If the sun does not send it's waves to that part then no man nor machine is going to have a hope in hell, because it becomes hell itself to even go a fraction closer to it. A tad further than the inner rim is all man will achieve and a machine may achieve a little better before simply ceasing to work.
They made it a ball because it gives the impression that we know what Earth is in its entirety. My guess is, we know about a quarter of it, if that.
Who said that nobody has ever been beyond the ice wall?Assuming someone has already, don't you think that achievement would merit some form of publishing, data collecting, charting?
As always, the stupidity of sceptimatic knows no bounds. And let's not forget that he is a proven liar, having claimed to be the author of several books, but refusing to tell us the title of even a single one.
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.Please give the distance between the 2.
Who said that nobody has ever been beyond the ice wall?
Who said there are no pictures of Antarctica?
Who said there are no pictures of Antarctica?
Who said there ARE pictures of the -Quote-
" Ice Wall "- Unquote. ?
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.Our apologies for mixing up some made up shit with some other made up shit.
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.
A map, even a very rough one, would help here. jroa, can you sketch something for us or at least describe the locations of the ice wall and the edge of the world?
Proven distances are wrong.I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.
A map, even a very rough one, would help here. jroa, can you sketch something for us or at least describe the locations of the ice wall and the edge of the world?
It is likely something roughly like this.
(http://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/4/43/Map.png/400px-Map.png)
Proven distances are wrong.
Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
I'm sure this was also argued for a while but it seems that if you were to travel from LA to Hawaii using the FE's "going in circles aroung the North Pole" The travel time would be 22 hours instead of roughly 5 1/2 hoursProven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
I'm sure this was also argued for a while but it seems that if you were to travel from LA to Hawaii using the FE's "going in circles aroung the North Pole" The travel time would be 22 hours instead of roughly 5 1/2 hoursProven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
With the usual formula.I'm sure this was also argued for a while but it seems that if you were to travel from LA to Hawaii using the FE's "going in circles aroung the North Pole" The travel time would be 22 hours instead of roughly 5 1/2 hoursThe azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
How did you calculate these flight times?
As you know. Projection. What is difficult to understand...Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
That is odd. This map seems to show that Australia is about twice as wide east to west as it is north to south. It also shows Greenland to be the same size as Africa. Maybe your RE maps are not as accurate as you once believed?
(http://www.mapsofworld.com/images-mow/world-map.jpg)
Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
That is odd. This map seems to show that Australia is about twice as wide east to west as it is north to south. It also shows Greenland to be the same size as Africa. Maybe your RE maps are not as accurate as you once believed?
Proven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
That is odd. This map seems to show that Australia is about twice as wide east to west as it is north to south. It also shows Greenland to be the same size as Africa. Maybe your RE maps are not as accurate as you once believed?
(http://www.mapsofworld.com/images-mow/world-map.jpg)
That is odd. This map seems to show that Australia is about twice as wide east to west as it is north to south. It also shows Greenland to be the same size as Africa. Maybe your RE maps are not as accurate as you once believed?
(http://www.mapsofworld.com/images-mow/world-map.jpg)
That is odd. This map seems to show that Australia is about twice as wide east to west as it is north to south. It also shows Greenland to be the same size as Africa. Maybe your RE maps are not as accurate as you once believed?
(http://www.mapsofworld.com/images-mow/world-map.jpg)
Uh... you must have missed the part where I said I've driven both E-W and N-S across Australia jroa? And you haven't yet explained how it is the pseudo flat earth map you use shows its length to width ratio as more like 4 to 1 and not "about" twice as long as it's wide. (Actually 4,100km by 3,180km.)
It seems that all authentic round earth maps and projections, distances, flight times, continental sizes etc are seen as "odd" by flat earthers. Which should encourage them to consider exactly why that is, rather than simply dismissing the abundance of demonstrable round earth geophysics and geometry as being "rubbish" or "crap" or "bullshit", or accusing round earthers of being government "shills" or "liars" or "idiots". (Their words; not mine BTW.)
I sure hope you did not use the map I posted when you made your trips across Australia. You would have been off by a good bit.
So NOW that he posts the proof you go and deny itAs always, the stupidity of sceptimatic knows no bounds. And let's not forget that he is a proven liar, having claimed to be the author of several books, but refusing to tell us the title of even a single one.
And don't forget too that sceptimatic claims to have been to Antarctica on a secret research mission. Now he's saying that man can not "go a fraction closer to it" without perishing. He seems confused about the "ice wall" and Antarctica—they seem to overlap somehow by definition. Are they two separate entities, or one and the same with two different names?
Or is the more likely answer that sceptimatic—true to form—was simply lying about his alleged scientific research in Antarctica?
Sceptic didn't post any evidence. Please note this.So NOW that he posts the proof you go and deny itAs always, the stupidity of sceptimatic knows no bounds. And let's not forget that he is a proven liar, having claimed to be the author of several books, but refusing to tell us the title of even a single one.
