Possible experiment

  • 8 Replies
  • 843 Views
Possible experiment
« on: June 15, 2025, 05:20:27 PM »
I have just acquired a solar powered drone. I am hoping to find 1 or 2 people to do the same towards our outer plane. They really have came down in price and have a near unlimited range.

I am hoping to fly mine from south of Chile. Some one in south Africa and Australia would round this out well. We will all fly our drones south. After a predetermined distance of never merging this will strongly suggest if not prove a outer rim exists.

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 6212
  • +14/-29
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2025, 07:06:49 PM »
I have just acquired a solar powered drone. I am hoping to find 1 or 2 people to do the same towards our outer plane. They really have came down in price and have a near unlimited range.

I am hoping to fly mine from south of Chile. Some one in south Africa and Australia would round this out well. We will all fly our drones south. After a predetermined distance of never merging this will strongly suggest if not prove a outer rim exists.

Are you trolling.  What model of drone do you think you can afford for what range? 

This already proves spherical earth.



And not this..







?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 6212
  • +14/-29
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2025, 07:20:18 PM »
However. Why wouldn’t a group of flat earthers do the same thing by chartering flight?



Funny flying what should be east out of Maine USA that takes you to Europe on a FE map ends up flying south to the ice wall. All flights on a FE if flown straight would take you to the ice wall.  For the FE delusion, civilian pilots to merchant marines never noticed? 
« Last Edit: June 15, 2025, 07:24:47 PM by DataOverFlow2022 »

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 4184
  • +8/-29
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2025, 09:13:22 PM »
Flying drones into restricted areas tends to result in them being shot down. Or EMP pulsed to death.

Contrary to all claims to the contrary, much of the land and water south of the 60th parallel is no-fly zone.

Here's an experiment you could try. Head to the Langley area of McLean, VA. Fly up and down the town. When you find out that yes, there are heights and distances and even specific locations that you're not allowed to fly, I will simply tell you that I told you so.

Or you can just read this article, as they list environmental excuses for why you can't fly a drone in addition to not flying a plane or sailing a boat.
https://solopassport.com/drone-antarctica/
It's always historic landmark this and environmental preserve that. But pretty much 75% of Antarctica is one zone or another. Basically, if you aren't a globalist shill scientist, they will not show you anything.

Yup, what did I say? "The delicate environment." Never mind that the environment is literally almost as barren as Atacama, think of the penguins! Oh and we need to preserve the solitude of the area.

Quote
Instances of unauthorized drone activity in no-fly zones can lead to civil and criminal penalties, including fines, imprisonment, and damage liability.

Sure, go ahead try your experiment. Just know that I routinely emulate games, and even I don't cross the Antarctic Treaty.

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 6212
  • +14/-29
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2025, 11:49:29 PM »


Contrary to all claims to the contrary, much of the land and water south of the 60th parallel is no-fly zone.

One.  If NASA was trying to keep the world from the ice wall, it would be a much bigger no fly zone.



Two.  For a FE.  Flying “east” out of Maine would take you south on a FE map to the ice wall where in reality east would take you two Europe.

Three.  In a flat earth, any direction would take to the ice wall.

Four.  As pointed out before.


This alone is absolutely right. If the Flat Earthers were allowed to fly without restriction over Antarctica, the matter would be closed. o be abolished.


  Bulma.  It’s never been more convenient for amateurs to conduct high altitude photography and video with high altitude balloons.  If I was a flatie, I would be investing in high altitude balloons ops if I thought I was right.  But they don’t.  Why? 




Anyway.  If you got the money.  You can travel to the Antarctica..


We are talking

Is it false to post Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions has taken people on successful South Pole trips for years now?

Yep - And then they only take you to the islands & to the edges of Antarctica to see the penguins, I'd want to go further in like Richard Byrd did, but my guess is you'd be stopped by some sort of military.

Is this what this tour is?

Quote



https://antarctic-logistics.com/camp/south-pole-camp/

See Bulma.  FE demonstrably debunked. 




Here's an experiment you could try. Head to the Langley area of McLean, VA. Fly up and down the town. When you find out that yes, there are heights and distances and even specific locations that you're not allowed to fly, I will simply tell you that I told you so.

Or you can just read this article, as they list environmental excuses for why you can't fly a drone in addition to not flying a plane or sailing a boat.
https://solopassport.com/drone-antarctica/
It's always historic landmark this and environmental preserve that. But pretty much 75% of Antarctica is one zone or another. Basically, if you aren't a globalist shill scientist, they will not show you anything.

Yup, what did I say? "The delicate environment." Never mind that the environment is literally almost as barren as Atacama, think of the penguins! Oh and we need to preserve the solitude of the area.

Quote
Instances of unauthorized drone activity in no-fly zones can lead to civil and criminal penalties, including fines, imprisonment, and damage liability.

Sure, go ahead try your experiment. Just know that I routinely emulate games, and even I don't cross the Antarctic Treaty.

*

JackBlack

  • 24585
  • +23/-46
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2025, 12:44:23 AM »
You don't need a drone for that, and a normal solar powered drone is unlikely to help.
A solar powered drone normally does not have enough power to last the night, so it would be quite complex to get it down south. You would need landing sites.
And that requires land which is already inhabited unless you are planning on having it land on the water.
Then there is the complication of the licensing for that, especially if you want it uncontrolled for that time.

It is far simpler to use already inhabited areas.
And you don't even need that much.
Just have you and a friend go to various places, then drive or otherwise travel due east/west, and using clocks you have previously synchronised, compare the time of solar noon at that location.
Look at how much time difference there is, vs distance. And see how that compares as you go north or south.

