The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Arkanos on December 11, 2009, 02:08:21 PM
-
According to the FAQ, the circumference of the flat earth is 78,000 miles. That means it would take 78,000 miles of travel distance to completely circumnavigate the icewall and end up where you started.
The coastline of Antarctica, which is actually this icewall, is about 11,000 miles in coastline. Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
There would be quite a noticeable time difference in travelling 11,000 miles compared to 78,000.
-
Also, I tried to travel along the ice wall the other day. I went south, then when I got to the wall, I turned right when I got to the wall. I expected, based on my flat earth map, to make all right turns, but I ended up having to make all lefts! whats the deal???
now that I think about it, it didn't take nearly as long as expected either.... what gives?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
-
The real question is why doesn't a motivated and enterprising flat earther try this his or her self?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
-
Just for shits and giggles can we also get at least one reference that is not a FES one. As a point of interest, how come Tom you accept any random piece of FE theory with no proof or evidence. When it comes to RE evidence you pick on the smallest detail or ask for the data.
-
Waiting to see what these haters have to say about good ole Fedor...
-
Who recorded it?
See Moons post above.
Who recorded the circumference for the flat earth map?
-
I'm sure they didn't, Licey... not doubt they took the pole to pole measurement of the globe and used that as the radius give or take and induced from there. It'd probably be even more accurate if they used their own measurements instead of using those of unreliable REers
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
There's another large number of people that have to be added to the conspiracy list. Why sponsor a race around the icewall if you're trying to hide it?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
-
you think theres another fucking continent down there we found but didn't realize or aknowledge??? jesus childrapist christ what the fuck? this can't really be what your saying can it?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
You've got to be kidding.
-
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Antarctica
-
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Antarctica
The distinct continent model fails hardcore.
I would love to see an accurate representation of Antarctica on a flat earth, if it is not this supposed "ice wall."
Also, it's kind of lame that you have these 'backup theories.' "Oh, it doesn't make sense if Antarctica is an ice wall, good thing we have this other theory which states it may actually be a continent, which totally contradicts my initial beliefs"
-
you think theres another fucking continent down there we found but didn't realize or aknowledge??? jesus childrapist christ what the fuck? this can't really be what your saying can it?
Tom Bishop does not understand the minimum basics of navigation, but yet he frequently declares that everyone else is an illiterate on the subject.
He thinks nobody does a decent job of checking the compass regularly, use dead reckoning, use the sextant; in short, Tom Bishop has to insult every navigator in the world that has traveled south of the equator even though he has demonstrated no skill whatsoever in the field he criticizes everyone else.
Anyone could easily see that the continent Tom Bishop has just invented is not Antarctica and not the Ice Wall he invented just by looking at the compass every now and then and seeing that the bearing of the ship goes full circle from South to East to North to West (or the other way around) if they travel around an island or continent that is not Antarctica or the "ice wall".
-
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
You're very light on evidence here, Tom. More inportantly, though:
Zeteticism is simply to start science from experiment rather than hypothesis and to leave no rock unturned or bush unmolested to reach the ultimate truths of the universe.
It seems like I've turned the "rock" over, you haven't liked the look of what's underneath, so you've chosen to put it back again.
-I call that "Selective Use of Evidence to Support Beliefs" (http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalflawsinreasoning/a/confirmation.htm). Another hallmark of pseudoscience.
YOU FAIL
-
I've never said that the original FET map is correct. It's for visual purposes only, as I've been saying all along.
I never made any claim to measure or map out the layout of the entire world.
-
I've never said that the original FET map is correct. It's for visual purposes only, as I've been saying all along.
I never made any claim to measure or map out the layout of the entire world.
Oh yes you have:
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
The "Ice Rim" sounds like a geographic object to me.
Also in an previous thread:
When James Clark Ross sailed along the coast of the Ice Wall he reported sailing a distance of over 60,000 miles. You can read all about it in Earth Not a Globe, Zetetic Cosmogony, and 100 Proofs, all of which are linked and available in my signature link.
That appears to be an attempt (by you) to define the boundaries of the FE. Remember that like Ross, Fedor Konyukhov would have had a compass, telling him which direction he was sailing in. It seems impossibly unlikely that he would have made such a blindingly obvious navigational mistake.
-
Oh yes you have:
I haven't claimed to measure or map out anything. I've only related what Sir James Clark Ross did.
That appears to be an attempt (by you) to define the boundaries of the FE. Remember that like Ross, Fedor Konyukhov would have had a compass, telling him which direction he was sailing in. It seems impossibly unlikely that he would have made such a blindingly obvious navigational mistake.
The compass doesn't even work in the Antarctic or Arctic Circles. I don't know why you'd think that he would use one where it wouldn't work. The compass only really works on a narrow strip of land where the majority of the world lives.
