The globe is not mathematically derived from any other map. Thus, it's not a transformation.
So the globe is not derived from an oblate spheroid? How then can you claim that its a map of earth?
By approximation. We believe the shape of Earth is sufficiently spherical that mapping it onto a sphere is useful for navigation.
Well by approximation we think the earth is a flat disk. We believe its sufficiently flat and disk shaped that mapping it as a disk is useful for navigation. Please refer to the FAQ for such a map.
You claim to use distortion as an aid. In RET we do the same. I have shown you our baseline that we distort and the method we use to distort it. All I'm asking is for the same from you.
No, you haven't showed me how you convert an oblate spheroid into a globe.
Are you really this stupid? I mean really? Its several pages later and you still seem to be struggling with the basics.
You don't think earth is a globe. You think its an oblate spheroid. So your 'baseline' or starting point is an oblate spheroid.
Please leave, research, and come back when you learn what distortion is.
please leave, research and come back when you know the difference between an oblate spheroid and a sphere.
With a good approximation, there are some.
And still no FE map.
Please see the FAQ. There is a great approximation of an FE earth mapped out there.