*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #40 on: March 28, 2016, 11:24:48 PM »
I don't know what you don't understand. I have been telling people all along that the AEP is not to be used as any kind of accurate representation, and that the only thing to scale is the distances from the north pole south along longitude.

When have I said otherwise? When did I seem confused? You are quick to come with lame insults, but your entire argument as far as I've ever seen is "the earth is round because it is." Now before you just devolve into your shell and call me a flat earther as some kind of self defense mechanism, when have I ever indicated I believed the Earth was flat? All I ever said is based on the information we have from observable phenomena that nothing is readily apparent about the shape of the Earth. The fact is, if 99% of people weren't told it was a sphere they wouldn't deduce that on their own.

Now please tell me more about how you think you're dealing with someone who hasn't been to elementary school.
I know you were answering "geckothegeek", but I hope this gets my meaning across.

You claim "All I ever said is based on the information we have from observable phenomena that nothing is readily apparent about the shape of the Earth.", but I claim that is rubbish because the earth has been measured (by whom? Yes geodetic surveyors) and those measurements prove that the shape of the real earth will not fit on a plane surface.

The trouble is that every time we say that this flat earth map or that flat earth map cannot be correct TFES (or The Flat Earth Society - different!) says, "no, no that's not the right map!".

So what's the point of bothering about the earth's shape with TFES, no-one really seems to care - all they want is "An old chooks debating society". As soon is any real evidence shows up the thread gets ignored! (probably my fault - tl;dr - blame the old guy!).

I have made numerous posts like:
I have tried to shorten it a bit, but it is still long!
I made a post http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4499.msg88069#msg88069
where I stated that the earth we live on simply cannot be flat.

What I am doing here is essentially repeating the earlier post, with a little different wording.

But, what about the crucial question? Let's look at the accepted dimensions of the earth.
From the TFES Wiki we have:
Quote from: Flat Earth Wiki
From: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Ice_Wall
The figure of 24,900 miles is the diameter of the known world; the area which the light from the sun affects.
Presumably the distance from the north pole out to the equator can be taken as one quarter of this, 6,225 miles or 10,018 km.

I will use a rounded figure for the north pole to equator distance of 10,000 km, which is closer to the currently accepted value.

Then to get a figure for the equatorial circumference of the earth, we can look at the "definition" of the Nautical Mile:
Quote
A sea mile or nautical mile is, strictly, the length of a minute of arc measured along a meridian. It represents a minute of longitude only at the equator.
  Currently the Nm is defined as exactly 1,852 meters. 
So the circumference of the equator must be (1,852 m) x 60' x 360° = 40,003 km.

Again I will use a rounded figure for the equatorial circumference of 40,000 km.

But, on any flat earth map I have seen the equatorial circle circumference is simply the
circumference of a circle of radius 10,000 km, or 62,830 km.

I do not see any possible way of reconciling the quite accepted equatorial circumference of 40,000 km of the earth
with the flat earth equatorial circle circumference of 62,830 km.

What are your thoughts? Are my distances wrong?

It seems strange to me that so many flat earth supporters send post after post quibble about tiny problems they see in a satellite photo, or some feature of the globe, yet are simply quite unwilling to tackle (what to me are) glaring holes in their own model.
Part of this must be that so many of flat earth supporters simply do not understand the implications of what they claim to support.
The only reply that has ever made any sense has been "Evidence?", so I have a number of times provided evidence such as in:
A refutation of RE that RE-ers will accept, then simply ignored!
Also: Geodetic Surveying PROVES a round earth: Why are we wasting time debating?.

That map shown in that last post was registered in 1855, yet its measurements are in close agreement with modern GPS based figures!
As another check on the old map (or the GPS if you prefer) the distance from Steep Point, Western Australia (the westernmost point) to Cape Byron, NSW (Australia) is Steep Point to Cape Byron (the easternmost point) is
3985 km scaled from the 1855 map and 3994 km on the current Garmin map (based on WGS 84).
In my mind that is enough to show that these dastardly NASA folk haven't been faking our maps.

Essentially I am claiming that until someone can come up with a "Flat Map" that can fit these long established measurements, then just forget the idea of a Flat Earth!

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #41 on: March 28, 2016, 11:49:25 PM »
I don't know what you don't understand. I have been telling people all along that the AEP is not to be used as any kind of accurate representation, and that the only thing to scale is the distances from the north pole south along longitude.

YOU may not believe the earth is a flat disk, a globe, a square or a dodecahedron, but TFES claims:
Quote
Earth
The earth is the flat astronomical body where live numerous species of plants, animals and other beings. The North Pole is the center of the earth, and South Pole is a circunference around it.
The sun and the moon are both located circa 3,000 miles above earth's surface. They have a mutual orbit (similar to a binary system orbit), which produces day and night on earth.
The stars are small astronomical bodies located circa 3,100 miles above earth and 100 miles above sun and moon orbit.