Anyone living in the Arctic circle, for example, could tell you that the compass does not work there due to the field lines being vertical.
The compass barely even works at the longitude of Seattle, Washingtion. At that longitude the field lines are at an angle and compass needle is already scraping along its bottom.
Evidence: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html
"So, what would happen to your compass as you walked north across Canada, towards the location of the North Magnetic Pole out on the Arctic ice? Well, here in Seattle the magnetic field is already tilting down into the ground, and I'm nowhere near the north pole. My compass still points north, but the needle is tilted, and the north end is scraping the bottom of the compass. If I started walking north, it would tilt more and more until it hit bottom and wouldn't work anymore."
The author of the article, William Beaty, goes on to explain that the compass is only usable in a very limited region between the Arctic and Antarctic circles. The compass needle is unable align with the vertical magnetic fields and defy "gravity" at the Northern and Southern regions of the earth, thus becoming useless to the explorer.
-
The compass doesn't even work in the Antarctic or Arctic Circles. I don't know why you'd think that he would use one where it wouldn't work. The compass only really works on a narrow strip of land where the majority of the world lives.
Anyone living in the Arctic circle, for example, could tell you that the compass does not work there due to the field lines being vertical.
The compass barely even works at the longitude of Seattle, Washingtion. At that longitude the field lines are at an angle and compass needle is already scraping along its bottom.
Evidence: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html
"So, what would happen to your compass as you walked north across Canada, towards the location of the North Magnetic Pole out on the Arctic ice? Well, here in Seattle the magnetic field is already tilting down into the ground, and I'm nowhere near the north pole. My compass still points north, but the needle is tilted, and the north end is scraping the bottom of the compass. If I started walking north, it would tilt more and more until it hit bottom and wouldn't work anymore."
The author of the article, William Beaty, goes on to explain that the compass is only usable in a very limited region between the Arctic and Antarctic circles. The compass needle is unable align with the vertical magnetic fields and defy "gravity" at the Northern and Southern regions of the earth, thus becoming useless to the explorer.
As usual, Tom Bishop does not even read his own quoted articles. If you read the very next paragraph following the piece he quoted, you will read:
"If I used a good, expensive compass, then the needle would be on a little axel and would not be able to tilt."
and a few paragraphs later,
"There is another type of compass besides the normal, everyday type. These compasses are called 'dip needles,' and are positioned vertically. Their needles rotate downward, not sideways as with an everyday compass."
And as always, the claims Tom Bishop makes about James Clarke Ross' voyage are totally wrong. He spent years going back and forth along the coasts of Antarctica, and his total trip, with the initial leg to Antarctica and some trips to South America and Australia totaled some 60000 miles and covered about 5/6 of Antarctica's coastline. This has been shown so many times that Tom Bishop does not even bother to deny it any more, he just waits a few months and makes this claim again as if nobody had demolished his arguments before.
-
As usual, Tom Bishop does not even read his own quoted articles. If you read the very next paragraph following the piece he quoted, you will read:
"If I used a good, expensive compass, then the needle would be on a little axel and would not be able to tilt."
and a few paragraphs later,
"There is another type of compass besides the normal, everyday type. These compasses are called 'dip needles,' and are positioned vertically. Their needles rotate downward, not sideways as with an everyday compass."
Even the dip needle only gets you so far.
Once you get into the Arctic or Antarctic circle the dip needle points directly downwards as the field lines are vertical. You still don't know which way you are going, or which way is North. The dip needle is completely useless when it's pointing directly downwards throughout the entirety of the Arctic circle.
-
Good job we've got GPS as well now then isn't it? ;)
-
Good job we've got GPS as well now then isn't it? ;)
GPS doesn't provide direction.
From http://www.gpsreview.net/electronic-compass/
"The GPS system itself can only provide information about where the device is. At the core GPS does not provide speed information and it does not provide direction information."
-
Good job we've got GPS as well now then isn't it? ;)
GPS doesn't provide direction.
From http://www.gpsreview.net/electronic-compass/
"The GPS system itself can only provide information about where the device is. At the core GPS does not provide speed information and it does not provide direction information."
You must get lost a lot if you can't figure out that GPS will tell you if you are going in the direction you want by comparing where it told you you were with where it tells you you are now. Duh. From that, the average human (not you with your vestigial hindbrain) could work out what direction they travelled in.
-
We were talking about finding north.
GPS doesn't tell you which way is north.
-
The compass barely even works at the longitude of Seattle, Washingtion. At that longitude the field lines are at an angle and compass needle is already scraping along its bottom.
Evidence: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html
really, tom?
I live at a latitude of 57.5 degrees north.
