The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: guv on August 17, 2014, 08:07:01 PM

Title: A map
Post by: guv on August 17, 2014, 08:07:01 PM
Found a flat earth map, this may clear up some disputes.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rowbotham's_flat_Earth_map.jpg (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rowbotham's_flat_Earth_map.jpg)
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Macpie on August 18, 2014, 12:06:07 AM
What are these two blobs replacing Australia supposed to be?... And why is it so far away from any other land?
Title: Re: A map
Post by: macrohard on August 19, 2014, 06:34:30 PM
Australia and New Zealand.

New Zealand is the size of Australia and they are both very far away from everything else because it is hilariously inaccurate.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: robintex on August 19, 2014, 07:39:34 PM
Aside from Rowbotham's map, this is the usual so-called "flat earth map"
http://www.mapthematics.com/ProjectionsList/Projectioninfo/azimuthal_equidistant-map.png (http://www.mapthematics.com/ProjectionsList/Projectioninfo/azimuthal_equidistant-map.png)
Which of course is a map made from a projection of the globe.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Pongo on August 19, 2014, 08:02:09 PM
I was going to post a telegraph map from the 1850's and say something like, "look at how inaccurate round-earth maps are. Lol." I even had the map all picked out. However, those types of posts always seem to be lost on round-earthers and they never understand my clever way of showing them how silly their arguments are.

I don't know, I just don't know. I mean, should I say that attacking the FE model does nothing to prove a round-earth? I grow weary of those arguments. Should I say the map is for ease of understand an idea? I grow tired of referencing diagrams of the atom.

All I can really say is if this is what you're bringing to the table then we'll have the whole world believing in a flat-earth in no time. 
Title: Re: A map
Post by: markjo on August 19, 2014, 08:24:25 PM
I mean, should I say that attacking the FE model does nothing to prove a round-earth?
I don't know.  Does attacking the RE model do anything to prove a flat earth?
Title: Re: A map
Post by: FlatAllTheWay on August 19, 2014, 08:56:54 PM
I mean, should I say that attacking the FE model does nothing to prove a round-earth?

What proves the earth is round (among other evidence) is that actual measured distances between continents and cities are completely consistent with the RE globe and RE maps.  At the same time, these distances are completely inconsistent with any flat earth map that anyone has ever proposed.  If you have a flat earth map that is consistent with know distances between continents and cities, please provide it.  Otherwise, as always, your FE model is based on nothing but fantasy.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on August 20, 2014, 03:03:12 AM
Should I say the map is for ease of understand an idea?
It seems to do the opposite.  The idea of a flat earth is quite easy to grasp, then you take a look at your map and think 'wow, they can't even get the continents in the right place'....
Title: Re: A map
Post by: guv on August 20, 2014, 03:35:14 AM
Every flat earth map I have seen is a bit on the piss if you live in the southern parts of the world.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Pongo on August 20, 2014, 07:08:44 AM
I mean, should I say that attacking the FE model does nothing to prove a round-earth?
I don't know.  Does attacking the RE model do anything to prove a flat earth?

No.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Pongo on August 20, 2014, 07:12:00 AM
I mean, should I say that attacking the FE model does nothing to prove a round-earth?

What proves the earth is round (among other evidence) is that actual measured distances between continents and cities are completely consistent with the RE globe and RE maps.  At the same time, these distances are completely inconsistent with any flat earth map that anyone has ever proposed.  If you have a flat earth map that is consistent with know distances between continents and cities, please provide it.  Otherwise, as always, your FE model is based on nothing but fantasy.

Part of the Flat-Earth Expedition is to make a flat-earth map.  Please help by donating and we can get underway sooner.
Title: Re: A map
Post by: FlatAllTheWay on August 20, 2014, 07:41:53 AM

Part of the Flat-Earth Expedition is to make a flat-earth map.  Please help by donating and we can get underway sooner.

Is there really a Flat-Earth Expedition? To what address or account would one send a donation?
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Son of Orospu on August 20, 2014, 07:46:45 AM

Part of the Flat-Earth Expedition is to make a flat-earth map.  Please help by donating and we can get underway sooner.

Is there really a Flat-Earth Expedition? To what address or account would one send a donation?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61797.0#.U_S0eN_xA38 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61797.0#.U_S0eN_xA38)
Title: Re: A map
Post by: Alpha2Omega on August 20, 2014, 08:33:47 AM
Part of the Flat-Earth Expedition is to make a flat-earth map.  Please help by donating and we can get underway sooner.

Since raising enough money for the proposed very ambitious expedition seems to be a problem, why not scale the first effort back and start by mapping, say, North America, using flat-earth principles.  As you may know, most of the US states (other than the original 13 colonies and Texas) are surveyed into mile-square blocks called Sections.  Because the original surveys were carried out using a spheroidal-earth model, however, once the surveys progressed some distance from their Baseline and Reference Meridian, the sections became distorted.  Since surveying a flat earth into a regular one-mile grid should be really easy, why not do your own section-line resurvey and you can point out to professional land surveyors where their mistakes are.  Much of the Great Plains in the US is crisscrossed by a grid of section line roads that are open to the public, so access to vast areas shouldn't be a problem, and if you start some place like, say, Iowa, logistics should be a snap since the terrain is gentle and small towns and cities every few miles are available to replenish supplies.  Operating out of small mom & pop motels or even camping could be done on the cheap and be much easier than whatever you'd have to do in remote regions with a very hostile climate.  This seems an ideal place to hone your techniques.

Highly accurate surveyor's transits, tapes, and chains that are no longer used professionally should be available for a song.  The pros now almost always use electronic equipment that you probably wouldn't trust, so simple manually-operated instruments with engraved scales and bubble levels, along with steel tapes or chains, in addition to being cheap, would seem to fit your style.

If the value of your ideas can be clearly demonstrated from a non-trivial but still manageable project like correctly mapping Iowa, you'll have no trouble raising funds for much grander projects.  After all, if you're successful, you'll want to do this anyway, and if you find out that a mapping project on this scale is too difficult, then whatever do you think will happen in truly wild places?

Starting modest has obvious advantages although it certainly isn't as sexy sounding as an all-out assault on Antarctica.  Think of it in practical terms, though.  And, remember, the earth wasn't mapped in a day!

Title: Re: A map
Post by: 29silhouette on August 20, 2014, 09:12:28 AM
There's detailed aerial imagery of the entire world pretty much.  I've heard it stated by FE'rs in the past that the reason some images don't join correctly on Google Earth is due to FE images being used.  Pick a continent and start laying out those FE images and we'll see if an accurate flat map is the result.