How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« on: April 12, 2016, 12:42:37 AM »
I should start off by saying the only reason I say 99.9% proof instead of 100% is because you should always allow some leeway for a factor that is completely unknown.

An overview of my idea is easily seen when you compare the relative size of Australia to Asia between the flat Earth and the spherical Earth maps.
There is an obvious discrepancy here. Australia is much larger (or at least wider) on the flat Earth map than it is on the spherical Earth.

The length of Australia is something that can be checked though.
There isn't one road going completely horizontally, or I suppose on a curve that is equidistant to the North Pole, going completely across Australia this can be roughly judged without even needing people from Australia to get out and measure it.
It's not something I've done but a brief glance at the road map of Australia the actual length can be estimated for confirming whether it is closer to the spherical or flat Earth.

The reason why Australia needs to be larger on the flat Earth map is to fit with what direction North is on each side of it's coast. That's something that can easily be checked and then the flat theory falls apart.

Quick check on google, width of Australia 3.1km, width of Asia 8.8km.

geckothegeek

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2016, 01:08:02 AM »
I should start off by saying the only reason I say 99.9% proof instead of 100% is because you should always allow some leeway for a factor that is completely unknown.

An overview of my idea is easily seen when you compare the relative size of Australia to Asia between the flat Earth and the spherical Earth maps.
There is an obvious discrepancy here. Australia is much larger (or at least wider) on the flat Earth map than it is on the spherical Earth.

The length of Australia is something that can be checked though.
There isn't one road going completely horizontally, or I suppose on a curve that is equidistant to the North Pole, going completely across Australia this can be roughly judged without even needing people from Australia to get out and measure it.
It's not something I've done but a brief glance at the road map of Australia the actual length can be estimated for confirming whether it is closer to the spherical or flat Earth.

The reason why Australia needs to be larger on the flat Earth map is to fit with what direction North is on each side of it's coast. That's something that can easily be checked and then the flat theory falls apart.

Quick check on google, width of Australia 3.1km, width of Asia 8.8km.

If you are referring to the size on "the flat earth map"........There is no "flat earth map."
The map the flat earthers usually "cite" as the flat earth map is simply The Unipolar Equidistant Azimuthal Projection of the globe. In this projection, distances and shapes south of the equator are greatly distorted. This is the problem on any projection. 
This has been de-bunked many times.The problem is the earth isn't a flat disc-it's a globe. Of course flat earth falls apart on many counts.

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2016, 01:22:12 AM »
Yeah you're right not all flat earthers use the same map of the world but the point I'm making is any map they choose to use should have the width of Australia at just over 3000km and then realistic NSEW (cardinal) directions comparing Australia to the rest of the world.

I'm 99.9% sure they can't do this unless they decide to use a spherical map.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2016, 05:18:06 AM »
Yeah you're right not all flat earthers use the same map of the world but the point I'm making is any map they choose to use should have the width of Australia at just over 3000km and then realistic NSEW (cardinal) directions comparing Australia to the rest of the world.

I'm 99.9% sure they can't do this unless they decide to use a spherical map.
Australia looked like this in 1855:
Google Earth thinks it looks like:
Gleason's Map (a North Polar Equidistant Azimuthal Projection) thinks it looks like this[1]:
I live in Australia and I know it does not look like that last map.


[1] This is unfair to Gleason, I don't believe that he ever thought his map would be used as a Flat Earth map. He knew it was just a projection of the Globe.

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2016, 02:37:10 AM »
Quick check on google, width of Australia 3.1km, width of Asia 8.8km.
So that is it?  Whatever google says is the truth. 

Have you ever driven across Australia? 
How long did it take you?  Which way did you go?  How many Kms did you clock? 
watch?v=xhcVJcINzn8

*

Offline BlueMoon

  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • NASA Defender
    • View Profile
Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2016, 03:10:36 AM »
Quick check on google, width of Australia 3.1km, width of Asia 8.8km.
So that is it?  Whatever google says is the truth. 

Have you ever driven across Australia? 
How long did it take you?  Which way did you go?  How many Kms did you clock?

