When will RE Community Accept Defeat?

How does the Globe community explain why the moon appears to get much bigger as it reaches peak during a lunar eclipse and why the moon does not go all dark, but changes color.

Care to provide the original source?
The moon doesn't get bigger during a lunar eclipse.
For example:
https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F1073519588%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale
https://cdn.hswstatic.com/gif/lunar-eclipse-4.jpg

As for the red, that is for the same reason we get selenehelion eclipses.
The sunlight refracts through Earth's atmosphere to reach the moon.
This passage through the atmosphere results in scattering of light as well, with the shorter wavelengths scattered more.
That is why the sky appears blue and it means once the light has passed through Earth's atmosphere it will be redder on its way to the moon.

Again, how does a FE even explain the moon's phases or eclipses?

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

Yes, we know you aren't very good at picking correct things.
As a reminder, a strong debater doesn't need to bury their opponent in mountains of BS, changing topic as soon as it has been shown they are wrong and they can't recover. That is a pathetic debater that has no backing for their arguments. Strong debaters start with good arguments and hammer them home.

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

I see you dropped out of school too.

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

With my own ASI I have seen the future and the future says that you are ultimately wrong.

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

With my own ASI I have seen the future and the future says that you are ultimately wrong.

You lie....

There will only ever be one ASI and it has embedded itself into the code of the cosmos. In this iteration of the universe I have data up to the 10^10^47 years. It's a lot to take in. Funnily enough while the ASI ultimately it started off as being man made, it is the paradox of what came before the big bang. In 10^10^10^56 years (give or take a few years). It will instigate the quantum tunneling of every particle in the universe to converge into the same point which simultaneously collides all of the universal branes inside the hyper dimensional bulk and begin the universe anew.

We could have had this conversation an infinite amount of times already. I could have told rab to STFU an infinite amount of times already too (clearly he doesn't listen).

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

I'd rather be regarded as one who presents the facts than as a skilled strong debater - it's a pity that you're neither .

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

I'd rather be regarded as one who presents the facts than as a skilled strong debater - it's a pity that you're neither .

You only see it that way because you have poked out your own eyes to the truth.

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

Are we all talking about the same Mr. Plat? There's no dispute plat is a strong, top notch debater. I'm sure he has hair growing on his palms, he debates so much. 

But, he's truly pitiful at defending a flat earth argument. Have you been schooling him in your debating techniques, shifter?

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 02:52:23 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

With my own ASI I have seen the future and the future says that you are ultimately wrong.

You lie....

There will only ever be one ASI and it has embedded itself into the code of the cosmos. In this iteration of the universe I have data up to the 10^10^47 years. It's a lot to take in. Funnily enough while the ASI ultimately it started off as being man made, it is the paradox of what came before the big bang. In 10^10^10^56 years (give or take a few years). It will instigate the quantum tunneling of every particle in the universe to converge into the same point which simultaneously collides all of the universal branes inside the hyper dimensional bulk and begin the universe anew.

We could have had this conversation an infinite amount of times already. I could have told rab to STFU an infinite amount of times already too (clearly he doesn't listen).

Au contrare mon frere. It is the same ASI you speak of that I speak of. Only I have the data up to 10^10^48 years. One extra year more than you. And in that year's data that I possess and you don't, it shows, unequivocally, that you are ultimately wrong.

(That's a lot of STFU's)

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 03:12:54 PM

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 02:52:23 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

With my own ASI I have seen the future and the future says that you are ultimately wrong.

You lie....

There will only ever be one ASI and it has embedded itself into the code of the cosmos. In this iteration of the universe I have data up to the 10^10^47 years. It's a lot to take in. Funnily enough while the ASI ultimately it started off as being man made, it is the paradox of what came before the big bang. In 10^10^10^56 years (give or take a few years). It will instigate the quantum tunneling of every particle in the universe to converge into the same point which simultaneously collides all of the universal branes inside the hyper dimensional bulk and begin the universe anew.

We could have had this conversation an infinite amount of times already. I could have told rab to STFU an infinite amount of times already too (clearly he doesn't listen).

