[acacius]

Hey I'm kinda new here. Why are there so few threads? To me there seems to be two ways to prove the earth is round: if a plane can fly across Antarctica, then it supports the round earth.

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth. Have these things been documented I don't know. Just some thoughts!

[Tau]

Hey I'm kinda new here. Why are there so few threads? To me there seems to be two ways to prove the earth is round: if a plane can fly across Antarctica, then it supports the round earth.

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth. Have these things been documented I don't know. Just some thoughts!

While there have been a few planes flown over Antarctica, no one has actually done a proper crossing that way. They generally just cross over that big peninsula that sticks out near South America. Which is still quite a feat, but doesn't prove anything either way.

As for why there are so few threads, there aren't many RE'ers on the site right now and it's still new. We recently had a schism with the old society and most regular FE'ers moved here, but we don't have the publicity or the traffic that the old site had yet.

[DDDDAts all folks]

I've flown to the Falkland Islands.

It was windy.

[Pete Svarrior]

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth.

No, it doesn't. In either case, the proportion would be the same.

[acacius]

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth.

No, it doesn't. In either case, the proportion would be the same.

You are right, the distance from Mexico to Japan does look the same on a flat earth, whether the route goes East or West. On the flat earth map I noticed that the shortest path (starting at Mexico) between the countries is to fly northwest right past the North Pole. But (excuse my ignorance) I don't know if that's possible with real aircraft because I'm not an aviator (or an air traffic guy).

About the South Pole, I found this on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_route

Look at the third picture to the right. How is that route possible on a flat earth?

Also I find this comment from Wikipedia interesting: "As it happens, airlines don't fly nonstop between many city-pairs having a great circle route over Antarctica. Direct flights between South Africa and New Zealand would overfly Antarctica, but no airline has scheduled such flights."

[Tau]

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth.

No, it doesn't. In either case, the proportion would be the same.

You are right, the distance from Mexico to Japan does look the same on a flat earth, whether the route goes East or West. On the flat earth map I noticed that the shortest path (starting at Mexico) between the countries is to fly northwest right past the North Pole. But (excuse my ignorance) I don't know if that's possible with real aircraft because I'm not an aviator (or an air traffic guy).

About the South Pole, I found this on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_route

Look at the third picture to the right. How is that route possible on a flat earth?

Also I find this comment from Wikipedia interesting: "As it happens, airlines don't fly nonstop between many city-pairs having a great circle route over Antarctica. Direct flights between South Africa and New Zealand would overfly Antarctica, but no airline has scheduled such flights."

That flight isn't a problem at all. As you can see, they only pass over a bit of Antarctica. They are far from the pole.

[acacius]

That flight isn't a problem at all. As you can see, they only pass over a bit of Antarctica. They are far from the pole.

But on the flat earth, South America and Australia are on opposite ends of the earth. According to the third picture, it should be a short trip because of the short distance. Perhaps I should take a flight from South America to Australia and see how long it takes! If it's a short time, doesn't it prove the earth to be a globe? Or maybe I'm missing something.

[Pete Svarrior]

Or maybe I'm missing something.

You are missing a whole lot. First of all, you don't seem to understand what "east" and "west" mean in FET. You also seem to think that airlines will necessarily take the shortest route between two points, even though this is almost universally untrue.

[Rama Set]

You also seem to think that airlines will necessarily take the shortest route between two points, even though this is almost universally untrue.

But do not make a false equivalency. Their routes, though not geographically always the shortest, are most likely the shortest practical route when accounting for weather, regulations and safety.

That flight isn't a problem at all. As you can see, they only pass over a bit of Antarctica. They are far from the pole.

Perhaps I should take a flight from South America to Australia and see how long it takes! If it's a short time, doesn't it prove the earth to be a globe? Or maybe I'm missing something.

It would not prove the Earth is a globe but it would be likely falsify some FE maps.

[acacius]

Or maybe I'm missing something.

You are missing a whole lot. First of all, you don't seem to understand what "east" and "west" mean in FET. You also seem to think that airlines will necessarily take the shortest route between two points, even though this is almost universally untrue.

I think I understand: West is a clockwise circuit around the central pole and East is counter-clockwise. Is that right?

[Rama Set]

Yes that's right.

[acacius]

Hey I found two claims of crossing Antarctica. One in the 1950s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Trans-Antarctic_Expedition

One in 1979-1982: http://www.transglobe-expedition.org/page/the-expedition

How can you prove them wrong?

[Tintagel]

Hey I found two claims of crossing Antarctica. One in the 1950s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Trans-Antarctic_Expedition

One in 1979-1982: http://www.transglobe-expedition.org/page/the-expedition

How can you prove them wrong?

The Trans-Antarctic expedition did cross a significant portion of the antarctic continent, but their route can easily be mapped on the "ice rim" model as well - they just ventured around the rim a bit.  The 1979 likely did the same thing, though it's possible they did venture farther into the antarctic landmass than the previous group.  Even so, the only real evidence we have of both antarctic expeditions is a written record and some photographs.  It's possible they didn't venture as far into the antarctic as they believed, as none of the accounts detail how they tracked their position.  Certainly not with GPS, in 1979.  It's also possible they were willfully dishonest about reaching the south pole, but I prefer to think they were merely mistaken.

[markjo]

The Trans-Antarctic expedition did cross a significant portion of the antarctic continent, but their route can easily be mapped on the "ice rim" model as well...

Then please do so.  It would be interesting to see how the FE route compares with the RE route.
 

The 1979 likely did the same thing, though it's possible they did venture farther into the antarctic landmass than the previous group.

I think that some here are operating under the assumption that the geographic south pole is in the center of Antarctica.  It isn't.

[pilot172]

 

Or maybe I'm missing something.

You are missing a whole lot. First of all, you don't seem to understand what "east" and "west" mean in FET. You also seem to think that airlines will necessarily take the shortest route between two points, even though this is almost universally untrue.

why would they not take the shortest route, wouldn't it get more customers if they took a shorter route and they would save fuel meaning cheaper flights which means more people. you seem to just lump everybody that is used as evidence of a round earth into 'nop they are all in on the lie' which really makes no sense

[jroa]

Who said they don't take the shortest route? 

[Rama Set]

Who said they are?

[Pete Svarrior]

why would they not take the shortest route

Because that'd cost them a lot of money and people don't like wasting money just so that their routes look oh-so-neat on a map.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_wind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_planning#Describing_a_route

[Pete]

Some of the people who say that the world is flat they also believe that there are no Antarctica. If this is the case that there are no Antarctica, then why do these fellows sell airline tickets to Antarctica once a year, where they even cross the South Magnetic Pole?
http://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/What-To-Expect

[Tom Bishop]

Some believe that they are actually crossing a commonly crossed peninsula off of the coast of the Ice Wall.

Others believe that Antarctica exists as a continent and the layout of the earth is different than the traditional Flat Earth model.