Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #140 on: July 28, 2019, 03:41:45 AM »

Sure, globes are 'interactive', but they are kind of cumbersome, hard to draw on when plotting a course and just don't have the portability that a 2D map has. That's why "projections" from a globe on to a 2D surface were created. Mercator came up with his method by lighting the inside of a globe and projecting the landmasses out onto a roll of paper.

The Bing map is a simply a Mercator projection from a globe, regardless of whether it's 'interactive' by zooming and such. It was still born of a globe, right or wrongly so assuming a globe, but decidedly not from a Flat Earth.

I notice the static image globe projections do a HORRIBLE job of matching reality while the interactive Bing map model is much closer to reality.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #141 on: July 28, 2019, 06:06:00 AM »

Sure, globes are 'interactive', but they are kind of cumbersome, hard to draw on when plotting a course and just don't have the portability that a 2D map has. That's why "projections" from a globe on to a 2D surface were created. Mercator came up with his method by lighting the inside of a globe and projecting the landmasses out onto a roll of paper.

The Bing map is a simply a Mercator projection from a globe, regardless of whether it's 'interactive' by zooming and such. It was still born of a globe, right or wrongly so assuming a globe, but decidedly not from a Flat Earth.

I notice the static image globe projections do a HORRIBLE job of matching reality while the interactive Bing map model is much closer to reality.

As has been explained before and shown in the Microsoft documentation, whether you're zoomed out or zoomed in on the Bing Map system, what you're seeing is still a Globe projection. It's all Mercator, all projection, all from and representing a globe earth in 2D. All using globe coordinates and distance measurements, all globe, all the time, whether you are interacting with it or just staring at it.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #142 on: July 28, 2019, 03:36:56 PM »
As has been explained before and shown in the Microsoft documentation, whether you're zoomed out or zoomed in on the Bing Map system, what you're seeing is still a Globe projection. It's all Mercator, all projection, all from and representing a globe earth in 2D. All using globe coordinates and distance measurements, all globe, all the time, whether you are interacting with it or just staring at it.

What does this have to do with the fact that the only way that I have found to accurately depict the earth of any shape is through something that is interactive with an interactive scale.

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #143 on: July 28, 2019, 03:45:21 PM »

Sure, globes are 'interactive', but they are kind of cumbersome, hard to draw on when plotting a course and just don't have the portability that a 2D map has. That's why "projections" from a globe on to a 2D surface were created. Mercator came up with his method by lighting the inside of a globe and projecting the landmasses out onto a roll of paper.

The Bing map is a simply a Mercator projection from a globe, regardless of whether it's 'interactive' by zooming and such. It was still born of a globe, right or wrongly so assuming a globe, but decidedly not from a Flat Earth.

I notice the static image globe projections do a HORRIBLE job of matching reality while the interactive Bing map model is much closer to reality.
In what way? if you mean the Bing map is more accurate because you can zoom in then you have still 100% missed the point of my last post in here. If you can make a physical globe in a classroom that shows all of the earth without physically changing, then you should be able to make a physical flat map of the earth that shows all of the earth without physically changing. If you can do this while still visibly seeing that the flat map matches reality then you're golden! Bing map doesn't do this. Maps on a classroom wall also don't match reality without distortion. Even if there was some magic way that we pacman from one side of the earth to the other when we travel east or west, the Bing map is still distorted.

Forget digital maps for a second and just think about physical maps, be it flat earth or globe earth. You can start by assuming that countries borders on land are accurately positioned. Now here's where you have to use assumptions because I'm guessing you've not done these things but people traverse regularly across the Bering Strait, even by kayak, so you can assume russia and alaska are pretty darn close making the bing map physically impossible (without pacmanning). People also do other crazy adventures like sailing around Antarctica which makes a disk map basically impossible. These are things the average joe can do for themselves but I don't expect anyone to bother doing these things just to try proving distances under the assumption the world is flat... But feel free to try.

Other things that would need to match is the distance from east to west on Australia and the size of Greenland compared to Africa. On the Bing map, Greenland is too big and on the disk map Australia is too long. At least the people who think the disk map is the real map acknowledge that the current images are just globe projections, but then they still have that issue that people have circumnavigated Antarctica and distances match the globe. You'd think someone would have mentioned by now "Hey that took many times more days than it should have to get around Antarctica!" which already brings into question if any kind of disk map can work.

