[pinecone]

I'm going to trace two flight itineraries around the earth, one northern, one southern.  Travelocity gives us:

Tokyo, Japan to San Francisco, US: 9 hours
San Francisco, US to New York, US: 5.5 hours
New York, US to London, England: 7 hours
London, England to Tokyo, Japan: 11.5 hours

Total of 33 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the northern latitudes.

Johannesburg, South Africa to Sydney, Australia: 12 hours
Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile: 12.5 hours
Santiago, Chile to Sao Paulo, Brazil: 4 hours
Sao Paulo, Brazil to Johannesburg, South Africa: 8.5 hours

Total of 37 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the southern latitudes.


According to all flat earth models I've seen, South America, South Africa, and/or Australia should be the furthest away from each other.  It should be at least twice as far to visit them as the northern route.  How do you account for jets' ability to fly faster at southern latitudes?

[Tontogary]

There is a flaw with the argument, as most of those routes will be great circles, and some of the more northern ones will be over the artic, just as some of the southern routes will be over the Antarctic (which according to FE does not exist, or possibly might exist, or does exist, depends on which FE model you choose.

However as the GC is different on the flat earth, it is more of a parallel than GC.

Given the distances and flight times, knowing a commercial airlines flies around 500Knots, the one in the Southern Hemisphere would have to be travelling past the speed of sound, something no commercial airliner is built to do presently.

[TomInAustin]

I'm going to trace two flight itineraries around the earth, one northern, one southern.  Travelocity gives us:

Tokyo, Japan to San Francisco, US: 9 hours
San Francisco, US to New York, US: 5.5 hours
New York, US to London, England: 7 hours
London, England to Tokyo, Japan: 11.5 hours

Total of 33 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the northern latitudes.

Johannesburg, South Africa to Sydney, Australia: 12 hours
Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile: 12.5 hours
Santiago, Chile to Sao Paulo, Brazil: 4 hours
Sao Paulo, Brazil to Johannesburg, South Africa: 8.5 hours

Total of 37 hours to circumnavigate the earth in the southern latitudes.


According to all flat earth models I've seen, South America, South Africa, and/or Australia should be the furthest away from each other.  It should be at least twice as far to visit them as the northern route.  How do you account for jets' ability to fly faster at southern latitudes?

This is the most bulletproof argument for a globe.   There is no way you can arrange the continents on a plane that allows for travel times/distances of flights that happen every day.   There is no dispute other than silly statements like "no one knows how far it is from New York to Paris",  or "these are fake flights".   

[stanlee]

i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?

[Tontogary]

i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?

Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.

[TomInAustin]

i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?

Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.

Indeed that is the best evidence and can't be disputed.

[stanlee]

i thought the argument was that you cant get flights around the southern hemispere, but they seem to exist.
anyone taken such a flight (intercontinental)?

Not a flight, but i have sailed them on the oceans, same thing really. I have empirical evidence that the posted distances are reasonably accurate, i have seen, i have observed, and recorded in the ships log books the distances sailed and the speeds that we were making, time taken etc. This is the empirical evidence Charlatan Rowbotham is suggesting that trumps other evidence.

so where have you sailed?

[Tontogary]

On different ships;
Luanda to Recife
Cape Town to Singapore
Durban to Perth
Christchurch to Cape Horn
Lots Angeles to tokyo
Shetland to Houston
Bahia Blanca (Argentina) to cape town
Cape Town to Recife
Cape Town to Cape Horn
Those are some of the longer east west routes i have sailed, plus many more north south, but they really should not have any impact on a RE or FE, as so far i dont see any objections to 1 minute of lattitude equalling 1 mile (nautical mile)

I will have to dig around for actual distances covered on those routes as compared to tabulated distances if needed.

[stanlee]

you got me at Christchurch to Cape Horn

[Tontogary]

 

you got me at Christchurch to Cape Horn

It was unusual!

[stanlee]

oh, you mean it took an unusually long time?
careful now.

[Tontogary]

Not unusual in the amount of time, more it was not a common route.

We left Argentina, bound for New Zealand, going round the cape. Not a route travelled by my company’s ships too often.

[stanlee]

well this guy is obviously an illuminari.
anyone else made any of these types of journeys?
come on, guys. anybody wud think flat earth forum dudes had never left their parents basements. speak up.

[Tom Bishop]

There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.

We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.

[Macarios]

There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.

We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.

Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.

There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.

[Tom Bishop]

There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.

We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.

Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.

There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.

There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.

There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.

Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.

We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.

[pinecone]

There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.

We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.

Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.

There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.

There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.

There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.

Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.

We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.

Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.