The most widely accepted map model of a flat earth
Now to me, that looks like the AEP and while it might not be very accurate we are looking at discrepencies of 25,400 km on the AEP (Gleason's) to 11,400 km on the Globe (Google Earth).
You might not believe in the Flat Earth, but you must have some global map that you use - of to you sit at home and "meditate"!
So out with it, or just stop simply trying to tear down everything, with nothing to replace what you have discarded.

So, who cares about a bit of accuracy!

So, what about YOU giving us a map that will agree with what we actually see on the Real Earth - whatever its shape.
But, please remember there are certainly measurements that will not fit on a plane surface!

Offline Unsure101

  • *
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #42 on: March 29, 2016, 01:02:12 PM »
I don't know what you don't understand. I have been telling people all along that the AEP is not to be used as any kind of accurate representation, and that the only thing to scale is the distances from the north pole south along longitude.

YOU may not believe the earth is a flat disk, a globe, a square or a dodecahedron, but TFES claims:
Quote
Earth
The earth is the flat astronomical body where live numerous species of plants, animals and other beings. The North Pole is the center of the earth, and South Pole is a circunference around it.
The sun and the moon are both located circa 3,000 miles above earth's surface. They have a mutual orbit (similar to a binary system orbit), which produces day and night on earth.
The stars are small astronomical bodies located circa 3,100 miles above earth and 100 miles above sun and moon orbit.

The most widely accepted map model of a flat earth
Now to me, that looks like the AEP and while it might not be very accurate we are looking at discrepencies of 25,400 km on the AEP (Gleason's) to 11,400 km on the Globe (Google Earth).
You might not believe in the Flat Earth, but you must have some global map that you use - of to you sit at home and "meditate"!
So out with it, or just stop simply trying to tear down everything, with nothing to replace what you have discarded.

So, who cares about a bit of accuracy!

So, what about YOU giving us a map that will agree with what we actually see on the Real Earth - whatever its shape.
But, please remember there are certainly measurements that will not fit on a plane surface!
Pretty sure that this one fits all your requests:

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #43 on: March 29, 2016, 09:16:57 PM »
I don't know what you don't understand. I have been telling people all along that the AEP is not to be used as any kind of accurate representation, and that the only thing to scale is the distances from the north pole south along longitude.

YOU may not believe the earth is a flat disk, a globe, a square or a dodecahedron, but TFES claims:
Quote
Earth
The earth is the flat astronomical body where live numerous species of plants, animals and other beings. The North Pole is the center of the earth, and South Pole is a circunference around it.
The sun and the moon are both located circa 3,000 miles above earth's surface. They have a mutual orbit (similar to a binary system orbit), which produces day and night on earth.
The stars are small astronomical bodies located circa 3,100 miles above earth and 100 miles above sun and moon orbit.

The most widely accepted map model of a flat earth
Now to me, that looks like the AEP and while it might not be very accurate we are looking at discrepencies of 25,400 km on the AEP (Gleason's) to 11,400 km on the Globe (Google Earth).
You might not believe in the Flat Earth, but you must have some global map that you use - of to you sit at home and "meditate"!
So out with it, or just stop simply trying to tear down everything, with nothing to replace what you have discarded.

So, who cares about a bit of accuracy!

So, what about YOU giving us a map that will agree with what we actually see on the Real Earth - whatever its shape.
But, please remember there are certainly measurements that will not fit on a plane surface!
Pretty sure that this one fits all your requests:

Yes, I can't see any other object fitting the known measurements of the real earth than a GLOBE.
And as yet no Flat Earther, Square Earther or anyone else has suggested one either!

Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #44 on: March 29, 2016, 09:54:29 PM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.

*

Offline BlueMoon

  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • NASA Defender
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #45 on: March 29, 2016, 10:39:36 PM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.
To quote xkcd, "yes, you're very clever."  The important thing about globes is that you can rotate them to whatever part of the earth you want, and you will have an accurate representation of that portion of the earth.  Can you do that with an AEP map?  No, you cannot.  Especially in the southern hemisphere, as rabinoz will be quick to point out. 