Seattle is 47.6 degrees north.
the compass works perfectly well here, I have many times in my life used compasses while mountaineering and hillwalking.
yet again, your claims are absolute and utter nonsense.
-
I never made any claim to measure or map out the layout of the entire world.
Arguing from a base of ignorance. Is there anything more satisfying?
-
I've never said that the original FET map is correct. It's for visual purposes only, as I've been saying all along.
I never made any claim to measure or map out the layout of the entire world.
Then why don't you map it out? Thousands have helped map out our round world, why don't you go map out your flat world?
-
Oh yes you have:
I haven't claimed to measure or map out anything. I've only related what Sir James Clark Ross did.
Mmmm. You now seem to be distancing yourself from Sir James Clark Ross and the 60,000 mile claim. You have used him countless times on these forums to support the FE POV, and now you are shying away.
Where's your head, Tom. Fedor Konyukhov or Sir JCR ?
-
The compass barely even works at the longitude of Seattle, Washingtion. At that longitude the field lines are at an angle and compass needle is already scraping along its bottom.
Evidence: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html
really, tom?
I live at a latitude of 57.5 degrees north.
Seattle is 47.6 degrees north.
the compass works perfectly well here, I have many times in my life used compasses while mountaineering and hillwalking.
yet again, your claims are absolute and utter nonsense.
I didn't say that the compass doesn't work at those latitudes far below the arctic circle. It just scrapes along the bottom.
Also, the compass you bought may have had an axle already in it since only specialty compasses are typically sold at higher latitudes.
Once you get to the Arctic circle the field lines are vertical and the dip compass just points downward, making the compass useless to the explorer.
-
Ahh, Tom, where would we be without your leaps of assumption and splendid ignorance of reality?
(http://www.mapsworldwide.com/itm_img/8860134820.jpg)
a bog-standard Silva compass. as made in sweden. (that's a country with much of its land mass in the arctic circle, for those of us who adhere to Real Earth geography, by the way)
It served me very well, pointing to the north and south poles from as far north as Tromso in norway (well beyond the circle) and as far south as New Mexico... its still probably in my parent's house all these years later. somewhere.
Unfortunately, "dip compasses" as you put them are, in fact something completely different to what your deranged imagination seems to envisage: they are in fact fixed in their rotation on the horizontal plane, so they may only rise and lower in the vertical plane - or dip downwards. they were used by geologists to find magnetic deposits. they are not in any sense used by rational man, beast or duck, a device used for dertermining north, in such a configuration. Many dip compasses, however, could be physically moved from vertical to the horizontal plane to be used as normal compasses.
(http://eost.u-strasbg.fr/musee/Images/Magn/02boussole_incl.gif) is a pic of one such device.
the change in field in differnt regions can be read here:
http://www.wide-screen.com/Suunto/zoneInfo.shtml
if, for once in your life, Tom, you actually want to learn something about what you're pretending to appear to know something about, instead of simply talking nonsense.
-
No. Dip Compasses don't only look like that. That's not the sole and only incarnation of a dip compass.
There are also electronic dip compasses, which is precisely what the website you've quoted is referencing.
http://www.wide-screen.com/Suunto/zoneInfo.shtml
"The horizontal and vertical components of the earth's magnetic field vary considerably at different locations. Most compasses are balanced for this magnetic inclination or dip by counterweights on the needle to prevent it from dragging on the top or bottom of the compass capsule. A compass needle that is balanced for use in North America will drag or stick in South America. For this reason Suunto balances compasses for 5 different zones. If the compass is used in an adjacent balancing zone, many compass pointers will tilt only slightly, however, the farther a compass is used from its correct zone, the more its pointer tilts. In extreme cases, the pointer will stick. For this reason it is extremely important to know in which zone a compass will be used.
Here is a simplified example of what happens to a compass balanced for Zone 1 when it is taken into the Southern Hemisphere.
Wide Screen Software LLC offers Zone 1 Compasses for the Northern Hemisphere. We often have TANDEMS for the other zones in stock. Please send us an email to inquire about the availability of Suunto TANDEMS for the other magnetic zones.
Suunto has developed a patented global needle that will perform correctly in all 5 of the Earth's zones. This needle in used in Suunto's Global Navigator Compass."
As you can see, this company sells specialty compasses for five different zones. Each compass is marketed to a different zone.
However, even Sunnto's compass won't work where the field lines are vertical at the Arctic and Antarctic circles. At those localities the compass would just point straight downwards.
Luckily for the company relatively no one lives in the Arctic or Antarctic circles.
-
The field lines ARE nearly vertical in Antarctica, because it is the SOUTH POLE! You finally got something right! Your parents got to spend a moment relatively shame free! Keep this up, and maybe they'll let your dad back into kiwanis!
-
Luckily for the company relatively no one lives in the Arctic or Antarctic circles.