It doesn't matter whether he's driven it himself.  It's enough that people are at liberty to drive across Australia as they please, and nobody has found any evidence that it's a different shape.  If there really was something to hide, they would have to physically keep people out of most of Australia, or else they would just be having faith that nobody will ever pay attention. 
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

geckothegeek

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2016, 04:48:23 AM »
Quick check on google, width of Australia 3.1km, width of Asia 8.8km.
So that is it?  Whatever google says is the truth. 

Have you ever driven across Australia? 
How long did it take you?  Which way did you go?  How many Kms did you clock?

It doesn't matter whether he's driven it himself.  It's enough that people are at liberty to drive across Australia as they please, and nobody has found any evidence that it's a different shape.  If there really was something to hide, they would have to physically keep people out of most of Australia, or else they would just be having faith that nobody will ever pay attention.

Australia has road maps. You can find the distances on them and check them to see if they agree with google maps.
Are all the maps of Australia not telling the truth about the size and shape of Australia ?
Besides this has nothing to do with the obvious distortion on the AEP.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2016, 04:57:19 AM by geckothegeek »

geckothegeek

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #7 on: April 14, 2016, 05:02:27 AM »
Yeah you're right not all flat earthers use the same map of the world but the point I'm making is any map they choose to use should have the width of Australia at just over 3000km and then realistic NSEW (cardinal) directions comparing Australia to the rest of the world.

I'm 99.9% sure they can't do this unless they decide to use a spherical map.
Australia looked like this in 1855:
Google Earth thinks it looks like:
Gleason's Map (a North Polar Equidistant Azimuthal Projection) thinks it looks like this[1]:
I live in Australia and I know it does not look like that last map.


[1] This is unfair to Gleason, I don't believe that he ever thought his map would be used as a Flat Earth map. He knew it was just a projection of the Globe.

Gleason's Map is something of a curiosity. He claims it is "The New Standard Map Of The World" and is "Correct." He also claims it is a projection but from
"J.S. Christopher " of "Modern College, Blackheath....". This is also curious. Did he purposely mis-spell "Morden" , which is the name of the College at Blackheath ?
Was there really a "J.S. Christopher" ? Of course the map is just a copy of the AEP, skewed a bit and with countries filled in and marked.

I can't find anything on "J.S. Christopher".  Was he supposed to be some expert in cartography ?

The only  information I have found on a Morden College in Blackheath is that it is sort of a retirement home for merchants, founded by John Morden in 1695
This Morden College is not an educational type place.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2016, 08:24:00 AM »
Gleason's Map is something of a curiosity. He claims it is "The New Standard Map Of The World" and is "Correct." He also claims it is a projection but from
"J.S. Christopher " of "Modern College, Blackheath....". This is also curious. Did he purposely mis-spell "Morden" , which is the name of the College at Blackheath ?
Was there really a "J.S. Christopher" ? Of course the map is just a copy of the AEP, skewed a bit and with countries filled in and marked.

I can't find anything on "J.S. Christopher".  Was he supposed to be some expert in cartography ?

The only  information I have found on a Morden College in Blackheath is that it is sort of a retirement home for merchants, founded by John Morden in 1695
This Morden College is not an educational type place.
Yes, but since TFES doesn't have any sort of accurate map and Gleason's has the same shape (as far as I can tell) as the TFES's "preferred map"  it is useful when sizes and distances are being estimated. The easiest way scale it to take the North Pole to Equator distance as 10,000 km - close enough!

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2016, 04:07:12 PM »
It doesn't matter whether he's driven it himself.  It's enough that people are at liberty to drive across Australia as they please, and nobody has found any evidence that it's a different shape. 
No.  It is NOT enough. 
However, if that is enough-for-shills, then it reveals the Shill Standard of Proof = popular perception.  Thanks for disclosing such! 

If there really was something to hide, they would have to physically keep people out of most of Australia, or else they would just be having faith that nobody will ever pay attention.
They?   
Who is they?? 
watch?v=xhcVJcINzn8

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2016, 06:01:33 PM »
It doesn't matter whether he's driven it himself.  It's enough that people are at liberty to drive across Australia as they please, and nobody has found any evidence that it's a different shape. 
No.  It is NOT enough. 
However, if that is enough-for-shills, then it reveals the Shill Standard of Proof = popular perception.  Thanks for disclosing such! 