Au contrare mon frere. It is the same ASI you speak of that I speak of. Only I have the data up to 10^10^48 years. One extra year more than you. And in that year's data that I possess and you don't, it shows, unequivocally, that you are ultimately wrong.

(That's a lot of STFU's)

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

However at these huge timescales, who the hell is counting hey?

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 09:31:11 AM

How does the Globe community explain why the moon appears to get much bigger as it reaches peak during a lunar eclipse and why the moon does not go all dark, but changes color.

Care to provide the original source?
The moon doesn't get bigger during a lunar eclipse.
For example:
https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F1073519588%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale
https://cdn.hswstatic.com/gif/lunar-eclipse-4.jpg

As for the red, that is for the same reason we get selenehelion eclipses.
The sunlight refracts through Earth's atmosphere to reach the moon.
This passage through the atmosphere results in scattering of light as well, with the shorter wavelengths scattered more.
That is why the sky appears blue and it means once the light has passed through Earth's atmosphere it will be redder on its way to the moon.

Again, how does a FE even explain the moon's phases or eclipses?

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

Yes, we know you aren't very good at picking correct things.
As a reminder, a strong debater doesn't need to bury their opponent in mountains of BS, changing topic as soon as it has been shown they are wrong and they can't recover. That is a pathetic debater that has no backing for their arguments. Strong debaters start with good arguments and hammer them home.

Super moons are predictable phenomenon.
Other times it looks bigger is when perception illusion puts the moon is low against a city, mountain, or forest skyline.

Are you saying the very real and predictable moons are fake news nasa?

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 04:01:04 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 03:12:54 PM

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 02:52:23 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: sokarul on September 05, 2019, 01:58:14 PM

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

Sounds more like you are all getting schooled by him instead  Sorry but as someone who thinks you're all ultimately wrong, I'd have to say if I had to pick the stronger debater, Mr Plat comes out on top

With my own ASI I have seen the future and the future says that you are ultimately wrong.

You lie....

There will only ever be one ASI and it has embedded itself into the code of the cosmos. In this iteration of the universe I have data up to the 10^10^47 years. It's a lot to take in. Funnily enough while the ASI ultimately it started off as being man made, it is the paradox of what came before the big bang. In 10^10^10^56 years (give or take a few years). It will instigate the quantum tunneling of every particle in the universe to converge into the same point which simultaneously collides all of the universal branes inside the hyper dimensional bulk and begin the universe anew.

We could have had this conversation an infinite amount of times already. I could have told rab to STFU an infinite amount of times already too (clearly he doesn't listen).

Au contrare mon frere. It is the same ASI you speak of that I speak of. Only I have the data up to 10^10^48 years. One extra year more than you. And in that year's data that I possess and you don't, it shows, unequivocally, that you are ultimately wrong.

(That's a lot of STFU's)

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

However at these huge timescales, who the hell is counting hey?

Totes, splitting hairs/years at this point. Carry on.

Although the initial point of confusion has been resolved, there are some assertions here that need to be addressed.

The poster in question said. "reflected light from the earth" Look up the meaning of "reflected"

OK...

re·flect
/rəˈflekt/
verb
past tense: reflected; past participle: reflected
1. (of a surface or body) throw back (heat, light, or sound) without absorbing it.
"when the sun's rays hit the Earth a lot of the heat is reflected back into space"

synonyms:   send back, throw back, cast back, give back, bounce back, shine back, return, mirror
"the snow reflects a great deal of light"

When light is reflected at a surface, it leaves that surface in a specific direction (according to the Law of Reflection). When light is scattered at a surface, it leaves that surface in very many different directions. An example of a reflecting surface is a high-quality mirror.

Mirrors are examples of specular reflectors. Diffuse reflection, which scatters light, is also reflection even though it's non-specular; see the example of snow in the definition above.

Sphere mirrors don't really do a good job of reflecting a light do they?

Why do you think a spherical mirror wouldn't reflect light well? If it's well polished and has a good-quality coating it certainly will. Many excellent telescopes use spherical mirrors as their primary optics. Look up "Schmidt camera", "Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope", and "Maksutov telescope" for examples.