Since the unmentioned author removes names from quotes of others the same courtesy has been forwarded.
My question is what about all the Australian Antarctic Division research posts? Postings for a year at a time are not unusual. If that's not living then what is...
-
http://www.aad.gov.au/
Have a look at this link. It even includes non government Antarctic tourism.
-
We were talking about finding north.
GPS doesn't tell you which way is north.
Point 0) The north pole (geographic or magnetic)
Point 1) Your original location
Point 2) Your current location
Line pt(1), pt(0) = North
Line pt(1), pt(2) = Your travel direction
Angle 0,1,2 your angular orientation relative to north, the closer to zero, the more north you are traveling.
-
I was about to do that, its a sphere.
Although Tom is technically right, there's nothing in the unit to tell you what direction you're going in.
-
Oh yes you have:
I haven't claimed to measure or map out anything. I've only related what Sir James Clark Ross did.
That appears to be an attempt (by you) to define the boundaries of the FE. Remember that like Ross, Fedor Konyukhov would have had a compass, telling him which direction he was sailing in. It seems impossibly unlikely that he would have made such a blindingly obvious navigational mistake.
The compass doesn't even work in the Antarctic or Arctic Circles. I don't know why you'd think that he would use one where it wouldn't work. The compass only really works on a narrow strip of land where the majority of the world lives.
Anyone living in the Arctic circle, for example, could tell you that the compass does not work there due to the field lines being vertical.
The compass barely even works at the longitude of Seattle, Washingtion. At that longitude the field lines are at an angle and compass needle is already scraping along its bottom.
Evidence: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html
"So, what would happen to your compass as you walked north across Canada, towards the location of the North Magnetic Pole out on the Arctic ice? Well, here in Seattle the magnetic field is already tilting down into the ground, and I'm nowhere near the north pole. My compass still points north, but the needle is tilted, and the north end is scraping the bottom of the compass. If I started walking north, it would tilt more and more until it hit bottom and wouldn't work anymore."
The author of the article, William Beaty, goes on to explain that the compass is only usable in a very limited region between the Arctic and Antarctic circles. The compass needle is unable align with the vertical magnetic fields and defy "gravity" at the Northern and Southern regions of the earth, thus becoming useless to the explorer.
If the Earth is flat, that problem with the compass wouldn't exist... You say that the Earth is flat, then say that near the "Ice Rim" You can't tell direction because North is below you. I am surprised noone else noticed this really, really flawed logic. You can't say that telling direction near the poles impossible because the earth is round to disprove proof that the Earth is round.
-
The field lines need only be vertical at the rim, just as predicted by FET. I'm not sure why you state this would not exist.
-
We were talking about finding north.
GPS doesn't tell you which way is north.
Yes it does. Tell the gps you want to go to 90 degrees north latitude. It will bring you to the true north pole.
-
I was about to do that, its a sphere.
Although Tom is technically right, there's nothing in the unit to tell you what direction you're going in.
Actually most gps devices inverse between where you were recently and where you are now. If you maintain a reasonable speed and course, it will display them to you.
-
The field lines need only be vertical at the rim, just as predicted by FET. I'm not sure why you state this would not exist.
Prove it.
-
The field lines need only be vertical at the rim, just as predicted by FET. I'm not sure why you state this would not exist.
I am trying to understand this statement. Your are referring to a theory, and what it would predict if it were true?
I would word that: If the field lines are vertical at the rim, then that is another piece of evidence supporting FET.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
It doesn't.
There would be quite a noticeable time difference in travelling 11,000 miles compared to 78,000.
Not necessarily.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
It doesn't.
There would be quite a noticeable time difference in travelling 11,000 miles compared to 78,000.
Not necessarily.
Ah, unsubstantiated one liner opinions, presented as fact. Glad to have you back :)
-
ITT: TB uses a fairly deep understanding of RE physics, tools, maps, and geographical features to claim how the world cant be round because those things (that are long established elementary level physics and navigation principles) he just used as an example, dont actually work.
Then the rest of us get sucked in to what boils down to masterfull trolling. Pseudoscience FTW.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
It doesn't.
Thank you for renewing your membership of the Reality Denial Club.
-
The field lines need only be vertical at the rim, just as predicted by FET. I'm not sure why you state this would not exist.
I am trying to understand this statement. Your are referring to a theory, and what it would predict if it were true?
I would word that: If the field lines are vertical at the rim, then that is another piece of evidence supporting FET.
You may read it that way. FET predicts a zone where vertical field lines would be found encompassing the disc.
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
Please do not necro threads unless you have a valid reason. Consider this a warning.
