[Mr. Potatohead]

Hey Flat Earthers, just wondering, I live in Australia. When travelling from Sydney to Adelaide, it only took slightly under 1500 km to get there. However, if your projection of the world is true, it should have been thousands of kilometres longer. Also, when flying from Australia to Argentina, you fly over Antarctica. However, there are no ice walls to be seen, except for glaciers. Also, if you are flying over Antarctica to get to Argentina, it should take many tens of thousands of kilometres and many days to get there according to your model, when you only quickly pass over the frozen continent and arrive at Argentina the next day. Why would flights travel in a massive circle around the edge of the flat world when they could simply pass over the north pole in a much more direct route, if your projection is true? Wouldn't it cost far more in fueling costs for the plane to travel in a massive circle around the world than simply over the curved surface of the world? Why would airliner companies be willing to spend so much more money on flights such as this than to show that the world is flat? Please answer, and please don't use any pointless videos or false definitions to explain it.

[Ratboy]

Potatohead,
I am glad you posted this.  I have often stated here that if we ignore that people might actually live south of the equator everything could work out fine.  When you watch the sun in the summer does it rise in the North east and set in the north west? 
Someone here claimed airplanes do not fly over Antarctica which proves the ice wall exists. So just to confirm, you have seen the continent and it is not 70,000 miles long in the form of a ring?

[Mr. Potatohead]

Potatohead,
I am glad you posted this.  I have often stated here that if we ignore that people might actually live south of the equator everything could work out fine.  When you watch the sun in the summer does it rise in the North east and set in the north west? 
Someone here claimed airplanes do not fly over Antarctica which proves the ice wall exists. So just to confirm, you have seen the continent and it is not 70,000 miles long in the form of a ring?

Yes, the Sun does rise in the north east and set in the north west, and many things here in Australia face north to catch sunlight. Personally I have not travelled to Argentina, but multiple close family members have and talked about seeing the shores of Antarctica. They didn't see any ice walls, and it wasn't 113000 km long in the shape of a ring either. Below is a map of flights from Adelaide and Sydney to Buenos Aires. I'm interested to see if any flat earthers will reply to this.

[tylerfoor]

Ratboy,

Just because airplanes do not fly over Antartica does not prove that the Ice wall exists. For there to be proof, there needs tangible, documented evidence for the existence of the ice wall OR there needs to be testable theories and falsifiable hypotheses that prove the validity of the Ice wall. You cannot say something exists because there is no evidence to contradict this. For example, no one can prove Santa Claus is real because no one has seen him, therefore he exists. This is obviously nonsense.

[Ratboy]

Ratboy,

Just because airplanes do not fly over Antartica does not prove that the Ice wall exists. For there to be proof, there needs tangible, documented evidence for the existence of the ice wall OR there needs to be testable theories and falsifiable hypotheses that prove the validity of the Ice wall. You cannot say something exists because there is no evidence to contradict this. For example, no one can prove Santa Claus is real because no one has seen him, therefore he exists. This is obviously nonsense.

I am not sure why I am being lectured on this point.  I talked to a guy I know that has been to Antarctica and he did find a shack with some crackers someone left.  The cold kept the crackers in good enough condition that he ate some (but he was not sure how long the crackers had been there) and did not die.  So he saw crackers so I will say that there were crackers there at least at one time.  I saw pictures of him taken there, and I do not think he was a member of some conspiracy and based on his middle class living, I doubt he was making much off of bribe money to keep quiet.  He did not mention seeing any ice walls, nor any mention of the continent being a giant ring around the known part of the Earth.  I am not claiming to say this proves the walls exist, just to be clear.

[Mr. Potatohead]

So, if Antarctica is not a ring, where does that leave us? Well, if Antarctica is not a ring, then there are two possible explanations: 1. that Antarctica is actually in the centre of the map, and the north pole is a ring on the edge of the world, but there are many, many things wrong with this, or 2. that the world is round, which sorts out the whole issue and disappoints the conspiracy theorists. If Antarctica is a ring, then why is every person to ever have seen it suddenly part of a conspiracy, and why is distance (like I asked in the original post) so different to what you say it should be in the southern hemisphere? Flat earthers, please explain how this is possible, and how distance, travel and flight paths can work on a flat earth.

[Ratboy]

I have often stated here that if Rowbotham had lived in Sydney, the south pole would have been the center of the universe.  It is simply a matter of wanting things to work out for yourself and to ignore that other peoples exist or at least that they do not matter.  Why not let the southern folk be the center?

[Pete Svarrior]

So, if Antarctica is not a ring, where does that leave us?

You provided no reasoning to conclude this. Your friend claims to have seen a very small subsection of the ice wall, and "other than glaciers" (i.e. literally what makes up the ice wall) they couldn't see it.

Why, yes, of course. The other day I fell off the ladder, and other than perceiving a downward acceleration of ~9.8ms^-2 relative to the Earth, I could not perceive any gravity. Given that gravity no longer exists, where does that leave us?

[Northman77]

So, if Antarctica is not a ring, where does that leave us?

You provided no reasoning to conclude this. Your friend claims to have seen a very small subsection of the ice wall, and "other than glaciers" (i.e. literally what makes up the ice wall) they couldn't see it.

Why, yes, of course. The other day I fell off the ladder, and other than perceiving a downward acceleration of ~9.8ms^-2 relative to the Earth, I could not perceive any gravity. Given that gravity no longer exists, where does that leave us?

Well Pete, Antartica has been crossed on ski, snowmobiles, by planes and circumnavigated by ships. By now there is actually quite a few people who has done it. Still no reports of an ice wall surrounding the earth. Please read answer the other post in Q & A.

[Mr. Potatohead]

So, if Antarctica is not a ring, where does that leave us?

