of the map, and matches reality based on the scale of the map you say NO WAY BUD THAT MAP DOES NOT COUNT!!

when flight times in the Southern hemiplane didn't fit his model, he simply claimed those flights were fake. Went as far to claim that Qantas, for example, simply murders all the passengers on those fake flights to hide that they are fake. Lovely logic.

Hmmm someone claiming that a flight is fake

This sounds just like someone claiming that a FE map is "fake" because of "projection"

Much like he points at the flights and says "DOES NOT COUNT"
You point at maps or models and say "DOES NOT COUNT"

14
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 05:53:06 AM »
Again it's not a red herring. You were presenting maps that are projections of the globe.

If it's not a red herring why do we keep talking about it instead of making a FE map??

"Why don't you present a map which fits your criteria for this discussion so we can finally move past this red herring debate" - because it doesn't exist yet. That's the point of this thread.

Then please present ANY map which fits the criteria as a framework for a FE map. I fear that it will show Canada North of the United States and someone will say "GLOBE PROJECTION!" thus FORCING this conversation to remain on the red herring.

Even when presented with maps in which the developer of the map does not specifically say is based on a globe projection:

"It looks kind of like a map that has a globe projection! therefore it does not count"  thus FORCING this conversation to remain on the red herring.

Listen, there is no such thing as a true accurate flat earth map. So we're collectively trying to figure out how in the hell to make a true accurate flat earth map where everyone else who has ever tried has failed. So there's no FE map to present because one doesn't exist, hence this thread. Get it?

From my perspective I am trying to present ideas for what I think could be good contenders and everyone else is talking about the projections that the maps may, or may not have.

Please present to me ANY map in which you believe the map would be a good framework for the starting of a flat earth map.

15
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 09:37:19 PM »
So again, the exercise here is to figure out a way to make a flat earth (as in World) map based upon a flat earth. No globe projections involved. The best place to start is with a static map like we all used to rely on 20 years ago.

Here's the problem. Every single static map that has been presented you stand up and proudly say "based on globe projection! It does not count!" and throw us back in the red herring projection debate.

You even presented a FE map and then, shortly after presenting it, claimed that it was really a globe projection.

Why don't you present a map which fits your criteria for this discussion so we can finally move past this red herring debate which I have asked dozens of times for us to move past.

16
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 08:34:56 PM »
Why are you wanting a map which is 100 year old when you could have a new, higher tech, more accurate interactive map?

No, actually only one that is about 20 years old. Yahoo! launched their 'interactive' web map service in 1998. They were basically the first to do so.

Stack,

ChrisTP is asking for a non interactive still picture map in the quote below:

Yahoo maps is an interactive map made in the last 20 or so years. My point is that still image non interactive maps were used over 100 years ago and we now have the ability to make better, more accurate, maps which are interactive.

Zoom out fully on the bing map, screenshot it and work from that screenshot instead of the website. Stop talking about interactive scales.

17
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 07:48:54 PM »
Why does it have to be "interactive" to be proven correct?  That should definitely NOT be necessary for a flat earth.  And, for a globe....well, they're not interactive at all.  I'm sure there's a giant globe out there that's accurate and not interactive.

Because any non-interactive map is severely weakened by observations that I've made when traveling internationally. If you provide me with a non-interactive map and I guarantee that I can provide overwhelming evidence showing that it is wrong using flight times and distances for flights that I've personally taken and verified. As well as the map not  matching shipping times, shipping distances shipping paths, travel times, travel paths, and travel distances.

Right, Zoom out fully on the bing map, screenshot it and work from that screenshot instead of the website. Stop talking about interactive scales. We want a picture of the world in full that is correctly sized and shaped, not one that's distorted. if it distorts, it means the distortion is making up for a projection of a spheroid or any other shape that isn't flat. It's that simple. The bing map regardless of what you think is still a globe map not a 'flat earth' map. There is no way round that fact.

By my definition Bing maps is not distorted.

There have been advancements in technology. You are asking for a map from the 1900's. I'm saying that you should consider that, in the past 200 years, advancements have been made in cartography and now we are able to create interactive online maps which are much less distorted (by both of our definitions of distortion when referring to maps) than the maps from over 100 years ago. Why are you wanting a map which is 100 year old when you could have a new, higher tech, more accurate interactive map?