-
Well, it was either that or I start an identical thread. Some forums prefer to necro rather than restart the topic. If you would rather I begin this same topic in a new thread, I will be willing to do so. But, if I may make one suggestion.... see about removing the search button. That way, no one will be able to necro.
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
No more takers on this one?
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
So many words and so little sense... What's your point? Can you prove it?
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
So many words and so little sense... What's your point? Can you prove it?
You're asking me if a discrepancy of 53,000 miles can be proven? It's easy. GO THERE. Travel. I don't know one traveler who believes the earth is flat. Not one. I've seen most of the world. I've met people who have seen even more than I have. Not one traveler believes that the earth is flat. Doesn't that tell you something?
53,000 miles. That's the argument here.
As I said in my thread Intelligence in Debate, there are 4 types of believers:
1. Those with proof
2. Those with only hearsay
3. Those who believe out of fear (like believing in a hell like christians do)
4. Those who believe because they want to belong to something
If no travelers believe that the world is flat then what does that tell you about the type of believer you are?
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
So many words and so little sense... What's your point? Can you prove it?
You're asking me if a discrepancy of 53,000 miles can be proven? It's easy. GO THERE. Travel. I don't know one traveler who believes the earth is flat. Not one. I've seen most of the world. I've met people who have seen even more than I have. Not one traveler believes that the earth is flat. Doesn't that tell you something?
53,000 miles. That's the argument here.
As I said in my thread Intelligence in Debate, there are 4 types of believers:
1. Those with proof
2. Those with only hearsay
3. Those who believe out of fear (like believing in a hell like christians do)
4. Those who believe because they want to belong to something
If no travelers believe that the world is flat then what does that tell you about the type of believer you are?
So you mean you have no proof? You look like believer type 2.
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
So many words and so little sense... What's your point? Can you prove it?
You're asking me if a discrepancy of 53,000 miles can be proven? It's easy. GO THERE. Travel. I don't know one traveler who believes the earth is flat. Not one. I've seen most of the world. I've met people who have seen even more than I have. Not one traveler believes that the earth is flat. Doesn't that tell you something?
53,000 miles. That's the argument here.
As I said in my thread Intelligence in Debate, there are 4 types of believers:
1. Those with proof
2. Those with only hearsay
3. Those who believe out of fear (like believing in a hell like christians do)
4. Those who believe because they want to belong to something
If no travelers believe that the world is flat then what does that tell you about the type of believer you are?
So you mean you have no proof? You look like believer type 2.
Nah. I have proof. As does the world. You see, as stated in Intelligence in Debate, (the other thread I'm posting in) I have pointed out that there is an astronomical amount of proof supporting a spherical earth yet YOU seem to want to believe it's flat yet when asked for proof, you back talk, get dodgy, insult, and accuse. You people like Psychiatrists, right? That's called Transference. You want to belong so you believe this flat earth conspiracy and turn your noses up at anyone who doesn't believe how you do.
I have my answer. Not a single one of you can provide the slightest bit of evidence besides "It looks flat when I stare out of my window." Congratulations, Clayman. You have represented your Flat Earth Group like an idiot.
-
As for who's mapped Antarctica, who hasn't? Private Fishermen, animal rights activists, whalers, Green Peace, oceanographers, environmental protection agency, more private fishermen, explorers, oil drillers, etc...
Who HASN'T flown over it or sailed it or explore it? I was in the Navy. I've sailed almost every part of this globe. I'm willing to bet I've seen more of this planet then any flat earther.
Not ONE map, photo, video, or drawing shows Antarctica as a thin ring at the edge of the earth. If there is anyone in Australia who thinks the earth is flat then I challenge them to go talk to a private fisherman. Ask him what he thinks of that. There is a HUGE difference between a continent (large island) and an outer ring.
The circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles around the Equator. That's the longest distance to be traveled in a straight line. The earth is not 78,000 miles in circumference around Antarctica. This is easily proven and it has been proven by so many people it's ridiculous.
So many words and so little sense... What's your point? Can you prove it?
You're asking me if a discrepancy of 53,000 miles can be proven? It's easy. GO THERE. Travel. I don't know one traveler who believes the earth is flat. Not one. I've seen most of the world. I've met people who have seen even more than I have. Not one traveler believes that the earth is flat. Doesn't that tell you something?
53,000 miles. That's the argument here.
As I said in my thread Intelligence in Debate, there are 4 types of believers:
1. Those with proof
2. Those with only hearsay
3. Those who believe out of fear (like believing in a hell like christians do)
4. Those who believe because they want to belong to something
If no travelers believe that the world is flat then what does that tell you about the type of believer you are?
So you mean you have no proof? You look like believer type 2.
