Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cartog

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question for Round Earthers: Why are you here?
« on: January 15, 2019, 01:25:21 PM »
We're here because teasing and ridiculing Flat Earthers is more socially acceptable than making fun of cripples and retardates.

That's a very good question, and one can add "How come every country on earth endorses the Round Earth if it isn't true?  Even in wartime, enemy countries don't repudiate the geography of a Round Earth."

The usual FE story is that NASA is one big swindle, getting millions by false pretenses.  But NASA didn't exist until 1958; Who was making money off the roundness concept before then, that governments have endorsed a Round Earth since before the Crusades?

And in all this time no Flat Earther, not a single one, has located The Edge of the flat planet, which ought to be found in any direction if one goes far enough.

Logically  the only explanation is Round Earth true, Flat Earth false.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Is there a problem with our current maps
« on: December 31, 2018, 11:17:21 PM »
IF the earth were flat, then a world map on an equally flat paper would involve no more mathematics than a simple ratio (e.g., one inch equals one thousand miles) - and every world map would look the same even if they were larger or smaller.  If the earth were flat then a world map would be little more than a floor plan drawn to a reduced scale.  The math required would be extremely simple.

But because the earth is round, flat world maps involve very complicated math, depending on the projection chosen.  There are well over a hundred different choices of map projection - some appropriate for world maps and some appropriate only for maps no larger than a state or province because of the distortions. 

One way of demonstrating that the earth is not flat is that the actual distances between distant cities, altho apparently measurable on flat maps, turn out to be very different from the actual distance covered by airplanes or ships making the actual trip. 

Flat Earth General / Re: The great wall of Antartic
« on: December 31, 2018, 11:04:38 PM »
No doubts about the Antarctic (except maybe from those who cannot spell it), every year ocean liners offer cruises that completely circumnavigate the Antarctic .... even letting passengers go ashore every now and then to annoy the penguins.  The trip involves mileage very roughly comparable to circumnavigating Australia, the important thing is that it proves that Antarctica is a round continent - not something stretched out on the rim of the flat planet.  Eliminating Antarctica as The Edge of the flat earth raises the question Where is The Edge?   It's not Antarctica and every other place on earth has been explored, flown over, mapped, aerial photographed, etc.  and nobody has yet spotted The Edge.  There can be no flat planet without The Edge (even if the flat surface went on for an infinity, there'd be an equivalent boundary when known geography ended and terra incognita began).  I think people would be eager to find The Edge and yet no one has.  Evidently all the Flat Earth people are restricted to ground transportation; everyone who has flown, ballooned, or even ridden the elevator to the top of the Empire State Building is a believer in the Round Earth.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proofs for the Flat Earth Model?
« on: December 22, 2018, 08:10:44 AM »
The biggest, most persuasive proof for the Flat Earth model -- indeed, the one bit of evidence that all Round Earthers would insist upon -- is locating The Edge.

The Edge is simply the dropping off end of the flat planet; the corner where the downward sides start, the point where the flat surface ceases.  If you are among those who believe the flat planet somehow goes on an infinite plane, then The Edge would be the limit of known geography beyond which everything is terra incognita.  Either way it would be something not on the conventional maps of the world, and it ought  to be in every direction if you go far enough.

Then, of course, having found The Edge, mankind could explore it.  That exploration might encourage new industries, new science, and the discoveries of new resources.  Maybe, beyond The Edge, there are plants and animals that human have not yet seen, maybe even creatures comparable to humans with their own culture and sciences.

Let's face it, if the earth were flat then there'd be an Edge, and, if there is no Edge then it follows that the earth is not flat.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Polaris, a.k.a. the North Star
« on: November 21, 2018, 08:40:06 AM »
Flinders Range is in Australia.
Yes, if the earth were flat it would seem logical that you could see Polaris.  But since the earth is round, you'd have to be north of the equator to see it.
By the same token, folks in the US and British Isles cannot see the Southern Cross.

I would bet that more than half the people on this website are here to jeer at the Flatearthers, and less than half are True Believers.

