The time has come, the Walrus said, to speak of [Flat Earth] - and other things...

a reply to: igloo

That's not an answer. You can't just say it's a massive lie without being able to debunk the most simple evidence why it isn't. The edge. Define it.

Where is the edge in the flat earth model?

"It's an evolving theory" is not an answer if you are incapable of drawing the parameters for the model.

If you can't do the most simple thing, define the borders of the flat earth, you're admitting it's an oblate sphereoid by default.

Unless you propose we live in PacMan universe where going off the left side of the flat earth instantly transports you to the right side of the flat earth.

*** Post edit. I actually didn't ever bother to really look at the flat earth model, so this post and previous ones reflect my ignorance to what a flat earth model really looks like. I didn't know they flattened it out from the top to keep it all circular.

Try this again.

Is this image the consensus?



Do all these flights really exist? Or is it a bunch of lies?



How do Qantas' longest commercial flights fit into the concensus model?


[Sydney to Buenos Aires]

a reply to: Degradation33
I say its a massive lie because of how NASA and other space agencies have duped people. I dont find them credible nor do I find all flat earth models credible which is also why I cannot answer your question... I do not know what the edge is or if there is more land further as Admiral Byrd stated. He could have been lying too but this subject sure throws people in a tizzy. Its hilarious.

As to the model, your image is similar to what many show but the water dripping off is wrong. The flat earth map is of the known world, not the whole world parts unknown. The sun flare in the image is way too big as the flat earth model has a smaller sun that cannot cast its light further than the edge, thus liquid water vs ice, and definitely not the whole surface at once. More like a lighter or candle in the dark.

I stand by what I said in that when there has been virtually no science devoted to flat earth, not much will be known. I realize how ridiculous that will sound but from my flat earther perspective I simply mean there is evidence but the strength of the argument comes from the sum of the parts and there are many examples.

As for flights, the only ones Ive personally taken enough times to see it in daylight are vancouver to glasgow and we always flew over greenland which works on both maps and its a direct flight on the flat earth map but arced on the globe map. Ive only ever gone to the southern hemisphere london to johannesburg which is a simple north south route.

a reply to: igloo

Do you find this credible? Is Qantas in on the rather pointless conspiracy as well?



And if not, what are we actually looking at them fly over, per the flat earth map in question? What is their flat-earth flight path?

originally posted by: Degradation33
a reply to: igloo

Do you find this credible?

And if not, what are we actually looking at them fly over, per the flat earth map in question? What is their flight path?

Did you read the video description...

76,104 views 19 Mar 2017
Santiago ✈ ✈ ✈ Sydney over Antarctic Land.....
Only the second flight route in history for an airliner to fly over Antarctica en-route between two continents
15 March 2017 - Qantas 28 flew to 75° south over the ice capped land and mountains in Antarctica with a mission to test communications and navigation along the way on a slightly longer route and much lower latitude than usual.
This is a little short video clip from that flight !
Hope everyone enjoys.

So this flight was a special mission not a routine commercial flight. Normal flights do not go that far south unless they are tourist flights which usually only go to the peninsula and the Antarctic Treaty makes those very restricted with many hoops to jump through for authorization.

The WHO, UN and UN subsidiaries International Maritime Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization all use the flat earth map. Isnt that odd...

Editing to add... that is a beautiful video though. Gorgeous scenery.

a reply to: igloo

Okay whatever. The commercial ones only go to 60° to avoid harsh conditions.

Still, what is THIS reasearch flight doing? How does the flat earth Sydney -> Santiago flight work?

On the flat earth model, on that flight in question, you have to fly THE OPPOSITE WAY of South America to run into ice. Clearly not "direct". How on flat earth can a 747 have the range for that one-off direct flight and fly over ice? Mileage is still the same right?

Here's what I am getting at:



I know this won't convince you of anything, but check this flight out, well under way at time of posting.

flightaware.com...

This flight isn't possible in that time, in a 787, with a flat earth model.

