*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #160 on: August 15, 2017, 05:06:05 PM »
That post was already addressed. Here was my reply:

If any of those navigational systems use Latitude and Longitude then they are using a Round Earth coordinate system. It is difficult to imagine that Longitude and latitude is not used in any navigational system.

The only reply from the poster was a statement that Latitude and Longitude is correct. No evidence was provided for this statement. The only evidence in this thread are my sources showing that GPS provides incorrect distances. No sources have been provided show that any Round Earth navigational system provides correct distances. You and Frank continually refuse to provide evidence of such. There is nothing further to discuss on this matter.


There has been evidence posted as to the accuracy of GPS, both links and anecdotal (that you seem to approve and use yourself).  This link is all that needs to be said about it.  These guys built it, maintain it and document it.

Quote
For example, GPS-enabled smartphones are typically accurate to within a 4.9 m (16 ft.) radius under open sky (VIEW SOURCE AT ION.ORG). However, their accuracy worsens near buildings, bridges, and trees.

High-end users boost GPS accuracy with dual-frequency receivers and/or augmentation systems. These can enable real-time positioning within a few centimeters, and long-term measurements at the millimeter level.


http://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

I don't have to go to the gym, I get all my exercise jumping to conclusions.-sandokhan

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6402
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #161 on: August 15, 2017, 05:09:19 PM »
That post was already addressed. Here was my reply:

If any of those navigational systems use Latitude and Longitude then they are using a Round Earth coordinate system. It is difficult to imagine that Longitude and latitude is not used in any navigational system.

The only reply from the poster was a statement that Latitude and Longitude is correct. No evidence was provided for this statement. The only evidence in this thread are my sources showing that GPS provides incorrect distances. No sources have been provided show that any Round Earth navigational system provides correct distances. You and Frank continually refuse to provide evidence of such. There is nothing further to discuss on this matter.


There has been evidence posted as to the accuracy of GPS, both links and anecdotal (that you seem to approve and use yourself).  This link is all that needs to be said about it.  These guys built it, maintain it and document it.

Quote
For example, GPS-enabled smartphones are typically accurate to within a 4.9 m (16 ft.) radius under open sky (VIEW SOURCE AT ION.ORG). However, their accuracy worsens near buildings, bridges, and trees.

High-end users boost GPS accuracy with dual-frequency receivers and/or augmentation systems. These can enable real-time positioning within a few centimeters, and long-term measurements at the millimeter level.


http://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

That is about the accuracy of finding your own coordinates. It says nothing about the accuracy of the distances between the coordinates. Once you have your own coordinates, the distance between other coordinate points is in the software, and should not be in error, since the distances between the Round Earth longitudes and latitudes is supposedly a matter which is already known.

The fact that there are distance discrepancies, and the fact that the discrepancy grows with increased distance plotted, shows that GPS is not accurate.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2017, 05:12:06 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #162 on: August 15, 2017, 05:18:13 PM »
That post was already addressed. Here was my reply:

If any of those navigational systems use Latitude and Longitude then they are using a Round Earth coordinate system. It is difficult to imagine that Longitude and latitude is not used in any navigational system.

The only reply from the poster was a statement that Latitude and Longitude is correct. No evidence was provided for this statement. The only evidence in this thread are my sources showing that GPS provides incorrect distances. No sources have been provided show that any Round Earth navigational system provides correct distances. You and Frank continually refuse to provide evidence of such. There is nothing further to discuss on this matter.


There has been evidence posted as to the accuracy of GPS, both links and anecdotal (that you seem to approve and use yourself).  This link is all that needs to be said about it.  These guys built it, maintain it and document it.

Quote
For example, GPS-enabled smartphones are typically accurate to within a 4.9 m (16 ft.) radius under open sky (VIEW SOURCE AT ION.ORG). However, their accuracy worsens near buildings, bridges, and trees.

High-end users boost GPS accuracy with dual-frequency receivers and/or augmentation systems. These can enable real-time positioning within a few centimeters, and long-term measurements at the millimeter level.


http://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

That is about the accuracy of finding your own coordinates. It says nothing about the accuracy of the distances between the coordinates. Once you have your own coordinates, the distance between other coordinate points is in the software, and should not be in error, since the distances between the Round Earth longitudes and latitudes is supposedly a matter which is already known.

The fact that there are distance discrepancies, and the fact that the discrepancy grows with increased distance, shows that GPS is not accurate.

Correct, that is what maps are for.  They have been in use for a while now.  Oddly enough GPS's use maps as part of their operation.  One can drive 1, 10, 50, 1000 miles and be well within an acceptable margin of error.  I drove to Fayetteville AR, via Tulsa OK a few weeks ago and hit my GPS ETA in Tulsa within a minute in 504 miles door to door.  Not too shabby.


