Depending on how you scale a FE-map, Iceland is either 467 km or 734 km in East-West-direction. (SE-maps claim that it's 490 km.)
Depending on how you scale a FE-map, South-Africa is either 1040 km or 1634 km in East-West-direction. (SE-maps claim that it's 655 km.)
And you can do the same calculations for many more examples.
Since no cartography of a FE world map has been performed, the maps you want to scale are based on RE maps, altered to fit FE ideas.No. That map exists, as part of a FE model map.
Hence no measurement of a real-world distance will do what you are looking for - contradict a FE model map - because no consensus model map exists. The map at http://www.3dham.com/blog/Flat_earthrot.jpg is just one idea.
No. That map exists, as part of a FE model map.There is no consensus among FE, or even a majority position, that the notional representations talked about so far are accurate maps from which distances can be determined.
As such, it does contradict it.
If you would like, feel free to provide your own FE map.
All it really means is that these specific FE models are shown to be crap, while the RE works fine.
You may wish that was the case for the sake of your argument, but that does not make it so.I'm not making that the case.
So you, like many others claim that we can't disprove the flat earth because even flat earth believers don't knowNo. That map exists, as part of a FE model map.There is no consensus among FE, or even a majority position, that the notional representations talked about so far are accurate maps from which distances can be determined.
As such, it does contradict it.
If you would like, feel free to provide your own FE map.
All it really means is that these specific FE models are shown to be crap, while the RE works fine.
You may wish that was the case for the sake of your argument, but that does not make it so.
Comparing the OPs distances to that notional representation does nothing to further the argument.
Depending on how you scale a FE-map, Iceland is either 467 km or 734 km in East-West-direction. (SE-maps claim that it's 490 km.)
Depending on how you scale a FE-map, South-Africa is either 1040 km or 1634 km in East-West-direction. (SE-maps claim that it's 655 km.)
And you can do the same calculations for many more examples.
Since no cartography of a FE world map has been performed, the maps you want to scale are based on RE maps, altered to fit FE ideas.
Hence no measurement of a real-world distance will do what you are looking for - contradict a FE model map - because no consensus model map exists. The map at http://www.3dham.com/blog/Flat_earthrot.jpg is just one idea.
All of your HYPERBOLIC BOLD ALL-CAPS CONCLUSIONS fail to take this into consideration and are, therefore, invalid.
Sorry.
No, but an authority much higher than you might do just that!
There is no consensus among FE, or even a majority position, that the notional representations talked about so far are accurate maps from which distances can be determined.
You may wish that was the case for the sake of your argument, but that does not make it so.
Comparing the OPs distances to that notional representation does nothing to further the argument.
Flat Earth FAQ - Please Read! (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.msg566284#msg566284)So it seems clear, with no ifs and buts, that the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge, though the map is not definitive.
Geography and Physics
How do you explain day and night cycles?
Day and night cycles are easily explained on a flat earth. The sun moves in circles around the North Pole. When it is over your head, it's day. When it's not, it's night. The sun acts like a spotlight and shines downward as it moves. The picture below illustrates how the sun moves and also how seasons work on a flat earth:
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/a/a1/Seasons.png)(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/7/70/SunAnimation.gif/900px-SunAnimation.gif)
When the sun is further away from the North Pole, it's winter in the northern hemiplain (or hemisphere) and summer in the south. A more simplistic picture can be found below.
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c8/Flat_Earth_Seasons.svg)
. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .
What does the earth look like?
As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge. This is the generally accepted model among members of the society. In this model, circumnavigation is performed by moving in a great circle around the North Pole.
The earth is surrounded on all sides by an ice wall that holds the oceans back. This ice wall is what explorers have named Antarctica. Beyond the ice wall is a topic of great interest to the Flat Earth Society. To our knowledge, no one has been very far past the ice wall and returned to tell of their journey. What we do know is that it encircles the earth and serves to hold in our oceans and helps protect us from whatever lies beyond.
Here is picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, flat earth:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
The Sun
The sun is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.
Spotlight effect
The Sun's area of light is limited to a circular area of light upon the earth much like the light of a lighthouse is limited to a finite circular area around it. The rotating light on a lighthouse does not propagate infinitely into the distance. This means that only certain portions of the Earth are lightened at a time. It also describes how night and day arise on the Flat Earth. The apparent view of rising and setting are caused by perspective, just as a flock of birds overhead will descend into the horizon as it flies into the distance.
Rendered picture of the Sun in relation to the Earth
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/9/9a/RenderedFE.jpg/750px-RenderedFE.jpg)
* North of the equator, distances in East-West-direction are always shorter in an FE-geometry than in an SE-geometry.That depends on which model with what scaling is used.
* South of the equator, distances in East-West-direction are always shorter in an SE-geometry than in an FE-geometry.
So you, like many others claim that we can't disprove the flat earth because even flat earth believers don't know what the flat earth looks like (no map), don't know how the sun moves and don't know even the accurate height of the sun or moon.
If you would like, feel free to provide your own FE map.
If you would like something more solid, feel free to provide a FE map to compare with.This is your go-to, isn't it, regardless of the fact that I've already told you no such map exists. I'm calling into question Pinky's assertion of unassailable logic that uses a FE map. He chooses the "map" picture and draws a conclusion. I don't have to provide a different map to show that his logic is flawed.
You see, the nice thing about this experiment is that we don't need absolute values for distances. We only need the ratios of distances.Yes, but you use the ratios you gleaned from your selection of a "map" you think all FE agree on for its accuracy (especially to the point of making measurements). If you're not familiar with the term, look up "strawman."
So, Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss Curiouser and Curiouser, you in infinite wisdom, with a whole 27 (at last count) posts under your pinafore claim to know more about flat earth theory than Jack, Administrator and one of the most senior flat earther members here.You think that number of posts equates to understanding of a topic? That's truly adorable!
