A Few Issues With the OTHER FES Map

OK, looking at this map, a few issues come to mind. 

The first one is, what the heck is holding in the water?  At least the other model had a wall of ice holding it all in.  What does this model, and levee's model as well, claim is holding the water on the planet?

The second has to do with a question I asked in another thread.  What would happen to someone attempting circumnavigation going from north to south in a straight line?  On a globe, they would cross the south pole, head north from there, and eventually reach their starting point.  On this model, they would seemingly cross the south pole, and then run off the planet.

Please explain guys.

There's no reason why this map can't also have an ice wall around the rim.

Why would someone run off the planet while attempting circumnavigation?

There's no reason why this map can't also have an ice wall around the rim.

Why would someone run off the planet while attempting circumnavigation?

Well, this model DOES NOT have an ice wall, so please to not add one.

Take a look at the image below, and try to explain what happens when the traveler following the red arrow when it reaches the edge of that map.

Well, this model DOES NOT have an ice wall, so please to not add one.

I was under the impression Wilmore's model did feature an ice wall. Can you provide a source which states that it does not?

Take a look at the image below, and try to explain what happens when the traveler following the red arrow when it reaches the edge of that map.

Travellers generally don't move in perfectly straight lines. Whatever navigational method was being used would simply cause them to follow one of the nearby curved lines of longitude and loop back on themselves.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 05:32:22 PM

Well, this model DOES NOT have an ice wall, so please to not add one.

I was under the impression Wilmore's model did feature an ice wall. Can you provide a source which states that it does not?

Travellers generally don't move in perfectly straight lines. Whatever navigational method was being used would simply cause them to follow one of the nearby curved lines of longitude and loop back on themselves.

The image I posted has no ice wall, since I got it from the Wiki, and no one has made any changes to it, such as adding an ice wall, I'd say that's proof enough. 

Also, you'll notice in the original image, there is a longitude line, known commonly as the Prime Meridian.  That would be your line of travel.  Now, I ask again, with a little more clarification, what happens when a traveler, heading due south along the Prime Meridian, reaches the edge of the Earth?

The image I posted has no ice wall, since I got it from the Wiki, and no one has made any changes to it, such as adding an ice wall, I'd say that's proof enough. 

I wasn't aware maps were intended as absolutely accurate portrayals of reality.

Also, you'll notice in the original image, there is a longitude line, known commonly as the Prime Meridian.  That would be your line of travel.  Now, I ask again, with a little more clarification, what happens when a traveler, heading due south along the Prime Meridian, reaches the edge of the Earth?

I understood perfectly well what you meant; unless you can show me a navigational method which allows one to travel in a perfectly straight line, your argument is void because this could not feasibly happen. If there were some magical device enabling a traveller to do this, they would reach the ice wall.

Traveling north from New Zealand will take you a few miles from the edge of the earth here, guaranteed. Traveling north from anywhere slightly east of NZ will take you even closer to the edge, enough to definitely see some crazy stuff. Basically it's garbage. Sure, you can make the reasonable argument that no one has ever traveled EXACTLY on the prime meridian for an entire journey, but any journey within even FIVE DEGREES OF LONGITUDE of it on a north-south journeys will bring such gross distortions that one would definitely see the edge of the world.

Traveling north from New Zealand will take you a few miles from the edge of the earth here, guaranteed. Traveling north from anywhere slightly east of NZ will take you even closer to the edge, enough to definitely see some crazy stuff. Basically it's garbage. Sure, you can make the reasonable argument that no one has ever traveled EXACTLY on the prime meridian for an entire journey, but any journey within even FIVE DEGREES OF LONGITUDE of it on a north-south journeys will bring such gross distortions that one would definitely see the edge of the world.

You're making the assumption that the edge of the map corresponds to the edge of the world. Would you care to back up this assumption?

Quote from: Pseudointellect on June 06, 2010, 05:57:22 PM

Traveling north from New Zealand will take you a few miles from the edge of the earth here, guaranteed. Traveling north from anywhere slightly east of NZ will take you even closer to the edge, enough to definitely see some crazy stuff. Basically it's garbage. Sure, you can make the reasonable argument that no one has ever traveled EXACTLY on the prime meridian for an entire journey, but any journey within even FIVE DEGREES OF LONGITUDE of it on a north-south journeys will bring such gross distortions that one would definitely see the edge of the world.

You're making the assumption that the edge of the map corresponds to the edge of the world. Would you care to back up this assumption?

Just working with the information given.  Provide better information and we'd have something better to work with.

Is no one going to seriously try to address this?  Where's Lord Wilmore or John Davis?  Come on guys, take a shot at it.  Parsifal's just dicking around.

Just working with the information given.  Provide better information and we'd have something better to work with.

No, you're making an unreasonable assumption. Or am I to assume that I will topple into oblivion when I leave the page in my local street directory?