I don't have to go to the gym, I get all my exercise jumping to conclusions.-sandokhan

geckothegeek

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #163 on: August 15, 2017, 05:48:24 PM »
I use my GPS on local trips.
For example, when I am driving across the roads on DFW Airport, when I reach the intersection of Airfield Drive and Mid-Cities Blvd., the map on the GPS shows this and "bongs" when I reach the intersection.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #164 on: August 15, 2017, 06:07:09 PM »
That post was already addressed. Here was my reply:

If any of those navigational systems use Latitude and Longitude then they are using a Round Earth coordinate system. It is difficult to imagine that Longitude and latitude is not used in any navigational system.

The only reply from the poster was a statement that Latitude and Longitude is correct. No evidence was provided for this statement. The only evidence in this thread are my sources showing that GPS provides incorrect distances. No sources have been provided show that any Round Earth navigational system provides correct distances. You and Frank continually refuse to provide evidence of such. There is nothing further to discuss on this matter.


There has been evidence posted as to the accuracy of GPS, both links and anecdotal (that you seem to approve and use yourself).  This link is all that needs to be said about it.  These guys built it, maintain it and document it.

Quote
For example, GPS-enabled smartphones are typically accurate to within a 4.9 m (16 ft.) radius under open sky (VIEW SOURCE AT ION.ORG). However, their accuracy worsens near buildings, bridges, and trees.

High-end users boost GPS accuracy with dual-frequency receivers and/or augmentation systems. These can enable real-time positioning within a few centimeters, and long-term measurements at the millimeter level.


http://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

That is about the accuracy of finding your own coordinates. It says nothing about the accuracy of the distances between the coordinates. Once you have your own coordinates, the distance between other coordinate points is in the software, and should not be in error, since the distances between the Round Earth longitudes and latitudes is supposedly a matter which is already known.

The fact that there are distance discrepancies, and the fact that the discrepancy grows with increased distance plotted, shows that GPS is not accurate.
Show me people having discrepancies with another source and their GPS when plotting a course. Those distances are accurate. The distances people are having issues with are the ones it reports after a walk, and showing an incorrect walked distance. That's a whole other ball game. The GPS doesn't just measure the distance from point A to point B, and give you that for how far you walked. It's constantly making calculations according to where it sees you now, and where you were at the last update. Since a GPS has a margin of error on where you are, it has a margin of error in distance traveled using these calculations. Those errors are larger in consumer grade devices. The site he linked even specifically calls out that distance traveled is accurate to the millimeter on the higher grade devices that have better location accuracy. The margin of error is also why the discrepancies become bigger in number the farther you travel. In all, higher end/grade devices are more than capable of providing accurate, reliable distance data according to everything that's been linked in this thread that talks about it.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #165 on: August 15, 2017, 06:10:13 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #166 on: August 15, 2017, 06:35:09 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.
I don't have to go to the gym, I get all my exercise jumping to conclusions.-sandokhan

geckothegeek

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #167 on: August 15, 2017, 06:53:59 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.

I think the debate should just be on "flat earth" and not a debate on "flat earth-vs.-round earth."

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #168 on: August 15, 2017, 06:58:48 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.

I think the debate should just be on "flat earth" and not a debate on "flat earth-vs.-round earth."
There is only one earth to discuss the shape of.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #169 on: August 15, 2017, 08:57:22 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.

I think the debate should just be on "flat earth" and not a debate on "flat earth-vs.-round earth."


Very good point
I don't have to go to the gym, I get all my exercise jumping to conclusions.-sandokhan

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6402
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #170 on: August 15, 2017, 11:22:38 PM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.

I think the debate should just be on "flat earth" and not a debate on "flat earth-vs.-round earth."

Then stop bringing up things that rely on the Round Earth model being accurate or true, because we are obviously not going to accept the accuracy of the distances between points on a Round Earth coordinate system unless those distances are demonstrated to be accurate.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #171 on: August 16, 2017, 12:02:08 AM »
TB is, maybe on purpose, confusing GPS which is an accurate location system with applications that use the location data.  There is no doubt about the accuracy and repeatibility of GPS data.  Those in the US will be familiar with its original purpose.

What I hoped for here is an honest debate.  Trying to derail a debate with talking points is too much like politics, not science.

I think the debate should just be on "flat earth" and not a debate on "flat earth-vs.-round earth."