I assume we can believe Jack when he writes in the FAQ!Why? That may be your problem. The assumptions you make may not necessarily be true.
So, Alice you're admitting that you're an "alt" born on 2017-12-07 simply to try to confuse us poor globularists? That's truly illegal!So, Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss Curiouser and Curiouser, you in infinite wisdom, with a whole 27 (at last count) posts under your pinafore claim to know more about flat earth theory than Jack, Administrator and one of the most senior flat earther members here.You think that number of posts equates to understanding of a topic? That's truly adorable!
Sure, let's have another look:I assume we can believe Jack when he writes in the FAQ!Why? That may be your problem. The assumptions you make may not necessarily be true.
Hmmm. Let's see. "Here is picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, flat earth"
That entry by Jack, an Administrator of the Society and the authority putting his name to the FAQ says rather more than the map is not definitive.There is no consensus among FE, or even a majority position, that the notional representations talked about so far are accurate maps from which distances can be determined.No, but an authority much higher than you might do just that!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Comparing the OPs distances to that notional representation does nothing to further the argument.
But look at what the FAQ and Wiki say about this topic:
I assume we can believe Jack when he writes in the FAQ!Quote from: JackFlat Earth FAQ - Please Read! (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.msg566284#msg566284)So it seems clear, with no ifs and buts, that the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge, though the map is not definitive.
What does the earth look like?
As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge. This is the generally accepted model among members of the society.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Here is picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, flat earth:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
Reading is fundamental.Yes, certainly, "reading is fundamental". Now what was the point I missed again?
Seems my point is clear. Perhaps you've missed it.
No. I claim that Pinky's assertion that this "...settles the dispute Flat-Earth-vs-Spherical-Earth forever and ever!" is an invalid argumentWhich is not what you said at all.
This is your go-to, isn't it, regardless of the fact that I've already told you no such map exists.And that is your problem, not mine.
I don't have to provide a different map to show that his logic is flawed.Then perhaps you should have made your argument more clear and less flawed yourself.
That entry by Jack, an Administrator of the Society and the authority putting his name to the FAQ says rather more than the map is not definitive.
It also says with no ifs and buts, that the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge This is the generally accepted model among members of the society..
Now, with those constraints there may be no definitive map, but there is little choice as to the general continental layout.
If you disagree with "the Wiki" and "the FAQ", why don't you replace most of with, "The FES hasn't a clue on xxxxx, but the earth looks flat, so it must be flat."
Yes, certainly, "reading is fundamental". Now what was the point I missed again?"Here is picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, flat earth." You insist the "map" is accepted and accurate. It's not. Therefore Pinky's experiment is logically invalid.
By the way I live in Australia and down here it would seem to my limited understand that any flat earth continental layout would indicate east-west distances at least twice the my GPS navigator map distances.
Like to comment?
PS Have you driven in Iceland and South Africa yourself?
Have the intellectual honesty to quote me in full "No. I claim that Pinky's assertion that this "...settles the dispute Flat-Earth-vs-Spherical-Earth forever and ever!" is an invalid argument, because Pinky is assuming that one representation is an accurate map. It's not, hence you can't draw that conclusion. I don't assert anything else," and then go back and read my first post. If you can't see that they are equivalent, then we have no further basis for discussion.No. I claim that Pinky's assertion that this "...settles the dispute Flat-Earth-vs-Spherical-Earth forever and ever!" is an invalid argumentWhich is not what you said at all.
As if I didn't see that coming! But, Alice, I should remind you that an "appeal to authority" is not necessarily a logical fallacy if said authority is actually an "agreed authority" on the topic. And surely "Jack, an Administrator of the Society and the authority putting his name to the FAQ" is an "agreed authority" on this topic. So let's strike throughThat entry by Jack, an Administrator of the Society and the authority putting his name to the FAQ says rather more than the map is not definitive.Logical fallacy of argumentum ad verecundiam, the "appeal to authority." Strike one.
It also says with no ifs and buts, that the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge This is the generally accepted model among members of the society..
Now, with those constraints there may be no definitive map, but there is little choice as to the general continental layout.
Since no cartography of a FE world map has been performed, the maps you want to scale are based on RE maps, altered to fit FE ideas.
Hence no measurement of a real-world distance will do what you are looking for - contradict a FE model map - because no consensus model map exists.
Have the intellectual honesty to quote me in fullQuoting you in full doesn't change the representation.
Hence no measurement of a real-world distance will do what you are looking for - contradict a FE model map - because no consensus model map exists. The map at http://www.3dham.com/blog/Flat_earthrot.jpg is just one idea.
I don't assert anything else," and then go back and read my first post.I suggest you go back and read it, because you did assert something else.
Now *you're* chosing a map (call it a continental layout). Strawman, strawman, strawman.No, he is using a map which has been presented by the FEers. As such, it is not a strawman.
All we have to do is to drive in a car from A to B and measure the distance!
All we have to do is to drive in a car from A to B and measure the distance!
Roads tend to go X,Y,Z between A and B.
All we have to do is to drive in a car from A to B and measure the distance!
Roads tend to go X,Y,Z between A and B.
And if we travel hundreds of kilometers, a change in height of 1 km will surely make a difference. ::)
If we travel 100 km and go up 1km, that lengthens our distance by a shocking 5 meters!!!
As an actual practical example, lets say you want to go from Portland to Seattle.
All we have to do is to drive in a car from A to B and measure the distance!
Roads tend to go X,Y,Z between A and B.
And if we travel hundreds of kilometers, a change in height of 1 km will surely make a difference. ::)
If we travel 100 km and go up 1km, that lengthens our distance by a shocking 5 meters!!!