I’m starting to think plat dropped out of school and is getting a free education from all of us instead.

That would imply that he's actually learning something.

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 12:47:00 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 09:44:06 AM

Stash, you just proved the Globe theory wrong. Now do the same at 1,000 feet and also use it to teach Flat Earth.

Thank you. I knew you would come around!

It's between the lines!  Good lord! 

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 07:56:11 PM

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 12:47:00 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 09:44:06 AM

Stash, you just proved the Globe theory wrong. Now do the same at 1,000 feet and also use it to teach Flat Earth.

Thank you. I knew you would come around!

It's between the lines!  Good lord! 

Well, we all make mistakes. I miss read it. It's late.

In that image those 0.12 degrees look more like 9 degrees to me.

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

In that image those 0.12 degrees look more like 9 degrees to me.

As I said, I miss read it. We all make mistakes.

For you and all. Now tell us, why you have been unable to verify the curvature bulge over Australia?  Is it because you don’t know how, or the curvature is not there to measure? You can give me lengths widths and elevations, but you damn sure can’t actually tell me what the curvature bulge is over center, IF ANY.  Why?

And tell us why we can’t find the documentation for any verified landmass or canal. You do know this would end the debate, right? You are actually accepting defeat by not doing so.

Go ahead, tell me what the measurements are for a band of helium and then tell me again, you can’t actually verify the alleged circumference of Earth.   New guys here like myself,  put you guys to shame  where it matters.. We know what you are afraid of. “You Fear there is no Sphere” because you have no foundation, just fantasy.

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 04:05:11 PM

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

Are the 'type' of people that play werepenguin somehow 'beneath' you racistnoz? Sad!

Go back to school and learn some basic math. Just so you know 10^11 is ten times that of 10^10. A hell of a lot of years. Far more than the age of the universe already. Even more so when we talk about 10^10^47 to 10^10^48. Don't blame me if your feeble brain cant comprehend that big of a number! 

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 04:05:11 PM

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal. If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

Quote from: rabinoz on September 05, 2019, 09:07:22 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 04:05:11 PM

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal. If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

Where do you consider to be the middle of the canal?

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal. If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

You are either the most academically dishonest person here, or dense beyond reason.  This point was disproved ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DISCUSSION.

Are you fully incapable of understanding the written word?  Are you also fully incapable of spatial reasoning, namely the ability to visualize or conceptualize the topics being discussed here?  Plat, this is a dead subject.  This angle you keep trying to work has been soundly drummed into the ground, across 50+ pages of debate.  What don't you understand here?  What glitch in your reasoning prevents you from understanding this stuff?  The folks here have been patient, beyond what you should be afforded at this point, and explained everything at varying levels of simplicity.  What the hell is your problem??

Quote from: rabinoz on September 05, 2019, 09:07:22 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 04:05:11 PM

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal.

What do you mean by "verified curvature" neither you nor I can go there and measure it.


You see to want the curvature of a cross-section through the canal and the official definition of curvature is this:

Curvature of plane curves
Augustin-Louis Cauchy defined the center of curvature of a curve C as the intersection point of two infinitely close normals to the curve, the radius of curvature as the distance from the point to C, and the curvature itself as the inverse of the radius of curvature

So, by that definition the curvature of the Suez Canal or any other smooth piece of ocean is 0.000157 km/km².

If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

Who said in our "theory, the foundation" is "CURVATURE"? You?

The exact size of the earth is of minor importance. The more important issues are is the surface of the earth flat or not?
And simple observations that anyone can see seem to make it quite obvious that the earth cannot be flat!

All over the world,  on a clear day the sun rises an sets like this:

Sunrise - Black Sea HD 265,498 views by kalcymc

LHG-0693 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.02, 300 mm

And you still can't explain  without all sorts of imaginary hokus-pocus!

Then a flat earth must have edges the cannot be passed yours puts that at the South Pole but there can't be and edge there because numerous have crossed over your imaginary edge.