You provided no reasoning to conclude this. Your friend claims to have seen a very small subsection of the ice wall, and "other than glaciers" (i.e. literally what makes up the ice wall) they couldn't see it.

Why, yes, of course. The other day I fell off the ladder, and other than perceiving a downward acceleration of ~9.8ms^-2 relative to the Earth, I could not perceive any gravity. Given that gravity no longer exists, where does that leave us?

Pete Svarrior, several things. Firstly, it was close family that saw Antarctica from the plane. Secondly, they mostly saw flat icy wasteland, nothing like what an ice wall would be. Thirdly, I didn't conclude that Antarctica isn't a ring, but instead simply put the question from the perspective that it isn't a ring. If you would care to read the entire post, you would see that I later addressed Antarctica as a ring, asking why every person who has ever seen it, including my close family is part of a massive conspiracy. And finally, what you are stating has little to no relevance to the original question, about flight paths over Antarctica and why distance in the Southern Hemisphere is so different to what it should be according to your model.

[totallackey]

So, if Antarctica is not a ring, where does that leave us?

You provided no reasoning to conclude this. Your friend claims to have seen a very small subsection of the ice wall, and "other than glaciers" (i.e. literally what makes up the ice wall) they couldn't see it.

Why, yes, of course. The other day I fell off the ladder, and other than perceiving a downward acceleration of ~9.8ms^-2 relative to the Earth, I could not perceive any gravity. Given that gravity no longer exists, where does that leave us?

Pete Svarrior, several things. Firstly, it was close family that saw Antarctica from the plane. Secondly, they mostly saw flat icy wasteland, nothing like what an ice wall would be. Thirdly, I didn't conclude that Antarctica isn't a ring, but instead simply put the question from the perspective that it isn't a ring. If you would care to read the entire post, you would see that I later addressed Antarctica as a ring, asking why every person who has ever seen it, including my close family is part of a massive conspiracy. And finally, what you are stating has little to no relevance to the original question, about flight paths over Antarctica and why distance in the Southern Hemisphere is so different to what it should be according to your model.

Your close family lied to you and you are perpetuating that lie here on a forum.

There are no commercial flights that take place within the Antarctic Circle.

There are no commercial flights that fly within a few thousand miles of the Ice Wall.

[AATW]

Your close family lied to you and you are peretuating that lie here on a orum.

There are no commercial flights that take place within the Antarctic Circle.

There are no commercial flights that fly within a few thousand miles of the Ice Wall.

Dude.
You can literally go there. To the actual South Pole. It's very expensive, because it's niche, to say the least, but there are companies who will take you there.

https://www.polar-quest.com/trips/antarctica/fly-to-the-south-pole

Shouting "fake" and "lies" at everything which doesn't match your world view is not being a skeptic, it's just denial.

[Ratboy]

Planes like to fly where they know they can land in an emergency.  It is true that more land mass on earth is north of the equator than south.  Commercial aircraft are there to make a profit, and very few people want to fly between places that puts the flight path over Antarctica. Book a flight anywhere and see how hard it is to get direct flights anywhere.  Likewise, airlines fly the busiest routes.  This is the conspiracy of economics.  There are no direct flights between Shreveport Alabama and Liverpool, but it is not because there is something along the way the illuminati do not want people to see.

[Tumeni]

Planes like to fly where they know they can land in an emergency.

There are also different flight rules for twin-engine planes as opposed to quadruple-engined.

Twin-engined are obliged to stay closer to land than quad, as quad are better equipped to handle one or two engine failures over large bodies of water.

[Pete Svarrior]

Pete Svarrior, several things. Firstly, it was close family that saw Antarctica from the plane.

I don't care what you call this unidentified third party.

Secondly, they mostly saw flat icy wasteland, nothing like what an ice wall would be.

Okay, so they also saw parts of Antarctica that clearly weren't parts of the ice wall.

Thirdly, I didn't conclude that Antarctica isn't a ring, but instead simply put the question from the perspective that it isn't a ring.

Yes, if you look at an unrepresentatively small sample of something, you're likely to arrive at funny conclusions.

If you would care to read the entire post, you would see that I later addressed Antarctica as a ring, asking why every person who has ever seen it, including my close family is part of a massive conspiracy.

No they're just suspiciously quick to jump to conclusions based on blatantly insufficient observations.

[AATW]

Pete, you understand that Antarctica has been traversed many times now.
A circumnavigation of the globe has been done via both poles.
And there is literally a research station at the south pole which you can go to if you have the money.

[Pete Svarrior]

Pete, you understand that Antarctica has been traversed many times now.
A circumnavigation of the globe has been done via both poles.

Those are some nice opinions you have there.

[Westprog]

Pete, you understand that Antarctica has been traversed many times now.
A circumnavigation of the globe has been done via both poles.

Those are some nice opinions you have there.

This is why approaching this from the perspective of trying to persuade is a lost cause. There's no possible way to produce any evidence that would convince a true believer. Circumnavigate Antarctica and that will be just proof of the ice wall. Evidence is evaluated solely on the basis that if it seems* to support FE it's sound, otherwise it's flawed.

In order to get to the point of believing FE, you have to ignore so much that it becomes very easy to ignore everything else.

[inquisitive]

Pete, you understand that Antarctica has been traversed many times now.
A circumnavigation of the globe has been done via both poles.

Those are some nice opinions you have there.

What observations and measurements have you made?

[mattbrown]

Yes, if you look at an unrepresentatively small sample of something, you're likely to arrive at funny conclusions.

This quote is so true, ironically, like when someone brings up the flatness of Kansas as evidence of a FE, or when they can't see the curvature of the planet from 30,000 feet up.