Important note to TheTruthIsOnHere:  You'll probably get defensive and whine that you never said you thought the earth was flat.  I don't care.  Your profile picture shows a flat earth, and your username is TheTruthIsOnHere, referring to the FES website.  As far as I'm concerned, you may as well be a flat earther like the rest, and you will be treated as such. 
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #46 on: March 30, 2016, 12:12:30 AM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.
Hey, you buffoon!
Of course we know that is a picture half the globe!
The question was NOT to find a MAP, but to find some object that fits the measured dimensions we have of the real earth[1]. And the answer given was a representation of the globe. We know that fits - so if you have any objections to the globe[2] please
stop being so negative and add something to the debate, instead of ALWAYS trying to pull everything down.


[1] I'll soon be coming up with a lot more of these dimensions, so start racking you brains!
[2] You claim you are not pushing for the flat earth. You seem to be a flat NOTHING!

Offline Unsure101

  • *
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #47 on: March 30, 2016, 01:13:37 AM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.
Sorry, I tried to upload a 3D object, but I broke the Internets. This image is simply a 2D representation of an object that meets the specified requirements.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #48 on: March 30, 2016, 01:41:05 AM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.
Sorry, I tried to upload a 3D object, but I broke the Internets. This image is simply a 2D representation of an object that meets the specified requirements.
It's a bit funny that no-one can find any flat object that fits! Possibly:
(1) All the surveyor have been deceiving us about the dimensions of Australia etc, or there is the faint possibility that
(2) The earth is not flat!

geckothegeek

Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #49 on: March 30, 2016, 01:55:13 AM »
Hey you buffoons, that is not a map. That is an illustration of one side of a globe. Try to navigate with that thing and see how far you get.

Ships have Chart Rooms with Sectional Oceanic Charts which cover small areas to minimize the distortions in making projections from the globe for navigation.
They are readily available and of course are used for navigation.
Can  you show us a source for such charts made from a flat earth map - of the entire earth - and tell us who uses them ? (If the earth is flat  ? )

Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #50 on: March 30, 2016, 03:29:13 AM »
Last time I saw a map it looked flat to me. My Google maps app looks pretty flat to me, in fact they ignored curvature altogether when they made the Web Mercator map it uses.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 03:31:15 AM by TheTruthIsOnHere »

*

Offline BlueMoon

  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • NASA Defender
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #51 on: March 30, 2016, 04:17:57 AM »
Last time I saw a map it looked flat to me. My Google maps app looks pretty flat to me, in fact they ignored curvature altogether when they made the Web Mercator map it uses.
And look at the size of Greenland.  Are you saying that the earth is flat because its projections are flat?
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #52 on: March 30, 2016, 04:49:14 AM »
Last time I saw a map it looked flat to me. My Google maps app looks pretty flat to me, in fact they ignored curvature altogether when they made the Web Mercator map it uses.
What on earth are you talking about? ALL maps on paper or a computer screen ARE FLAT!
But they are all some projection of the Globe!

As you say, Google maps use Web Mercator, but I haven't yet been able to find out for sure what we see in Google Earth!
Clearly the intention is simply to show what we would see looking down from the "eye elevation", so I guess the only variable is our field of view.

geckothegeek

Re: 11 hr direct flight from Auckland to buenos aires
« Reply #53 on: April 08, 2016, 01:57:00 AM »
I don't know what you don't understand. I have been telling people all along that the AEP is not to be used as any kind of accurate representation, and that the only thing to scale is the distances from the north pole south along longitude.

YOU may not believe the earth is a flat disk, a globe, a square or a dodecahedron, but TFES claims:
Quote
Earth
The earth is the flat astronomical body where live numerous species of plants, animals and other beings. The North Pole is the center of the earth, and South Pole is a circunference around it.
The sun and the moon are both located circa 3,000 miles above earth's surface. They have a mutual orbit (similar to a binary system orbit), which produces day and night on earth.
The stars are small astronomical bodies located circa 3,100 miles above earth and 100 miles above sun and moon orbit.

The most widely accepted map model of a flat earth
Now to me, that looks like the AEP and while it might not be very accurate we are looking at discrepencies of 25,400 km on the AEP (Gleason's) to 11,400 km on the Globe (Google Earth).
You might not believe in the Flat Earth, but you must have some global map that you use - of to you sit at home and "meditate"!
So out with it, or just stop simply trying to tear down everything, with nothing to replace what you have discarded.

So, who cares about a bit of accuracy!

So, what about YOU giving us a map that will agree with what we actually see on the Real Earth - whatever its shape.
But, please remember there are certainly measurements that will not fit on a plane surface!

A few comments:

There do not seem to be any comments on where planets and other objects are located - only stars are mentioned.
A true flat earth map would have to show all the continents in their proper size and shape. Projections  of course fail as true flat earth maps.
Flat Earth needs to  come up with something better than the AEP if they want to  convince  anyone  in the matter of  cartography.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2016, 02:12:36 AM by geckothegeek »