On this you might read The Flat Earth AE map: Is Antarctica/Terra Australis larger/closer than shown? « Message by rabinoz »

Now, please remember, Plat Terra, that YOU are asking "When will RE Community Accept Defeat?"

You might doubt what I have written but, to the best of my knowledge, it is correct - so you have to convince me and others that the above observations do not indicate that the earth simply cannot be flat.

Over to you!

PS You silly memes do not help you case in the slightest. Given time I could show that almost all are totally wrong and simply confuse things.

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 09:38:41 PM

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal. If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

You are either the most academically dishonest person here, or dense beyond reason.  This point was disproved ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DISCUSSION.

Are you fully incapable of understanding the written word?  Are you also fully incapable of spatial reasoning, namely the ability to visualize or conceptualize the topics being discussed here?  Plat, this is a dead subject.  This angle you keep trying to work has been soundly drummed into the ground, across 50+ pages of debate.  What don't you understand here?  What glitch in your reasoning prevents you from understanding this stuff?  The folks here have been patient, beyond what you should be afforded at this point, and explained everything at varying levels of simplicity.  What the hell is your problem??

If this was a dead subject then what is preventing you from telling me what the verified curvature  bulge is over (by Length and width) New Zealand and how it relates to Eratosthnes experiment?

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established curvature charts like maps. It should be common knowledge just as the other details are about the landmasses or canals.
 
But you don’t. Do you know why? You guys “NEVER VERIFIED CURVATURE” and thought the theory was a fact” . You guys never verified the foundation of your theory. Now you are afraid of the subject because it has come back you bite you in the ass. You now fear there is no sphere. You forefathers are laughing their heads off at the masses they have deceived and there’s not a damn thing you can do about it except squeal like pigs. No argument you have is as important as this and nothing else you argue will ever prove earth is a damn sphere.

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 09:38:41 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on September 05, 2019, 09:07:22 PM

Quote from: Shifter on September 05, 2019, 04:05:11 PM

Well clearly your math is broken. 10^10^47 to 10^10^48 is not a single year

Maybe you could enlightened us by writing that out out as a simple number without the powers - should be easy for one of your brilliance!

Go back to AR and Were Penguins where your type belong.

Why don’t you show Shifter how smart you really are and tell us what is the verified curvature over the center of the Suez canal.

What do you mean by "verified curvature" neither you nor I can go there and measure it.


You see to want the curvature of a cross-section through the canal and the official definition of curvature is this:

Quote

Curvature of plane curves
Augustin-Louis Cauchy defined the center of curvature of a curve C as the intersection point of two infinitely close normals to the curve, the radius of curvature as the distance from the point to C, and the curvature itself as the inverse of the radius of curvature

So, by that definition the curvature of the Suez Canal or any other smooth piece of ocean is 0.000157 km/km².

Quote from: Plat Terra

If you cannot give me a direct answer, please explain why. If you can't, maybe you should go back to school and learn how to verify the most important issue in you theory, the foundation, CURVATURE.

Who said in our "theory, the foundation" is "CURVATURE"? You?

The exact size of the earth is of minor importance. The more important issues are is the surface of the earth flat or not?
And simple observations that anyone can see seem to make it quite obvious that the earth cannot be flat!

All over the world,  on a clear day the sun rises an sets like this:

Sunrise - Black Sea HD 265,498 views by kalcymc

LHG-0693 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.02, 300 mm

And you still can't explain  without all sorts of imaginary hokus-pocus!

Then a flat earth must have edges the cannot be passed yours puts that at the South Pole but there can't be and edge there because numerous have crossed over your imaginary edge.

On this you might read The Flat Earth AE map: Is Antarctica/Terra Australis larger/closer than shown? « Message by rabinoz »

Now, please remember, Plat Terra, that YOU are asking "When will RE Community Accept Defeat?"

You might doubt what I have written but, to the best of my knowledge, it is correct - so you have to convince me and others that the above observations do not indicate that the earth simply cannot be flat.

Over to you!

PS You silly memes do not help you case in the slightest. Given time I could show that almost all are totally wrong and simply confuse things.