I'd probably start out by taking holiday time to find the distances across Greenland, across Australia, around the antarctic continent and then the distance between South America and Antarctica just to be sure I wasn't sailing around a random other island. It would be harder to get exact numbers by boat but you can still most certainly find out if it's a ring around the world or a much smaller chunk of land at the bottom of a globe. Are these big tasks? Yes. Are they impossible? No. Can any able bodied person do it? Yes. Will I do it? No, because I'm fairly confident the results will just match a globe and I don't want to waste my time. Any flat earth is free to try though literally no one is stopping them.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #144 on: July 28, 2019, 08:02:41 PM »
As has been explained before and shown in the Microsoft documentation, whether you're zoomed out or zoomed in on the Bing Map system, what you're seeing is still a Globe projection. It's all Mercator, all projection, all from and representing a globe earth in 2D. All using globe coordinates and distance measurements, all globe, all the time, whether you are interacting with it or just staring at it.

What does this have to do with the fact that the only way that I have found to accurately depict the earth of any shape is through something that is interactive with an interactive scale.

Because the title of the thread is 'How to make a FE map, step one.' Right or wrongly, Bing maps is based on a globe, whether zoomed in or out. So it's not a valid "step one" in making an accurate FE map because it is representative of a Globe earth and that defeats the entire point of the thread.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #145 on: July 29, 2019, 04:25:37 AM »
Because the title of the thread is 'How to make a FE map, step one.' Right or wrongly, Bing maps is based on a globe, whether zoomed in or out. So it's not a valid "step one" in making an accurate FE map because it is representative of a Globe earth and that defeats the entire point of the thread.

You didn't answer the question.


What does this have to do with the fact that the only way that I have found to accurately depict the earth of any shape is through something that is interactive with an interactive scale.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #146 on: July 29, 2019, 05:41:37 AM »
Because the title of the thread is 'How to make a FE map, step one.' Right or wrongly, Bing maps is based on a globe, whether zoomed in or out. So it's not a valid "step one" in making an accurate FE map because it is representative of a Globe earth and that defeats the entire point of the thread.

You didn't answer the question.

What does this have to do with the fact that the only way that I have found to accurately depict the earth of any shape is through something that is interactive with an interactive scale.

It's not my question to answer. How would I know why you have found something to be of your liking?

Fact of the matter, a globe, whether a physical desktop model or a virtual one on your screen, whether you spin it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 3D representation of a spheroid earth. A Bing map, whether printed out onto a piece of paper or as shown on your screen, whether you drag it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 2D representation of a spheroid earth.

If you think step one in creating a map of The Flat Earth has something to do with a Bing map, great. Then it's not even step one, it's job done. You can say that you have found, finally, where everyone else has failed, an accurate map of The Flat Earth.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #147 on: July 29, 2019, 05:09:22 PM »
Fact of the matter, a globe, whether a physical desktop model or a virtual one on your screen, whether you spin it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 3D representation of a spheroid earth. A Bing map, whether printed out onto a piece of paper or as shown on your screen, whether you drag it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 2D representation of a spheroid earth.

Good then we agree that, with advancements in technology, interactive maps are more accurate that static non interactive maps.  This means that an interactive map > non-interactive map.



If you think step one in creating a map of The Flat Earth has something to do with a Bing map, great. Then it's not even step one, it's job done. You can say that you have found, finally, where everyone else has failed, an accurate map of The Flat Earth.

No because Bing maps has a South pole and no real "center" of the disk. It was rejected by many people. The flat disk great ice wall model does not have a South pole. The model which is based off of Bing maps but not a globe projection

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #148 on: July 29, 2019, 08:50:33 PM »
Fact of the matter, a globe, whether a physical desktop model or a virtual one on your screen, whether you spin it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 3D representation of a spheroid earth. A Bing map, whether printed out onto a piece of paper or as shown on your screen, whether you drag it, get closer to it or zoom in on it, it is a 2D representation of a spheroid earth.

Good then we agree that, with advancements in technology, interactive maps are more accurate that static non interactive maps.  This means that an interactive map > non-interactive map.

I mentioned nothing regarding interactivity leading to accuracy. You missed the point, again, entirely.

If you think step one in creating a map of The Flat Earth has something to do with a Bing map, great. Then it's not even step one, it's job done. You can say that you have found, finally, where everyone else has failed, an accurate map of The Flat Earth.

No because Bing maps has a South pole and no real "center" of the disk. It was rejected by many people. The flat disk great ice wall model does not have a South pole. The model which is based off of Bing maps but not a globe projection

The flat disk great ice wall model without a South pole is spherical earth projection.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #149 on: July 30, 2019, 04:45:50 PM »
I mentioned nothing regarding interactivity leading to accuracy. You missed the point, again, entirely.

and I mentioned nothing about projections in mine. You missed the point, again, entirely.

The flat disk great ice wall model without a South pole is spherical earth projection.