Nah. I have proof. As does the world. You see, as stated in Intelligence in Debate, (the other thread I'm posting in) I have pointed out that there is an astronomical amount of proof supporting a spherical earth yet YOU seem to want to believe it's flat yet when asked for proof, you back talk, get dodgy, insult, and accuse. You people like Psychiatrists, right? That's called Transference. You want to belong so you believe this flat earth conspiracy and turn your noses up at anyone who doesn't believe how you do.
I have my answer. Not a single one of you can provide the slightest bit of evidence besides "It looks flat when I stare out of my window." Congratulations, Clayman. You have represented your Flat Earth Group like an idiot.
You now insult me and still no proofs... Go get some pills, think about your proves and come back again ::)
-
Clayman, what proof are you asking for?
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
i didn't say i will give you money! I said i will pay for the trip ;D. Do you want to come along???
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
Well, of course the money will be used for the trip, but how can we trust that you're sincere if you're not willing to deposit it into our PayPal account up front?
I would love to go!
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
Well, of course the money will be used for the trip, but how can we trust that you're sincere if you're not willing to deposit it into our PayPal account up front?
I would love to go!
I think he is talking about a different kind of trip than you are.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
Well, of course the money will be used for the trip, but how can we trust that you're sincere if you're not willing to deposit it into our PayPal account up front?
I would love to go!
I think he is talking about a different kind of trip than you are.
Let me enlight you about your question! A simple exmple :D, If you ask a woman out for dinner, do you give her the money for the dinner up front ? or you go to dinner together and you pay the bill? ;)
Now i will say the same thing for the third time ;D I said... (clears throat) I WILL PAY for the trip, so Flat Earth Society can make all the necessary arrangements with bookings and I will pay the bill! ;D The offer applies to all the members of the Flat Earth Society. I will even fund you your own documentary crew so you can make your own documentary!
And please don't ask why... its simple ... ;D because I can ;D
-
Please dont waste your money Turbofan
First of all, Antarctia has been crossed, mapped, and people live there.
It is not "the ice wall". It is a separate continet, See Master's Willmores map.
Also, you will never convince a faqqer of anything. Even if you went they would say they were drugged, or that they were witnessing a hologram, or something silly like that.
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
Well, of course the money will be used for the trip, but how can we trust that you're sincere if you're not willing to deposit it into our PayPal account up front?
I would love to go!
I think he is talking about a different kind of trip than you are.
Let me enlight you about your question! A simple exmple :D, If you ask a woman out for dinner, do you give her the money for the dinner up front ? or you go to dinner together and you pay the bill? ;)
Now i will say the same thing for the third time ;D I said... (clears throat) I WILL PAY for the trip, so Flat Earth Society can make all the necessary arrangements with bookings and I will pay the bill! ;D The offer applies to all the members of the Flat Earth Society. I will even fund you your own documentary crew so you can make your own documentary!
And please don't ask why... its simple ... ;D because I can ;D
I'm sorry, you have to understand, we get a lot of trolls here. While I usually prefer to look for the good in people and assume the best intentions, because I'm an idealist, I'm just not sure we can trust you to pay up when the time comes. Also, this is a bit different from trying to woo a woman (unless you are attracted to Tom Bishop! :-X) so your analogy really doesn't apply.
But I do trust that you fully intend to live up to your word, and provide us with the $$$ necessary to mount this expedition. If you're really interested, PM Daniel and ask him how to deposit money into our PayPal account!
-
Why does it only take 11,000 miles to totally circumnavigate Antarctica and end up where you started, when it should take 78,000?
That's because it doesn't.
Then why is the coastline of Antarctica recorded to be 11,000 miles?
Who recorded it?
Fedor Konyukhov did it in 102 Days (http://www.antarcticacup.com/). If it was 78,000 miles he would have had to average 767 miles per day!
As it stands, he would have averaged a more realistic 107 miles a day.
Tom, I know you are going to reject this evidence out of hand. I'm interested to know the reason.
I don't think that account is fabricated. He might have gone around something. Not necessarily the Ice Rim.
How do you know mr Bishop have you been there? if not why dont you go! i will pay all the expenses! here is your chance to prove your theory.
PM Daniel and I'm sure he will be willing to tell you how to deposit those funds into our PayPal account. How exciting!
I didn't say that I will give you money! ;D. I said that i will pay for the trip, do you want to come along? ;)
Well, of course the money will be used for the trip, but how can we trust that you're sincere if you're not willing to deposit it into our PayPal account up front?
I would love to go!
I think he is talking about a different kind of trip than you are.
Let me enlight you about your question! A simple exmple :D, If you ask a woman out for dinner, do you give her the money for the dinner up front ? or you go to dinner together and you pay the bill? ;)
Now i will say the same thing for the third time ;D I said... (clears throat) I WILL PAY for the trip, so Flat Earth Society can make all the necessary arrangements with bookings and I will pay the bill! ;D The offer applies to all the members of the Flat Earth Society. I will even fund you your own documentary crew so you can make your own documentary!