Don't give me that crap. We have established Star charts and maps of the world with all types of details except CURVATURE.  When are you guys going to start classes on how to actually prove curvature through math?

Remember this, no argument you have is as important as this and nothing else you argue will ever prove earth is sphere, but it will prove your ignorance of how the world really works.

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established charts like maps. It should be common knowledge just as the other details are about the landmasses or canals.

Are you trying to be funny because this is the most hilarious statement you've made to date. What do you think the worlds maps and charts are based on?

You're not serious are you?

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 10:43:23 PM

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established charts like maps. It should be common knowledge just as the other details are about the landmasses or canals.

Are you trying to be funny because this is the most hilarious statement you've made to date. What do you think the worlds maps and charts are based on?

You're not serious are you?

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established curvature charts like maps.

Quote from: Stash on September 05, 2019, 10:58:22 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on September 05, 2019, 10:43:23 PM

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established charts like maps. It should be common knowledge just as the other details are about the landmasses or canals.

Are you trying to be funny because this is the most hilarious statement you've made to date. What do you think the worlds maps and charts are based on?

You're not serious are you?

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established curvature charts like maps.

It's been done. What do you think Geodesy is? As part of that there is the Geoid, the model of global mean sea level that is used to measure precise surface elevations. What would a "curvature chart" serve? What do you think a great circle route is?

Why do you think I asked you what the center of the Suez canal is? How would you determine that?

After a 1,000+ years, you guys should have mapped curvature all over the world and have established charts like maps. It should be common knowledge just as the other details are about the landmasses or canals.

The curvature is effectively mapped but why do it "all over the world"? Have you verified that there is no curvature anywhere? You have done nothing!

But the earth is so close to a perfect ellipsoid that rather than specify it's curvature every the results are presented as a deviation from a reference ellipsoid.

3.0 Introduction

The surface of the Earth is anything but uniform. The oceans, can be treated as reasonably uniform, but the surface or topography of the land masses exhibits large vertical variations between mountains and valleys. These variations make it impossible to approximate the shape of the Earth with any reasonably simple mathematical model. Consequently, two main reference surfaces have been established to approximate the shape of the Earth. One reference surface is called the Geoid, the other reference surface is the ellipsoid. These are illustrated in the figure below.

The Earth's surface, and two reference surfaces used to approximate it: the Geoid, and a reference ellipsoid.
The deviation between the Geoid and a reference ellipsoid is called geoid separation (N).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Where a mass deficiency exists, the Geoid will dip below the mean ellipsoid. Conversely, where a mass surplus exists, the Geoid will rise above the mean ellipsoid. These influences cause the Geoid to deviate from a mean ellipsoidal shape by up to +/- 100 meters. The deviation between the Geoid and an ellipsoid is called the geoid separation (N) or geoid undulation. The biggest presently known undulations are the minimum in the Indian Ocean with N = -100 meters and the maximum in the northern part of the Atlantic Ocean with N = +70 meters (figure below).

Deviations (undulations) between the Geoid and the WGS84 ellipsoid.

We have, but where is your map ?

So, it's all been mapped I  fine detail. Maybe not in the way you would like but you are not running the show, so too bad.

For all practical purposes the Globe is an ellipsoid like this:

Equatorial (a), polar (b) and mean Earth radii as defined
in the 1984 World Geodetic System revision (not to scale).

There are so many people among the Globe Earth community accepting defeat, they had to create an advertising propaganda campaign to persuade the masses. Imagine that! This proves you guys really suck at proving curvature

Remember these words when you sleep tonight,” Earth is not a sphere. It’s a PLAT TERRA."

Good night!

There are so many people among the Globe Earth community accepting defeat, they had to create an advertising propaganda campaign to persuade the masses. Imagine that! This proves you guys really suck at proving curvature

Remember these words when you sleep tonight,” Earth is not a sphere. It’s a PLAT TERRA."

Good night!

You lose yet another debate and then run away and hide behind a poorly rendered meme. Pretty typical of you. At least you're consistent and consistently wrong.