Recent Posts

1
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Pole to pole flight
« Last post by flachland on Today at 07:41:34 AM »
I can not find the flight patch track, where did you get it online?

I saw it at the time on flightaware or one of those sites. I would love to see it plotted on a globe, or disk if you want. Please post if anybody finds one.
2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by iamcpc on Today at 03:08:33 AM »


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

You seem to be the only one who can answer their own questions. So ask yourself why this topic exists.


Was that a yes or a no?


I'll ask again because i'm not sure what the answer is.

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
3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by stack on Today at 01:44:45 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

You seem to be the only one who can answer their own questions. So ask yourself why this topic exists.
4
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by iamcpc 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
5
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by stack on Today at 12:38:25 AM »
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.

Hmmm, maybe I am just incapable of conveying what I think I am trying to convey. Entirely possible.

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.

We are not talking about a map of Texas, we are talking about a map of the world.

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!!!


The same logic doesn't apply because we are talking about 3D versus 2D.

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

Ask yourself what the question is that's being asked in the OP and why.
6
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: When rockets launch....
« Last post by markjo on Today at 12:21:56 AM »
Nah, it's simpler than that. He (I'm assuming he - apologies if not) thinks you should get exactly 12 hours of daylight on the day of an equinox and he's looking at sunrise and sunset times to determine for himself when equinoxes occur - and getting the wrong answers.
Oh, I understand completely what he's trying to do.  It's not an uncommon argument among FE'ers.  I'm simply pointing out that the exactly equal day/night phenomenon that he (and other FE'ers) thinks should happen at the equinox is actually a real, but less well known phenomenon called the equilux which generally happens a few days before or after the equinox.
7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by iamcpc 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
8
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by stack on July 15, 2019, 11:22:23 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?

I've already explained this and documented it in the thread linked. before. I'll link it again here:

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

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

- 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.

I never uttered the words, "does not count". I'm just merely pointing out that "interactivity" or not doesn't matter because these interactive maps you've referenced are globe based regardless of whether you're zoomed in or not. If you don't like that fact, take it up with Microsoft.
9
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Last post by iamcpc 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?

I've already explained this and documented it in the thread linked. before. I'll link it again here:

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.
10
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: When rockets launch....
« Last post by model 29 on July 15, 2019, 10:29:53 PM »
At my latitude 55 degrees north equinox occurs 5 days prior to the corresponding southern latitude equinox.
The equinox happens at the same time for the planet.  Do you have a source stating there are 2 equinoxes 5 days apart?

The size of the lunar shadow cast onto our earth during solar eclipse varies from 70 - 100 miles we observe . This destroys the distant sun assumption since it is known by scientific experiment that electromagnetic rays propagate according to the inverse square law . The moon cannot be 240,000 miles distant , unless sunlight is focused by some means to shine on earth .
The eclipse shadow umbra (approx 70 miles) is just what we should expect with a sun 864k miles in diameter, 93 million miles away, shining on an object 2,100 miles in diameter and 240k miles away between the globe and sun.