And don't forget too that sceptimatic claims to have been to Antarctica on a secret research mission. Now he's saying that man can not "go a fraction closer to it" without perishing. He seems confused about the "ice wall" and Antarctica—they seem to overlap somehow by definition. Are they two separate entities, or one and the same with two different names?
Or is the more likely answer that sceptimatic—true to form—was simply lying about his alleged scientific research in Antarctica?
You are children of the lies. Stench of staunch favoritism, the blind dogmatic suffered by years of implementing the Lies to the round/sheep, who refuse to ACCEPT that reality is different that you have been told as a child
[!]
So NOW that he posts the proof you go and deny it
You are children of the lies. Stench of staunch favoritism, the blind dogmatic suffered by years of implementing the Lies to the round/sheep, who refuse to ACCEPT that reality is different that you have been told as a child
I'm sure this was also argued for a while but it seems that if you were to travel from LA to Hawaii using the FE's "going in circles aroung the North Pole" The travel time would be 22 hours instead of roughly 5 1/2 hoursProven distances are wrong.
When did you prove these distances, and what were your methods? Thanks in advance.
The azimuthal equidistant projection map of the spherical earth (which is often used by flat earthers as a "pseudo" flat earth map) shows Australia as being 4 times as as long as it's wide, which is ludicrous on our real world. In reality, it's 4,100km long east-west, and 3,180km wide north-south.
And yes; I have driven both E-W and N-S to (roughly) prove these figures. Or will you now claim my car's odometer was wrong?
How did you calculate these flight times?
How did you calculate these flight times?
Uh... are you apparently admitting that—given the distance apart of two cities, and the velocity of the aircraft—you're unable to figure out its fight time jroa? Seriously?
Uh... are you apparently admitting that—given the distance apart of two cities, and the velocity of the aircraft—you're unable to figure out its fight time jroa? Seriously?
I am not a pilot. Are you?
Can you now show me how you'd work out this Melbourne-Los Angeles flight time on your flat earth model, and by how much the resultant flight time would differ from the round earth time? Much longer, or far shorter?
I think you first need to prove the flight times would be different on a RE map compared to a FE map.
I think you first need to prove the flight times would be different on a RE map compared to a FE map.
That is trivially easy. Which FE map should we use?
I think you first need to prove the flight times would be different on a RE map compared to a FE map.
I already told you that I am not a pilot. Perhaps you could prove your side instead?
And as an easy exercise, can you tell me what you consider to be the correct flight time from Perth to Sydney?
As expected, unable to provide any FE distances. Enough proof that a flat earth does not exist.I think you first need to prove the flight times would be different on a RE map compared to a FE map.
That is trivially easy. Which FE map should we use?
You can start by proving your RE map distances, then we can discuss comparing the FE distances.
As expected, unable to provide any FE distances. Enough proof that a flat earth does not exist.I think you first need to prove the flight times would be different on a RE map compared to a FE map.
That is trivially easy. Which FE map should we use?
You can start by proving your RE map distances, then we can discuss comparing the FE distances.
I have found after reading these posts for the last couple hours that the MO of the flat earther is to come up against a wall, and suddenly disappear or start attacking the person questioning them, leaving their half baked theory forgotten. So I am starting to think maybe I should play devils advocate and work their stupidity out to its conclusion.
You can start by proving your RE map distances, then we can discuss comparing the FE distances.If you have doubts about RE map distances, then perhaps you should express your concerns to the Rand McNally people.
I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times? ???
I have found after reading these posts for the last couple hours that the MO of the flat earther is to come up against a wall, and suddenly disappear or start attacking the person questioning them, leaving their half baked theory forgotten. So I am starting to think maybe I should play devils advocate and work their stupidity out to its conclusion.
To facilitate that, I will now calculate the flight time between Sydney and Perth when using the FE map that I have seen multiple FE'ers post up.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Flat_earth.png)
The distance I know from living here is coast to coast in the United States which is roughly 3,000 miles. The size of Australia on that map is roughly double the size of the United States. So in this fantasy world where the earth is flat, Australia is 6,000 miles long.
The cruising speed of a Boeing 747-400 is 570 mph.
So using simple, provable math, the flight time from Sydney to Perth using a flat Earth map is 6000/570 which equals roughly ten and a half hours.
Wait... but planes make the same trip in roughly 3 hours... how can my impeccably thought out and tested flat earth model be so far off observable real world tests??
Obviously the 747-400s are actually traveling at 1,710 miles an hour, but only in Australia, because they suddenly can make the 3,000 mile trip in 5 hours for the coast to coast trip in America. Because bending light rays, ether and the earths acceleration down.
I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Who said there are no pictures of Antarctica?
Who said there ARE pictures of the -Quote-
" Ice Wall "- Unquote. ?
Behold, the Ice WallTM
(http://simplisafe.com/files/images/blog/the_wall.jpg)
I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
I have found after reading these posts for the last couple hours that the MO of the flat earther is to come up against a wall, and suddenly disappear or start attacking the person questioning them, leaving their half baked theory forgotten. So I am starting to think maybe I should play devils advocate and work their stupidity out to its conclusion.This is the most ridiculous map one can look at, it shouldn't even be accepted in any argument. Canada's east to west at extreme points is 9306Km while Australia's is 4000-41000Km while this map shows an Australia that is double the width of Canada when it is actually the other way around. These distances are easily measured by any individual, not NASA conspirators like FE-ers would like us to believe. When they can come up with a map that shows accurate distances that can be measured by anyone, then they can start a debate.