And please don't ask why... its simple ... ;D because I can ;D
I'm sorry, you have to understand, we get a lot of trolls here. While I usually prefer to look for the good in people and assume the best intentions, because I'm an idealist, I'm just not sure we can trust you to pay up when the time comes. Also, this is a bit different from trying to woo a woman (unless you are attracted to Tom Bishop! :-X) so your analogy really doesn't apply.
But I do trust that you fully intend to live up to your word, and provide us with the $$$ necessary to mount this expedition. If you're really interested, PM Daniel and ask him how to deposit money into our PayPal account!
Well, the dinner example is what i state in the the first place... an example, but you choose to elaborate, change the sentence and imply that i am a gay man which is not true so your point was to insult me! The second assumption was that i am a troll which again i am not because i didn't say anything to imply that! The proposition in our conversation here is quite simple, as i have explained earlier adding a purposely misinterpreted example to gain grounds to throw insults, i am making an offer here to cover the cost of logistics and take whoever of your group is interested on an exploration expedition, adding a documentary crew to record things the way you will dictate. Now i would expect that the appropriate assertiveness from your side to be something like "thank you for your offer mr X, how can we make arrangements so the we can meet and discuss the matter at hand" and not "PM mr David and deposit the £££ in our paypal account" which is abrupt for a multilevel procedure like this one. This is business my friend trust me and in the business world you have to glide not drop!
-
your trip will only prove the what is already known. Antarctica is a continent.
If you have the means, this simple experiment will prove its planar.
mount a camera to one balloon, preferably in a desert or flat plain, or salt flat. or even on a large body of water (if you have a boat). Do this at night.
about 20-25 miles away raise another balloon with a bright light beacon.
raise them both about 100-200 feet off the ground. Do this in an area with no trees or other obstructions.
Now if the video shows the lights beacon we know its planar.
This test is simple if you live in the right area. and have access to a camera and strong light.
-
your trip will only prove the what is already known. Antarctica is a continent.
If you have the means, this simple experiment will prove its planar.
mount a camera to one balloon, preferably in a desert or flat plain, or salt flat. or even on a large body of water (if you have a boat). Do this at night.
about 20-25 miles away raise another balloon with a bright light beacon.
raise them both about 100-200 feet off the ground. Do this in an area with no trees or other obstructions.
Now if the video shows the lights beacon we know its planar.
This test is simple if you live in the right area. and have access to a camera and strong light.
I like the idea of this test, but if the Earth is flat why would the lights have to be 100-200 feet high? Shouldn't 10-20 feet be plenty (as long as it was above the tallest waves, etc.)?
I would have to do the math, but I'm not entirely sure that two objects, each 100-200 feet high would not have line of site to each other on a round earth at 20 miles apart.
Edit: In fact, if both balloons were at 100' height the direct line of site would only just be obstructed by the curvature of the earth when they were 25 miles apart. Even a little higher or closer and there would be direct line of site between the two objects and light would be visable to the camera dispite the Earth's curvature.
-
lets pick 50 ft, i pulgged this in to the spherical earth theory diameter and accordingly objects would be obscured at 20 miles. So just to be safe go 25 miles apart.
So this makes things logistically easier.
raise both ballons, one with camera, one with bright beacon,
and if the light is visible, which i am guessing it will be, planar earth.
-
Well, the dinner example is what i state in the the first place... an example, but you choose to elaborate, change the sentence and imply that i am a gay man which is not true so your point was to insult me!
I never implied any such thing. There's a website called rif.org you might want to visit sometime.
The second assumption was that i am a troll which again i am not because i didn't say anything to imply that!
Again, rif.org. I didn't assume you are a troll (though to be fair this post is making me wonder). I fear that you may be a troll because we see so many. More visitors here are trolls than aren't. The law of averages suggests it. I gave you a way to prove you're not trolling and so far you're failing to make your case. :(
The proposition in our conversation here is quite simple, as i have explained earlier adding a purposely misinterpreted example to gain grounds to throw insults, i am making an offer here to cover the cost of logistics and take whoever of your group is interested on an exploration expedition, adding a documentary crew to record things the way you will dictate. Now i would expect that the appropriate assertiveness from your side to be something like "thank you for your offer mr X, how can we make arrangements so the we can meet and discuss the matter at hand" and not "PM mr David and deposit the £££ in our paypal account" which is abrupt for a multilevel procedure like this one. This is business my friend trust me and in the business world you have to glide not drop!
You are asking us to plan an entire itinerary on the promise of a stranger. You're starting to smell more like a con artist than a troll. I'm afraid we just can't trust you unless you front the money. But rest assured if you do front the money the expedition shall be mounted!