And my apologies, I don't pay enough attention to what I post and edit a lot. Sorry if I change it after you respond.

Continued:

Technically, on a flat earth model the flight between Sydney and Santiago is supposed to FLY OVER NORTH AMERICA!

Doesn't it seem, you know, VERY WRONG, for a plane flying directly from Syndey, Austrailia to Santiago, Chile to overfly British Columbia, Oklahoma, and Alabama?



Yet, to maintain a flat earth, this flight in the Southern Hemisphere will fly over North America in the next few hours. Any Flat-Earthers want to argue that? You pretty much have to. Otherwise, you admit it's a spheroid.

Done being a hammer now.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Ok so if the earth is flat, and the sun is closer to the earth and circumnavigating around a centre point, why would the sun not be visible 24/7 no matter where on earth you would be…

If the Earth was really flat there wouldn't be a visible horizon at least not like it appears now, and you would be able to see VERY VERY far unlike now, and it is this way because you must believe your own eyes and senses that the Earth is a sphere. It's been proven by so many different things going far beyond what is necessary. All large bodies in space are geometrically roundish because of gravity distribution of mass. Pictures of Saturn showing another planet as a sphere because they are all spheres. Science and observation proves it long before.

What proves the Earth is NOT flat? Our 3 dimensional lives on Earth does. Gravity works on all 3 axis X, y, and z, hence gravitational forces are three dimensional. A flat Earth would violate the laws of physics.

Excellent Post! I stumbled across the "Flat Earth" when flying at 65k ft alt, I was amazed at what I was seeing! Since then I have done my own experiment's while in a companied by my youngest Son age 12 ( who thinks I'm a kook ) but can't deny my findings when seeing my conclusions. I've have explained to him on numerous times about the change from a Disk Earth before 1958 Antarctica Treaty and a Globe Earth and proved this to him.
Even though my Son has witnessed these ( Proofs ) to him and he knows how passionate I am in regards to a Flat Earth, he still thinks I'm a kook. Kids today?
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

a reply to: DaRAGE

It is pretty much everything on earth going against it.

Things that couldn't exist with a flat earth:

Day/night
Time Zones
Coriolis Effect
A south pole
Aurora Australis
Volcanism
Orbit
The Moon
La Grange points
Geosynchronous satellites
GPS
Fata Morgana (Superior Mirage)
Axial precession
Long flights within the "Southern" hemisphere.
Ocean currents
Astrology
Weather
Lithosphere
Biosphere
Ozone Layer
Troposphere
Stratosphere
Mesosphere
Thermosphere
Exosphere
Ionosphere
Magnetosphere
Gravity/Laws of physics

Okay, now I think I'm done.

a reply to: Degradation33
About that need to be a hammer... relax, its just a theory. I believe it, you dont have to. There are so many aspects to it that make sense and some that dont like this distance thing.

I havent the knowledge of flight data to understand much of the website but I get your point when looked at with conventional views the timing of this flight doesnt work. That said, the flat map is also distorted if you look at the wonky shape of some of its continents. There could be a solution to this, but I dont have it at the moment. Maybe looking at the flight latitude, longitude as it travels but its late here and I can barely see my eyes are so tired.

Must agree to disagree.

a reply to: DaRAGE
No, because the model assumes the sun is small enough that its more like a candle or flashlight in the dark, if you walk far enough away you wont be able to see it illuminate anything.

There is an interesting video where the guys theory is that there are two forms of light from the sun, direct sunlight that produces shadows and the noble gases in the air being lit up by the suns presence which creates an indirect ambient light plus the dawn and dusk colours are produced by these excited molecules and still visible for a time when the sun moves away and is less intense.

originally posted by: Degradation33
a reply to: DaRAGE

It is pretty much everything on earth going against it.