To facilitate that, I will now calculate the flight time between Sydney and Perth when using the FE map that I have seen multiple FE'ers post up.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Flat_earth.png)
The distance I know from living here is coast to coast in the United States which is roughly 3,000 miles. The size of Australia on that map is roughly double the size of the United States. So in this fantasy world where the earth is flat, Australia is 6,000 miles long.
The cruising speed of a Boeing 747-400 is 570 mph.
So using simple, provable math, the flight time from Sydney to Perth using a flat Earth map is 6000/570 which equals roughly ten and a half hours.
Wait... but planes make the same trip in roughly 3 hours... how can my impeccably thought out and tested flat earth model be so far off observable real world tests??
Obviously the 747-400s are actually traveling at 1,710 miles an hour, but only in Australia, because they suddenly can make the 3,000 mile trip in 5 hours for the coast to coast trip in America. Because bending light rays, ether and the earths acceleration down.
Please provide details of NASA formulas.Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
How am I wrong?
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.Nope. This response of yours is nonsensical LOL. Check THIS (http://bit.ly/1yproqL) site out. Pilots don't take "years" to learn how to figure out flight distances and times. Are you serious with this; it takes them a few weeks.
I have found after reading these posts for the last couple hours that the MO of the flat earther is to come up against a wall, and suddenly disappear or start attacking the person questioning them, leaving their half baked theory forgotten. So I am starting to think maybe I should play devils advocate and work their stupidity out to its conclusion.
To facilitate that, I will now calculate the flight time between Sydney and Perth when using the FE map that I have seen multiple FE'ers post up.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Flat_earth.png)
The distance I know from living here is coast to coast in the United States which is roughly 3,000 miles. The size of Australia on that map is roughly double the size of the United States. So in this fantasy world where the earth is flat, Australia is 6,000 miles long.
The cruising speed of a Boeing 747-400 is 570 mph.
So using simple, provable math, the flight time from Sydney to Perth using a flat Earth map is 6000/570 which equals roughly ten and a half hours.
Wait... but planes make the same trip in roughly 3 hours... how can my impeccably thought out and tested flat earth model be so far off observable real world tests??
Obviously the 747-400s are actually traveling at 1,710 miles an hour, but only in Australia, because they suddenly can make the 3,000 mile trip in 5 hours for the coast to coast trip in America. Because bending light rays, ether and the earths acceleration down.
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.
A map, even a very rough one, would help here. jroa, can you sketch something for us or at least describe the locations of the ice wall and the edge of the world?
It is likely something roughly like this.
(http://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/4/43/Map.png/400px-Map.png)
I think you people are confusing the "Ice Wall", which is where Antarctica starts, with "The Edge of the World", which is where Antarctica ends.
A map, even a very rough one, would help here. jroa, can you sketch something for us or at least describe the locations of the ice wall and the edge of the world?
It is likely something roughly like this.
(http://wiki.tfes.org/images/thumb/4/43/Map.png/400px-Map.png)
Not as nonsensical as thinking that it takes years to learn how to calculate flight times.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
Lol!I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
Lol!I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
What kind of retarded pilots take years to master this equation:
distance / speed
C'mon Jroa. You are terrible.
Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
How am I wrong?
Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
How am I wrong?
Obvious troll is obvious.
The NASA formula that he speaks of is d/r=t, you know Distance divided by Rate equals Time.
Thats right, he is somehow trying to say NASA has altered reality and thats why only trained pilots can possibly figure out how big a distance is.
And before you post your vague rhetorical response jroa, like any basic middle school algebra equation any of those three can be the variable. If I know the speed of the plane and the time it took me to get somewhere, I can figure out the distance.
Wrong. Why the NASA obsession?Air traffic control people, engineers, scientists can if it is their job.I already told you that I am not a pilot.Why would someone need to be a pilot (or even a navigator) to be able to calculate flight times?
Because then jroa—who's stated that he's not a pilot—can save face and not have to figure out the flight timings question I asked him LOL. His obvious implication is that only pilots are capable of doing this. Which is nonsensical.
You, claiming that a lay person can make calculations that pilots have to spend years to perfect, is nonsensical.
They use formulas provided by NASA.
How am I wrong?
Obvious troll is obvious.
The NASA formula that he speaks of is d/r=t, you know Distance divided by Rate equals Time.
Thats right, he is somehow trying to say NASA has altered reality and thats why only trained pilots can possibly figure out how big a distance is.
And before you post your vague rhetorical response jroa, like any basic middle school algebra equation any of those three can be the variable. If I know the speed of the plane and the time it took me to get somewhere, I can figure out the distance.
lol, I suppose that you have never heard of Einstein's theory of relativity.
lol, I suppose that you have never heard of Einstein's theory of relativity.