Flat Earth General / Re: A proposal to find the true map
« on: November 05, 2018, 04:53:33 AM »
I would only point out that the airline distances or timings might not be as direct and straightforward as you imagine.  When a straightforward route takes a plane over a lot of water or over hazardous territory (such as mountains or enemy countries), the airline route tends to detour to minimize the risk or facilitate emergency landings.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What's below?
« on: October 28, 2018, 07:37:43 PM »
I think the question is, ultimately what is supporting the flat planet?  If the flat surface is resting on rocks, or a pillar, or a stack of turtles, or floating on water, then what are the rocks/turtles/water/etc resting on?  What's beneath everything? 

If, on the other hand, the flat earth is resting on nothing, just floating or flying through space with an exposed underside, like a frisbee, there are all sorts of questions - what's on the underside - is it livable with its own plants and animals (maybe very different from what we have on this side) and maybe even some sort of people?  Howcome we haven't tried to find them or they find us? 

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Ice wall
« on: October 28, 2018, 07:30:02 PM »
Is the ice wall continuous all-around Antarctica?  If so, how are the penguins able to swim and then get back on the shore?

Flat Earth General / Re: Moon Hoax Theory dead - killed by rabbit!
« on: September 29, 2018, 07:43:50 AM »
Evidently one of the foundations for the Moon Landing Hoax conspiracy theory is that the photos attributed to the astronauts failed to show stars in the sky.
This is easily explained.

Keep in mind that the lunar surface is fairly beige or sandy colored -- that is to say, much lighter colored than if it were covered with grass -- and that the sun beats down on that surface with no clouds or atmosphere to moderate it -- in other words, very strong and bright sunlight on a light colored moonscape.  Using ordinary brownie-type cameras would have resulted in only useless photos completely washed out by the intense sunlight.  It was necessary, in those circumstances, to use filters and film that would tone down the strength of the sunlight, much like sunglasses, in order to get usable photos of the moon's surface.  However the same sunglasses effect would dim out the stars in the sky. 

Arguably the astronauts could have pointed a brownie-type camera (without filters) toward the sky and gotten lots of stars, but such photos had already been taken by satellites and automated spacecraft that didn't land on the moon, and the mission at hand was devoted to discoveries on the moon's surface so that particular photo-op was ignored.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Star Trails prove the flat earth?
« on: September 09, 2018, 11:04:24 PM »
Here's a question about star trails:

When you are somewhere in the Arctic Circle (near the North Pole), the stars move around the north pole in counter-clockwise direction.  But when you are in the vicinity of the South Pole, the stars move around the south pole in the clockwise direction.  This seems possible only if the earth is round.

Flat Earth General / Re: Solve this proof
« on: September 08, 2018, 12:25:00 PM »
Digging is not much of "a round earth proof" -- the flat earth might be as flat as a pancake, that doesn't mean it's as thin as one.

The flat earth might be very thick, especially if the flat earth rests on something rather than have another surface underneath, like a coin or a frisbee.

Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite ocean and super continents
« on: September 08, 2018, 12:21:04 PM »
Since you're imagining an infinite plane beyond the known geography, I imagine you can imagine anything you want -- including the kingdoms of The Game of Thrones (together with its dragons and ice zombies), the tribes of Conan the Barbarian, a forest filled with unicorns, etc.

Have fun imagining all this, maybe you can someday write a successful fantasy novel from all this.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ice wall around the entire disc?
« on: August 29, 2018, 11:35:32 AM »
If you are talking about the coastline of Antarctica, then the answer is no, the ice wall is not continuous.  The ice wall (or ice cliffs) appear on some parts of the Antarctic shoreline (and the ice wall is continuously crumbling and being rebuilt with new ice and snow), and other parts of the shoreline are like a conventional beach or riverbank where penguins can jump or waddle into and out of the water.