Parsifal's just dicking around.

Please don't insult me when I'm taking the time to answer your questions.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 06:06:31 PM

Parsifal's just dicking around.

Please don't insult me when I'm taking the time to avoid your questions.

Fixed.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 06:01:55 PM

Just working with the information given.  Provide better information and we'd have something better to work with.

No, you're making an unreasonable assumption. Or am I to assume that I will topple into oblivion when I leave the page in my local street directory?

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 06:06:31 PM

Parsifal's just dicking around.

Please don't insult me when I'm taking the time to answer your questions.

If your local street directory was meant to be a map of the entire planet, than I'd imagine something like that would happen.

If your local street directory was meant to be a map of the entire planet, than I'd imagine something like that would happen.

FE maps aren't supposed to represent the entire Earth, only the known Earth. We can't map the unknown.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 06:15:15 PM

If your local street directory was meant to be a map of the entire planet, than I'd imagine something like that would happen.

FE maps aren't supposed to represent the entire Earth, only the known Earth. We can't map the unknown.

Why not just grow some balls and admit that you don't know what the map looks like?  Honestly, I'd respect FE'ers a lot more if they simply said, "We do not know the layout of the flat Earth." rather than you scrambling to come up with some distorted, half-assed representation of our planet.

Why not just grow some balls and admit that you don't know what the map looks like?  Honestly, I'd respect FE'ers a lot more if they simply said, "We do not know the layout of the flat Earth." rather than you scrambling to come up with some distorted, half-assed representation of our planet.

We don't know what it looks like. That's kind of why there are several different suggestions.

Wait, so we both do not know what lies beyond the edges of this map but we also do know that an ice wall lies beyond the edges of the map? Contradiction.

Wait, so we both do not know what lies beyond the edges of this map but we also do know that an ice wall lies beyond the edges of the map? Contradiction.

The ice wall is one hypothesis.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 05:49:26 PM

The image I posted has no ice wall, since I got it from the Wiki, and no one has made any changes to it, such as adding an ice wall, I'd say that's proof enough. 

I wasn't aware maps were intended as absolutely accurate portrayals of reality.

An icewall is a pretty big detail to omit.

An icewall is a pretty big detail to omit.

Unless the intention is to simply display the layout of the continents, without regard for what might be outside them for the sake of preserving generality.

well couldn't you just use an accelerometer or a gyroscope to aid you???
also, you could follow the southern cross.

So Parsifal is the only "FE'er" to even try this one?  I mean come on!

You should label threads like this "srs bsnss" to just get attention from real FE'ers (if such a thing exists).

So Parsifal is the only "FE'er" to even try this one?  I mean come on!

Even Parsifal sees that this map does not resist even the simplest scrutiny. For example, Australians would need compasses specially made for them, with the North-South line making a 45^o angle with the East-West line.

And where is Hawaii? I could not even find it.

But Parsifal decided to become a full-time troll, even arguing that birds carry the airplanes in the southern hemiplane, like the airplanes in Fred Flintstone's world.

So Parsifal is the only "FE'er" to even try this one?  I mean come on!

Not every flat earth proponent believes in this model.  It would be unethical for them to argue in defense of something that they do not believe in.

Also, Hawaii is glaringly apparent.

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 09:12:59 PM

So Parsifal is the only "FE'er" to even try this one?  I mean come on!

Not every flat earth proponent believes in this model.  It would be unethical for them to argue in defense of something that they do not believe in.

According to Parsifal, believing in something is irrelevant to arguing in defense for it.  Are you calling Parsifal unethical?

Quote from: Sliver on June 06, 2010, 09:12:59 PM

So Parsifal is the only "FE'er" to even try this one?  I mean come on!

Not every flat earth proponent believes in this model.

I'm aware of that, but Lord Wilmore is one who does.  I'm trying to see what the FE'ers who DO believe in this model have to say.

Australia is not the same size as Africa... wtf?


this map is wrong on so many levels.

Australia is not the same size as Africa... wtf?


this map is wrong on so many levels.

Obviously, it's impossible to project a spherical model (like that of the Earth) onto a flat surface.  The FE'ers distort it further to try to get it to make more sense, which makes things even worse.  They seem to claim that the current map of Earth is incorrect/unknown anyway (because everyone is a lying tool of the Conspiracy), implying that we can't know it's distorted.

However that argument gets worse and worse; by taking wind speed and flight times, pilots can find the distances between two points pretty easily.  It's not hard to do.

Really, the fact that the map of the Earth cannot be anything other than spherical totally debunks FET.

well couldn't you just use an accelerometer or a gyroscope to aid you???

Interesting idea. How might that work?

also, you could follow the southern cross.

The southern cross goes in circles around the south celestial pole. I don't think that's the objective here.