Does that mean that it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #150 on: July 30, 2019, 05:17:41 PM »
I mentioned nothing regarding interactivity leading to accuracy. You missed the point, again, entirely.

and I mentioned nothing about projections in mine. You missed the point, again, entirely.

Huh? I won't even venture a guess as to what you're going on about.

The flat disk great ice wall model without a South pole is spherical earth projection.

Does that mean that it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model?

It depends. Whether you want to 'count' something is not for me to decide. But if someone wants to claim the AE North Pole center map showing Antarctica as an ice wall is an accurate working map of The Flat Earth, the irony is not lost that they are using a Globe projection to represent it.

If they want to use the AE North Pole center map showing Antarctica as an ice wall as a model, not an accurate map, of The Flat Earth, the irony is still not lost that they are using a Globe projection to represent it.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #151 on: July 30, 2019, 06:15:46 PM »
It depends. Whether you want to 'count' something is not for me to decide.




I'm not asking myself the question. I'm asking you the question. I feel like you already know that. Since you like to argue semantics I'll humor you and add two words to the previous post to clear up your confusion. I'll ask basically the same question many different ways in the hopes that you might the wording of one of them worthy of an answer.


The flat disk great ice wall model without a South pole is spherical earth projection.

Does that mean that you believe it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?

In case you don't like the wording of that question then please answer this question:

Does that mean that you think it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?


In case you don't like the wording of that question then please answer this question:

Does that mean that you understand it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?


In case you don't like the wording of that question then please answer this question:

Does that mean that you know it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?


In case you don't like the wording of that question then please answer this question:

Are you saying it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?

In case you don't like the wording of that question then please answer this question:

Are you under the impressions that it DOES NOT COUNT as a FE model because it is based on a spherical earth projection?

« Last Edit: July 30, 2019, 08:23:56 PM by iamcpc »

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #152 on: July 30, 2019, 08:49:36 PM »
A projection of the globe map is not the same as a flat earth map. They cannot be the same. it is the flat earthers claim that the globe map isn't accurate. if you're saying it is accurate then great, you're saying it's a globe.

So no, for the last time a globe map does not count as a 'flat earth map'. It's frustrating then you aren't seeing this. If using the bing map is the first step you'll probably find that the earth conforms to a globe shape, it'd be the first and last step and it's just be confirming the earth is a globe.

So step one. Take measurements in real life. I've said it before that since there is no trust in modern technology (you have to assume technology is lying to us if you think the world is flat) then you'll have to use more oldschool cartography techniques. I don't pretend to know how to do the job of a cartographer, it's certainly something on my to-do list to find out about (for my own knowledge) and it's certainly something you'd have to study.

You could also test the globe maps accuracy by using manual measuring tools like a measuring wheel. I've mentioned before that you can use a bicycle for this. You can go on some nice long bike rides and measure the distance manually and if it doesn't match up with google maps (assuming you've calibrated accurately) then dayum, you are gunna have the discovery of a lifetime on your hands. my longest bike ride was roughly 892 miles and google maps matched up pretty perfectly with my bikes mileage but that was from top to bottom in the UK which I don't think it disputed by flat earthers. You're going to want to test places like Australia.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 662
    • View Profile
Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« Reply #153 on: July 31, 2019, 04:25:29 PM »
So no, for the last time a globe map does not count as a 'flat earth map'. It's frustrating then you aren't seeing this. If using the bing map is the first step you'll probably find that the earth conforms to a globe shape, it'd be the first and last step and it's just be confirming the earth is a globe.

I was not asking you because I already knew what your thoughts on the matter were. I was asking Stack but, to this point, he has REFUSED to answer.

So step one. Take measurements in real life. I've said it before that since there is no trust in modern technology (you have to assume technology is lying to us if you think the world is flat) then you'll have to use more oldschool cartography techniques. I don't pretend to know how to do the job of a cartographer, it's certainly something on my to-do list to find out about (for my own knowledge) and it's certainly something you'd have to study.

So then step one would be to develop some sort of cartography global scale measurement system that a significant portion of the FE community could agree on.

You could also test the globe maps accuracy by using manual measuring tools like a measuring wheel. I've mentioned before that you can use a bicycle for this. You can go on some nice long bike rides and measure the distance manually and if it doesn't match up with google maps (assuming you've calibrated accurately) then dayum, you are gunna have the discovery of a lifetime on your hands. my longest bike ride was roughly 892 miles and google maps matched up pretty perfectly with my bikes mileage but that was from top to bottom in the UK which I don't think it disputed by flat earthers. You're going to want to test places like Australia.

Problem with this is that, base on my belief, the Earth is at least 60% water and you can't use a measuring wheel on an ocean. Also it's impossible to form a concesus on if the bike measuring method is accurate or not.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2019, 04:32:13 PM by iamcpc »