The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model.  I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle.  I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have. 

As far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing.  I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason.  Also, the majority of these routes are over water.  There would be no place to refuel.  As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/

Thanks.

[inquisitive]

There is no flat earth map. Although the map you seen is the commonly used one, that map given is mainly for illustrative purposes. There was not any work that was put into creating it. There is a lack of manpower to research this important topic.

We rely on our users to perform research; but unfortunately it appears that most people here just want to complain about the current model, which they perceive as set in stone, rather than participate to further the research.

Ofcourse there isn't.
If the Earth was flat it would be easy to just scale down flat surface to flat paper.

There are direct measurements, some of them even presented on this forum, but they can't fit on flat, so they were swept under the carpet.

There are many possibilities. There are single-pole and two-pole Flat Earth models with an infinite number of continental configurations.

There are a few problems keeping us from devising a map. As an example; flight routes don't exist between all possible airports, or in all directions around the earth without regard to fuel efficiency.

Also, recent investigations have shown that there has been some imprecision with the word "nonstop." The term "nonstop" in the travel industry does not count fuel stops. Only the stops which pick people up or drop people off are counted. As an example, a bus route that stopped at 29 stops to transfer people would be advertised as "29 stops," even if the bus driver stopped for fuel at some point along the way.

We will require your participation in such discussions to see progress. Unfortunately there is a lack of participation on this forum.

There are plenty of measurements available for you to start determining the shape of the earth. Maybe just 10 would give you a good start.

What is your problem with the WGS-84 model?

[Tom Bishop]

Thanks to taking the time to discuss this.

The intention of the exercise is to suggest that the map is "pinched" at the top, but equally "pinched" at the bottom, seemingly forcing us into a none planar model.  I suppose I could add a third itinerary to show that it also bulges in the middle.  I am in earnest here trying to explain the flight data that we do have.

There is nothing to explain. There is no Flat Earth map. What you are combating is a map used for visualization purposes only. We don't know if there are one or two poles; or the nature of those continents.

What you have provided may be a basis to create some kind of map, but it is not a contradiction against the Flat Earth map, since it doesn't exist.

As far as fueling stops I have never experienced such a thing.  I understand that this was true during the days of prop planes, but I have never heard of anyone buying a "non-stop" ticket and there being a stop for whatever reason.  Also, the majority of these routes are over water.  There would be no place to refuel.  As to industry terms, I goggled and got this: "Non-stop means pretty much what it sounds like—that the airplane is not scheduled to land between its origin and destination."
https://thepointsguy.com/2014/12/12-confusing-travel-industry-expressions-and-what-they-mean/

Thanks.

If a bus had to stop and fill up its tank at some point along its 29 stop route, would the bus company advertise that the bus made 29 stops or 30 stops?

[Tontogary]

Ok let me do some digging, and i will try to find distances that we sailed across oceans, and publish them here.

However i can categorically state that on cross ocean voyages that i have been doing for over 30 years i have not seen any deviation between published, calculated and actual sailed (steamed) steamed distance of more than 3%.

While Tom can just say they dont know what the flat earth looks like, it is poor argument, and in now way empirical to say that no one knows! The charts we use are published, and available to all, navigation charts have been used for hundreds of years by millions of navigators, and if there is any minor inaccuracy (such a a navigational buoy being out of place, depths changing due to silting or erosion taking place) there is a system in place to make the corrections known worldwide, to ensure we all know.

Given the above and widely available published distances between sea ports, it would be a start, and at least doing something to further the FES to possibly look at producing a chart.

However the first and primary decision would need to be whether there is a South Pole, or if Antarctica exists! So much reliance is based upon the great ice wall, that if it is not Antarctica, then no one has seen anything resembling it, and a two pole earth cannot fit in with our current RE model with Lattitude and Longitude, Magnetic poles and angles of dip, compasses, and distances, that there would be so much weight of empirical evidence (peoples observations, experiences and use of senses to verify the observations) that a bi polar plane earth would have to be dramatic in its extremes and debunk so much empirical evidence, as well as scientific evidence that it just cannot be rationalised by a normal person.

Using Occam’s razor, the bi polar flat earth cannot possibly stand up to scrutiny. Nearly every thing we know about navigation would be wrong, yet not proved, and Tom himself has said that it is not known, therefore the location of continents, magnetism, lattitude longitude would all be assumed!

So taking the model with least assumptions means we end up with the RE model, and unless Tom, or anyone else is prepared to provide this forum with empirical evidence, (actually having done observations and travelled distances, calculated their position on the earth) the FE bi polar world should be consigned to the “ i dont know, it is just a dream i had” shelf!