If that is too difficult, you can instead just look at the night sky, and notice that regardless of where you are in the southern hemisphere, you can see a point due south that the stars appear to circle.

Or you can just look at the southern summer, and see how the further south you go the more daylight hours you get.

Or you can look at flights between these southern locations, and notice how the depart heading partly south and arrive partly from the south.

All of this collectively shows that there is a point due south of everyone, i.e. that it converges.


So if you want that, we already have it.


much of the land and water south of the 60th parallel is no-fly zone.
That is just your repeated, pathetic assertion that you can't justify at all.

Head to the Langley area of McLean, VA.
So in an attempt to pretend Antarctica is a no fly zone, you pick a location no where near it.

Or you can just read this article
Where like you it just asserts pathetic crap without actually providing any meaningful reference.
And even then, you still manage to lie about it.

For the most part, this is providing reasons why you shouldn't, not why you can't.
The only attempt at a reason you can't would be appealing to the "legal reasons".
Except it spouts pure BS.
It appeals to Article 8 of the Protocol on Environmental Protection; claiming it is about the regulation of non-indigenous species.
Except article 8 has nothing to do with that.
It is just spouting complete and utter shit.

If you think there is something that prohibits it, provide a link or reference to the legal instrument, and a quote clearly showing where.

Otherwise, like usual, you are just spouting crap.

Yup, what did I say?
Complete and utter crap which you cannot justify with any valid reference.

*

bulmabriefs144

  • 4184
  • +8/-29
  • Roco the Fox
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2025, 05:44:02 AM »
Quote
Two.  For a FE.  Flying “east” out of Maine would take you south on a FE map to the ice wall where in reality east would take you two Europe.



I hate having to reexplain my own theory.

Please try to listen.

East is along the round lines of latitude, south is along the straight lines of longitude extending from North Pole to the Wall (for FE; for RE despite never  looping completely through say Canada to North Pole then to South Pole back to Canada without turning around, they claim it's also curved). When in doubt look at a conventional no-projection map and then a Gleason.

Draw the line from (Maine?) to South America's nose to the ice and don't keep saying stupid things like this. You are heading southeast with an emphasis on south.

"I flew around the world! Earth is a sphere!" No, Earth is a circle. "This person (a high level Mason) explored Antarctica (by skimming the coasts)!" Please refer back to the Gleason and realize that he did nothing of  note.
"Pilots use the great circle motion. This proves..." It proves that you are either lying or do not understand your own theory. When drawing a straight line on a sphere or Gleason, someone figured out that going from Maine to Greenland to Norway to Russia to China (which appears to deeply curve on the no-projection map) is an actual straight line and thus the most direct route. Heading northeast then southeast from lower South America to the nose of Africa to Australia is also significantly shorter trip than flying over water. And if there are any state secrets (like you know, hidden continents?) this north route covers them too. It also prevents people from accurately measuring the southern hemisphere compared to the north.

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 6212
  • +14/-29
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2025, 06:12:13 AM »

Please try to listen.



Dude.  Flat earth doesn’t work.  What do you not understand.  Going due east out of Maine leads to going to the Europe.  Going due east will never get you to an ice wall.  It’s clear in the FE delusion that going straight in any direction should eventually lead to an Ice wall.  That’s not reality. 

Where celestial south for navigation only works as witnessed for a spherical earth.

This already proves spherical earth.



And not this..





These work and are accurate where people can use them with accurate results because the earth is spherical

Northern hemisphere





Southern hemisphere



The heliocentric model is real.

Why this is accurate and practical to star gazers.



Where on a flat earth a Celestial Star Globe would be useless. 



*

JackBlack

  • 24585
  • +23/-46
Re: Possible experiment
« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2025, 02:00:55 PM »
I hate having to reexplain my own theory.
What theory? What explanation?
Perhaps if you actually provided an explanation from a coherent there you wouldn't be saying the same crap again and again.

Please try to listen.
Follow your own advice.
Listen to what people say in response to you.

East is along the round lines of latitude
Which is not what was being discussed.
That require you go east and keep adjusting to continue going east.
Instead of starting to go east and travelling in a straight line.

for RE despite never  looping completely through say Canada to North Pole then to South Pole back to Canada
Due to the definition of north and south.
Not hard to understand, but here you are playing dumb again.

When in doubt look at a conventional no-projection map and then a Gleason.
The "no-projeciton" map would be a globe.
All flat maps are projections of the globe onto a flat surface.

If Earth was flat you would just use the 1 map and it wouldn't be called a projection.

If you want to pretend Earth is flat with the north pole at the centre, then you should never use a rectangular projection centred on the equator. It makes no sense in your delusional fantasy.

It proves that you are either lying or do not understand your own theory.
Quite the opposite, and your response proves that you are either lying or don't understand the RE model.
Notice that in your response you again appeal to an alleged "no-projection map", which in reality is a rectangular projection of the globe. Generally the one used is the Mercator projection.
That is a projection.
That distorts lines, so most straight lines will appear as curves, and a straight line on that projection is generally a curve on the globe.
This has been explained to you countless times, but you just ignore it.

Heading northeast then southeast from lower South America to the nose of Africa to Australia is also significantly shorter trip than flying over water.
Yet back in reality planes fly heading southeast and then approach from the southwest, or vice versa.
Clearly showing they are going south, with that southern route being a shorter path.
That makes sense for a RE, but not for your delusional BS.

It also prevents people from accurately measuring the southern hemisphere compared to the north.
More delusional crap.
Nothing is preventing you.


But again, all it takes are simple observations of the south celestial pole to show there is a point due south for everyone.