I'll tell you what. I sense you may be apprehensive about providing Daniel with the money because you don't know him. PM me the pertinent information regarding your debit/credit card (card number, expiration date, name, address, and of course the secret three-digit code on the back) and I promise I will make this happen. I've been chomping at the bit to mount such an expedition! You can trust me; we're already friends! :)
disclaimer: Do not pm me with your account details.
-
Turbofan, Don't worry about giving Roundy the information I will vouch for him.
-
But rest assured if you do front the money the expedition shall be mounted!
You're starting to smell more like a con artist than a troll.
-
But rest assured if you do front the money the expedition shall be mounted!
You're starting to smell more like a con artist than a troll.
Actually, even though I would hope it's obvious to Turbofan that I'm joking and don't expect him to actually send me his financial details, what I did was kind of bad form. I've added an appropriate disclaimer to the post.
-
so the official response for moderators is to extort money from new posters, who had a VERY Zetetic idea
demand credit card numbers, expiration dates and 3 digit numbers???
is this what this Society has come to?
-
so the official response for moderators is to extort money from new posters, who had a VERY Zetetic idea
demand credit card numbers, expiration dates and 3 digit numbers???
is this what this Society has come to?
Well... no. I think I made that pretty clear. :-\
Besides, it wouldn't be extortion anyway. He offered to finance the trip.
-
As of 2012 the CIA shows an approximation (no error given) of the Antarctica Coastline to be 18,000.
The question that really needs to be answered is.. according to Flat Earth Theory .. how much land area does Antactica constitue?
Then you can do the circumference calculation.
Your math is fuzzy... it taking into consideration 100% of the Earth's land area.. that's why the numbers are so off..
duhhhh
-
BUMP
<Excerpt from the Flat Earth Conspiracy, by Eric DuBay>
Now there's a reliable source of information. ::)
-
Here ya go a different source about the cook journey.
http://libweb5.princeton.edu/visual_materials/maps/websites/pacific/cook2/cook2.html (http://libweb5.princeton.edu/visual_materials/maps/websites/pacific/cook2/cook2.html)
I love how most FE sources either blatantly misquote or leave out information to try to show that history supports their claims. Yet when you call them out, that part that they left out is always claimed to be conspiracy driven revisionist history.
Here is the published chart of Captain Cook's voyage. Publish in his book in 1777 after his return in 1775.
(http://libweb5.princeton.edu/visual_materials/maps/websites/pacific/cook2/map-southern%20hemisphere-1777-thumb.jpg)
The 60000 mile figure includes from start to end, from England to all the stuff in between and back to England. But since this 60000 mile figure closely matches what sailing the length of the "ice wall" on a FE map, they conveniently leave out the part of the journey that includes getting there and add all the mileage into the exploration portion.
-
Wow, that chart looks pretty flat to me. :-\
-
Wow, that chart looks pretty flat to me. :-\
It's a hemisphere imperfectly projected onto a circle. This particular projection can also be found nowhere on any flat Earth map other then duel Earth.
-
BUMP
<Excerpt from the Flat Earth Conspiracy, by Eric DuBay>
Now there's a reliable source of information. ::)
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yeah, why not, Eric Dubay!
-
Wow, that chart looks pretty flat to me. :-\
*facepalm*
What did you expect, 3d or something?
-
well it literally says "a chart of the southern HEMISPHERE" at the top
hemi: half
sphere: round geometrical object in three-dimensional space
-
Wow, that chart looks pretty flat to me. :-\
Sarchasm, when actually funny, will get you a laugh jroa. This one made me laugh. TY
-
Even without knowing (or caring) about the size - or shape - of the planet, and even without using a magnetic compass, ships have completely circumnavigated Antarctica in a few weeks, arriving at their starting point and finding their way back to port by means of radio beacons.
The mere fact that Antarctica could be circumnavigated, even once, would PROVE that it is not surrounding the flat planet. But such circumnavigation cruises have been done many times, and continue to be done.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1901&dat=19860817&id=NlQgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UtIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2609,979496 (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1901&dat=19860817&id=NlQgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UtIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2609,979496)
By whatever measurement you want - travel time, fuel consumption, mileage - the Antarctic coastline measures roughly 18,000 km (11,200 miles), very roughly half the coastline length of Australia (but the area of Antarctica is about twice that of Australia).
-
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Antarctica
Hmm strange.
I assume that you also find it strange.
That being the case, you'll be horrified to learn that there is no evidence of anyone 'mapping' the coastline of Antarctica either - even for the 'globe' earth, the 'accepted' model, proven by science! (Unless of course - you subscribe to the idea that it was mapped in 1513 lol).
Please enlighten me and show me evidence of this exercise.