But, imagining that Antarctica somehow surrounds the rim of the flat planet, even if the ice wall were completely continuous that would be the "inner" side of Antarctica - the side that faces the known continent.  The "outer" side of Antarctica would be the unknown side that abut the Edge of the Flat Earth, and if that side behaves the way the inner side is known to behalf, then tons of ice and snow are constantly dropping over the Edge.

On the other hand, ocean liners offer cruises in which the ship completely circumnavigates Antarctica at a leisurely pace, allowing passengers many opportunities to go ashore and mingle with the penguins, and the circumnavigation takes a few weeks (the length of the Antarctic shoreline is comparable to Australia's).  So, clearly, Antarctica is not surrounding the rim.

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?
« on: August 28, 2018, 10:20:29 AM »
Moonlight may seem cold but keep in mind that maximum moonlight is from a full moon, and a full moon comes up at sunset and sets at sunrise.  So a full moon (and its light) occurs only in the dark of night, unlike the quarter moons that appear during part of the daylight.   The result is that a full moon (and its light) is associated with the cold (and dark) of night and the other phases of the moon occur during part of the daytime and might not be noticed then.

Moonlight probably adds only a tiny fraction of a degree warmth to the atmosphere but it is overwhelmed by the drop in temperature after sunset.

Flat Earth General / Re: 150ft Ice Wall Edge
« on: August 28, 2018, 10:09:04 AM »
I don't know that Einstein or Hawking ever visited Antarctica to see the ice walls.

People who have been there will tell you the the ice walls are only intermittent, like cliffs on the coast of any continent, and that there are plenty of large spaces that resemble a normal beach where penguins are able to waddle in and out of the water.  How did you suppose the penguins survive if they could only jump back up to 150 ft cliffs?

People who have been there will tell you there are no fortresses, no lines of soldiers or guards to keep people out of Antarctica  (consider how many soldiers would be required - over the past century - to prevent visitors and explorers from entering Antarctica, and yet not a one ever spoke of this experience there).  The FE story is pure baloney

Flat Earth General / Re: 150ft Ice Wall Edge
« on: August 27, 2018, 01:35:13 PM »
Supposedly this 150 ft ice way is on the coast of Antarctica (that's what it says on the link), but I know for a fact that this ice wall does NOT run all around Antarctica.  There are ocean liners that circumnavigate Antarctica (around December each year) and they have daily stops when passengers can go ashore and annoy the penguins.  The penguins, incidentally, are able to dive into the ocean water for food and then leap back up to the land - so it isn't 150 ft above the water.

And the fact that Antarctica can be circumnavigated by these ocean liners (in a few weeks at a leisurely speed) shows that Antarctica, with or without ice, is not surrounding the rim of the earth.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Question for Infinite Earthers
« on: August 27, 2018, 01:29:33 PM »
I would have thought a more interesting question for Infinite Earthers would be:  Where/How to the sun, moon, and stars rise and set?  If the Earth's surface continues to infinity, how does the sun set in the west, and then rise in the east.  If the Earth is infinite there is no aperture for the sun to drop below the surface of the earth and go underneath to come up in the east next morning.

It seems also, if land actually extends beyond the known (the mapped) earth, that unknown land surface has resources - and living space - the rest of the world desperately needs and exploration/exploitation of that land would make millionaires out of those hardy souls (and countries) brave enough to venture out there.  We go up into space, we go down to the ocean floor, yet we don't go outward to this unknown infinite surface.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE - No Pillars?
« on: August 18, 2018, 02:20:39 PM »
It would seem to me that, if the Earth were either gliding (like a hockey puck) or flying (like a frisbee), then the very consistent rise and setting of the sun, moon, and stars wouldn't be possible.  The Earth must be more or less stationary with regard to the surrounding celestial bodies.

I am not at all clear on the business about the size of the Gizeh Pyramid and how its specific size is necessary for its "function".  What was its "function", besides being a monument and mausoleum??