Then stop bringing up things that rely on the Round Earth model being accurate or true, because we are obviously not going to accept the accuracy of the distances between points on a Round Earth coordinate system unless those distances are demonstrated to be accurate.
Which was done at the start of the thread, and you've been looking for how to deny that ever since, taking us frequently off track.

We showed you how the speed of an airplane is known, and that with that and flight times we can deduce the distance traveled. Then showing how those distances can't work on a flat Earth.

You took issue with how we know the speed of an airplane. 3DGeek explained how we know it's speed through rigorous math, science and testing before the plane ever leaves the ground. As well how a plane can get it's speed without measuring against the ground in any way.

You latched onto the GPS explanation for how those can't be accurate because of all the people posting online that they aren't accurate for their walks. We've shown you that there's a difference between consumer grade GPS, and the high end ones that are accurate with distances to millimeters.

You continue to say we can't trust them because of all these reports of inaccurate measurements. Claiming you don't see the parts that reference the accuracy of higher end models, and can't seem to understand how position error can result in distance error when tracking a person walking.

Then simply revert to saying we can't trust anything based on a RE coordinate grid, because it's based on a RE coordinate grid. Ignoring the fact it works, ignoring the testimony of people in the airplane industry who say their instruments couldn't work if the Earth was flat and the software was supposing a round Earth, and ignoring most offers and requests to give a method of confirming distances that you would accept.

For a supposed expert and very vocal proponent of FE, you certainly show a surprising lack of knowledge about either FE or the workings of RE. I suppose that can explain why you follow it so vehemently. You don't appear to understand how anything works in either model beyond the most basic concepts.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6402
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #172 on: August 16, 2017, 01:00:25 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #173 on: August 16, 2017, 01:39:50 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.
You have no evidence that the WGS-84 shape of the earth is incorrect.  Still waiting for details of what equipment you need.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #174 on: August 16, 2017, 01:48:07 AM »
Tom Bishop.  You claim that we cannot know the speed of an aircraft.  There are about 1000 radar stations in North America that disagree.  No GPS needed.  Radar is so reliable on tracking speed that police officers use it all the time to catch speeders.  Stop fixating on GPS and get to the point.

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #175 on: August 16, 2017, 01:59:41 AM »
although you yourself have not witnessed it

This is incorrect.

Whoa!  Tom Bishop is an astronaut!  Perhaps we should take his word on it....

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #176 on: August 16, 2017, 02:04:34 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.

So you have no intention of having an honest debate?  GPS is proven to be accurate and you know it. 
I don't have to go to the gym, I get all my exercise jumping to conclusions.-sandokhan

geckothegeek

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #177 on: August 16, 2017, 02:09:53 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.

So you have no intention of having an honest debate?  GPS is proven to be accurate and you know it.

Flight data is also proven to be accurate and you should know that too.
In particular the distance from New York to Paris is known and proven to be accurate. (3625 Miles)

I have been retired since 1999 and technology has probably progressed since then.
But at that time the radar displays in a typical FAA Air Route Traffic Control Center showed the speed of aircraft from computers in the aircraft which sent that information back to the ARTCC's. So we definitely know the speed of aircraft.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2017, 02:23:27 AM by geckothegeek »

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #178 on: August 16, 2017, 02:19:50 AM »
Many of us seem completely willing to be drawn off topic into a debate on the easy pickings.  There are several good reasons besides GPS that allow us to know the speed of an aircraft.  Tom seems to be really good at deflecting without providing any good solutions.  His only answer seems to be "how do you know?"

Re: Using airline flight data.
« Reply #179 on: August 16, 2017, 02:37:20 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.
If you do not understand why the proofs in this thread are proofs, then perhaps you should be asking for them to be explained instead of simply saying they are fake over and over.

No wait. Better option. If 3DGeeks information from working in the industry is incorrect, and planes are in fact traveling at a rate other than they are designed to fly. Prove it. Show us your evidence that a plane flies faster or slower than multiple different instruments show us it does. Than it's designers created it to. Than science says it does. Because that's what your left with here Tom. Denying science. In which case there is no debate to be found here and your posts are indeed the waste of time to be listened to. I already know any information you present on the dual pole model can't be trusted, seeing as you cannot answer the simplest of questions on it. Should I just extend that to everything you say and presume you to be the greatest troll for FE on this forum?

Answer one simple question. What method would you deem allowable for determining distances? If you cannot answer that, then we are indeed wasting our time here, because you cannot concede a single point made in this thread without conceding them all and giving a flat Earth zero possibility to exist based on distances alone. This is the corner you've painted yourself into. You've decried a single piece of each bit of evidence going deeper and deeper into the hole. Surrendering one piece means they're all correct. So let's have it. What is an accurate, allowable method for us to measure a distance?