Dude, this is the age of the internet. If there is widely available public data that the authorities claim to be true, but is easily proven to be false, it generally gets called out.

Heck, it generally gets called out even if it ISN'T easily proven to be false. Hence, the existence of this website.

If there really was something to hide, they would have to physically keep people out of most of Australia, or else they would just be having faith that nobody will ever pay attention.
They?   
Who is they??

Exactly. There is no "they", because there is no flat-earth conspiracy, because the earth is not flat...

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2016, 06:09:39 PM »
Dude, this is the age of the internet. If there is widely available public data that the authorities claim to be true, but is easily proven to be false, it generally gets called out.

Heck, it generally gets called out even if it ISN'T easily proven to be false. Hence, the existence of this website.

Exactly. There is no "they", because there is no flat-earth conspiracy, because the earth is not flat...

There are no bounds to human stupidity.

The level of apathy and ignorance generally exhibited by the majority of the populace has been expertly crafted and cultivated. Yes, by a they. An informed public is a dangerous public. Much easier to play to their fears and prejudices than to have a functioning education system.

Blue pill or red pill, its obviously your choice.

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #12 on: April 18, 2016, 06:20:32 PM »
Dude, this is the age of the internet. If there is widely available public data that the authorities claim to be true, but is easily proven to be false, it generally gets called out.

Heck, it generally gets called out even if it ISN'T easily proven to be false. Hence, the existence of this website.

Exactly. There is no "they", because there is no flat-earth conspiracy, because the earth is not flat...

There are no bounds to human stupidity.

The level of apathy and ignorance generally exhibited by the majority of the populace has been expertly crafted and cultivated. Yes, by a they. An informed public is a dangerous public. Much easier to play to their fears and prejudices than to have a functioning education system.

Blue pill or red pill, its obviously your choice.

This has nothing to do with human stupidity. Rather, it relies on the fact that the observational abilities of a group of people increases with the size of the group.

Yes, crowd sourcing an important decision is often a bad idea. The group's decision roughly depends on the average person's understanding of the subject matter.

However, you CAN generally rely on crowds to notice obvious discrepancies. It only takes ONE person (out of millions) to notice and report the discrepancy. If the discrepancy is something easily detectable for the average person, (like the reported distance on a public highway), and if you have millions of people within observational range of that discrepancy (Australia has millions of people), then there is a very good chance that that discrepancy will be noticed and reported by someone.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 06:24:07 PM by TotesNotReptilian »

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #13 on: April 18, 2016, 06:53:57 PM »
Dude, this is the age of the internet. If there is widely available public data that the authorities claim to be true, but is easily proven to be false, it generally gets called out.
Thank you for confirming shill standards. 





Message to honest and honorable true-earthers: 
Take note of the double-standards employed by liars to promote their "scientific" lies.   
They ask for ultra-PEER-reviewed references and they offer the lowest common denominator of PEER-review to support their lies. 
watch?v=xhcVJcINzn8

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #14 on: April 18, 2016, 08:07:50 PM »
Message to honest and honorable true-earthers: 
Take note of the double-standards employed by liars to promote their "scientific" lies.   
They ask for ultra-PEER-reviewed references and they offer the lowest common denominator of PEER-review to support their lies.

Technically, we have tons of peer-reviewed references concerning the shape of the earth. We are not making a new claim, you are.

Re: How big is Australia? 99.9% proof one way or the other
« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2016, 08:28:18 PM »
Dude, this is the age of the internet. If there is widely available public data that the authorities claim to be true, but is easily proven to be false, it generally gets called out.
Thank you for confirming shill standards. 

Whaaaat? Read my username. I'm totally not a shill for our reptilian overlords human authorities! Yeah... totally not.... um.......



Seriously though, I have never required peer-reviewed sources in any of my posts. I try to only make arguments that can easily be confirmed by the average person. I can't speak for everyone on the forum though...
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 08:38:25 PM by TotesNotReptilian »