18
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 07:33:27 PM »
If you think about the FE model to be like a pizza, and start to draw countries and continents based on known true distances, inland and between them, this pizza will end up missing few slices. Flat Earth model has a huge problem here.  Someone (FEt) must fix this issue very soon.

The biggest problem that I've seen is that, if the map is not interactive, it always get proven incorrect by

19
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 10, 2019, 10:33:25 PM »
Step one for mapping the earth would be to literally measure long distances manually then compare the results to standard, widely used maps like Google maps.

Chris,

Thank you so much for your idea. The problem that I see within the FE community is that the systems which are used to measure long distances are many times not agreed upon.

In addition how would you measure the distance to and from the great ice wall? In my FE model there is no great ice wall. Would you measure distances under the assumption that there is a great ice wall?

Something like this, if using the most common FE map, the AE:

It's the most common FE map yet people have claimed that it's based on a globe projection therefore does not count.

In an attempt to put projections aside:

That map does not corroborate observations that I've made when traveling internationally. The distance between South America and Australia for example does not match shipping times, shipping distances shipping paths, travel times, travel paths, and travel distances.

20
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 10, 2019, 08:42:00 PM »
I disagree. I think the interactive scale does mean something.

It doesn't. We are talking about a World flat earth map. Not a city/state/country flat earth map. So if we are talking about the World then you must be zoomed out. Therefore one scale = World.

I disagree. We can just agree to disagree and move on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be.

By your definition Bing maps is distorted. By my definition it is not.

No, by Microsoft's definition:
...
How many time do we have to go over this?

I have defined what I my criteria for distortion are and how bing maps does not meet my criteria for distortion.
We can just agree to disagree and move on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be.

Again this thread was about the first steps to be taken to make a map of the earth. Hence the title: "How to make a FE map, step one."

Everyone is acting like the title is "How to make a FE map, in which the map takes no inspiration from any sort of global projection, step one."

A true flat earth map by definition has no projection of any shape. No projection. As I and others have said many times, there is no need to project a flat earth onto a flat map. It's 1 to 1.

The entire point of this and any other discussion about an FE map is that the Flat Earth Community does not have a map to support their theory that the earth is flat. At least one that is NOT based on a spherical earth. Which is the whole point of trying to make a true flat earth map, one that is not based on a spherical earth. It is the holy grail of the entire flat earth movement.

If it would make you more comfortable, I can ask Jimster to change the title of this thread to "How to make a FE map, in which the map takes no inspiration from any sort of global projection, step one." But I shouldn't have to as you should understand by now.

We can just agree to disagree on the whole projection thing. It's a red herring anyway.
We can just agree to disagree and move on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be.

TimeandDate.com: Yes, from the distortion there is some sort of projection being used. Look at Greenland, for example. A true Flat Earth map would have zero distortion.
No documentation found.

Suncalc.net: Yes, uses Google’s Mercator Globe Projection

I notice you don't have any documentation to go along with these claims. Can we move away from the red herring and move on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be.

Again we disagree. If the map has an interactive scale which changes depending on where you look and how far in you are zoomed I don't consider that distorted.

Just because you disagree doesn't make you right. Read Microsoft's description of the distortion in Bing maps above. And again, we're not talking about scaling. We're talking about a world map which means you use one scale, the zoomed out one. Otherwise, you can't see the whole world.

Can we move away from this pointless red herring debate about if you think i'm right or not. Can we move on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be?

No where in the wiki or the supporting documentation does it say the Mercator projection is not based on a globe/sphere/oblate spheroid but rather based on a collection of flat maps. Tom's arguments are around State Plane maps which if you actually read the supporting  documentation are great for a State view but quickly lose accuracy the bigger the area. According to Tom's logic the FE community could just paste together all the State plane maps and boom, there's your flat earth map of America. However, in aggregate, it would be a wildly inaccurate map of America.

And actually, the wiki article and supporting documentation quite nicely points out how maps are based on a spherical earth.

Would it help you move on if I said you are 100% correct and I am 100% wrong and have changed by views an opinions to perfectly match yours? If so I will do it in a second. As long it it would help us move away from this pointless unwinnable red herring debate and on to more pressing points like what the first step in creating a FE map would be.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28  Next >