Things that couldn't exist with a flat earth:

Day/night
Time Zones
Coriolis Effect
A south pole
Aurora Australis
Volcanism
Orbit
The Moon
La Grange points
Geosynchronous satellites
GPS
Fata Morgana (Superior Mirage)
Axial precession
Long flights within the "Southern" hemisphere.
Ocean currents
Astrology
Weather
Lithosphere
Biosphere
Ozone Layer
Troposphere
Stratosphere
Mesosphere
Thermosphere
Exosphere
Ionosphere
Magnetosphere
Gravity/Laws of physics

Okay, now I think I'm done.

Much of this can be explained within the flat earth model but it takes a lot of lateral thinking and in some instances like gravity, it gets wholly swapped out for density and buoyancy. Anyone who is really interested can find these alternate theories and understand how they work together. It isnt as simple as taking one system and saying it doesnt work in the model... the models have different attributes and some are not interchangeable. Thats why I originally said that this is sort of a work in progress, something like that, and I dont know all the answers. No one does.

Its like that flat earth meme with water falling off... its used as ridicule but even an ice wall is ridiculous until its understood that a small suns energy only goes so far, then beyond becomes ice, hence ice wall. No one knows what is beyond, or if they do, they aint telling.

People go bonkers over flat earthers because they are comparing apples with oranges. Everyone just knows flat earthers are wrong, wrong, wrong but they know nothing of how the flat earth system works. I dont personally care if its flat or not but it has enough compelling stuff that Im interested in it and I used to be a massive science physics space nerd. Maybe I just needed a new shiny thing.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

I'm stil looking for what that GD walrus had to say!

originally posted by: Degradation33
Is this image the consensus?

There is no consensus on anything since every flat earther got their own idea and they are often conflicting haha... And they always use a flat earth map based on a projection from a sphere earth which of course complicates matters.

But if one average it as the flat plane with a "dome" of stars and rotating moon/sun inside, yes.

No flat earther can make a model of their world that actually work with how we see the world on a daily basis. You dont really have to go that far.

- The sun on the flat earth at sunset would become smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller until it vanish and it become nighttime, and the opposite at sunrise. That's not what happens in the real world.

- Everyone on the entire flat earth would view the same stars at night. That's not what happens in the real world.

- Just as the sun, at night the moon would first grow from nothing to large then become smaller and smaller and smaller until it's invisible as the sunrise comes. That's not what happens in the real world.

You cant go out of the confines of the "dome" either and just place a flat disc in the solar system, because then the 24h clock wouldnt work as everyone has nighttime or daytime at the same time on the plane.

Having the disc on the back of a huge space turtle is more believable, because then at least you can say "well... uh... BECAUSE MAGIC!!!"

What i find hilarious about the whole situation is how they’ve drawn the countries on their earth map. They’ve drawn the countries like they are on a sphere.

originally posted by: DaRAGE
What i find hilarious about the whole situation is how they’ve drawn the countries on their earth map. They’ve drawn the countries like they are on a sphere.

A landmass is a landmass, coastlines are coastlines, or no... Why would they be different. The landmasses are the parts that are known and have been for a long time.

How should they be drawn on...

a reply to: igloo

Nothing in the flat earth model (let's pretend briefly that there is actually a single agreed on model) works. Nothing. Not one thing matches observable, measurable reality.

a reply to: igloo

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Well take a look at Australia on the globe. Then take a look at Australia on the flat earth map. You actually want a country drawn correctly, as it looks and appears, not squished like angled. Drawing it that way just makes it look like they are looking down on the country and makes the flat map have a sphere appearance by drawing the countries that squished up way. Like i said hilarious.

a reply to: merka

I figured it had to be a magical snow globe world.

Argumentum ad absurdum:

On a flat earth, The Sun would have to be 30 miles across and 600 miles away for there to be some type of night and day. If sizes are proportional, Jupiter is about 2.8 miles across and around 3000 miles from earth. Also in this model, the comparable size of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs is 1 foot in diameter. Otherwise, we got hit with something 1/5 the size of the sun. Relatively speaking.

Like the earth is an infant mobile.

At some point, you'd think there'd be enough going against.