If the Earth is flat, whether it rests on something solid or not, it has an Edge, a Side (of a size that hasn't yet been measured), and, if there is no pillar supporting it, an Underside of approximately the same size as the surface we live on.  It is Very Possible that the Side and the Underside (or the Pillar) offer phenomena that we cannot even imagine -- possibly minerals and resources we can use, maybe even livable land that people could populate, possibly even living things - plants and animals - we've never seen before.  All of these possibilities make it imperative to try to find the Edge -- which, in a half a million years of human history, has never yet been found -- and so serious exploration.  You'd think that such possibilities would have some nation, or group of nations, or group of billionaires, hard at work .... but nobody is making the effort.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: What about the scientific community?
« on: August 18, 2018, 02:04:25 PM »
The usual FE claim is that, somehow, somebody is bribing all the teachers and scientists to pretend that the Earth is round and deny that it is flat.

But I know, personally, some scientists and teachers who are decidedly underpaid - it's clear that they were not paid bribes - who are insisting that the Earth is round for  free !

You'd think that some ambitious scientist or teacher would go for fame and glory (and money) of being the first to reveal to the world the true configuration of the planet ....  And yet no scientist or teacher, in any country, does.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The issue with curvature
« on: August 18, 2018, 01:58:09 PM »
The simple fact is that, the higher you (as the observer) go the more of the Earth is visible to the  horizon.  To a swimmer in the ocean, whose head is just inches above the water, the horizon is about 3 miles.  Standing up at the shoreline, the horizon is about 7 miles.  From the top of the Empire State Building, about 250 miles.  The distance to the horizon is calculated by a mathematical formula (not very challenging) that necessarily is based on the size of the Earth as a sphere.  If we were on another planet (of a different size than Earth) the formula would be slightly different (and predictable from the size of that planet).

This phenomenon and the formula would not work at all unless the Earth is round and of a specified size.

It would seem to me that, if the FE was true, we'd have, by now, a clear image of the Flat Planet - whether it was an infinite plane or was a finite surface that had Edges.  And we'd have a clear notion of what the center point of the known Earth was, in terms of distances to the Edge or to the unmapped parts of the infinite plane.

This is, after all, the 21st century.  We have extremely detailed maps of every part of the Earth's surface, even the ocean's depths, but somehow still ignorant of those basics of the Flat Earth.

There is no fully functional FE model because, when a thoroughly detailed model of the FE is attempted various anomalies and contradictions have popped up.  The usual FE response is to take each such problem separately and offer theories and excuses that often involve dubious physics or astronomy, but when these problems are cobbled together for a working model of a Flat Earth it becomes painfully obvious that these problems cannot really be resolved or explained away, but the problems persist and prevent the model from functioning.

Flat Earth General / Re: the history of flat earth
« on: August 16, 2018, 09:08:59 PM »
The Vikings, and many other ancient travelers, were not much for long-distance voyages.  They also weren't much (by modern standards) at mapmaking.
In those pre-industrial times, fastest land travel for a group was roughly 20 miles a day.  At that rate the shape of the planet didn't matter much. Even over long distances, a map showing a specific route (rather than spreading out in all directions) could be reasonably accurate while assuming that the earth was flat as regards that route.

Flat Earth General / Re: How does this secret stayed kept?
« on: August 08, 2018, 05:02:33 PM »
If the Flat shape of the Earth is a deep dark secret, it's a secret that has been very securely kept for more than a thousand years.  The spherical shape had believers even before the First Crusade, and even when Columbus set off the Church believed the Earth was round (but insisted it was bigger than Columbus thought it was).

So the truth that the Earth was flat has been a secret kept for at least a thousand years, and in that time more than a million astronomers, geographers, physicists, cartographers, explorers, etc. etc., in dozens of countries, apparently knew that truth and kept it secret.  Not a single one, out of those million, ratted them out. 

The Watergate conspiracy involved only about two dozen people and within six months half of them were squealing on the other half.  How is it that the flatness of the Earth was so effectively kept secret?  In all those centuries a great many of the people who supposedly knew the secret were not being paid to keep it a secret, and could have attained fame and money by revealing the secret, but not a single one broke rank on it.

In the meantime, the FEers have a secret of their own:  Where is The Edge?  You know, the limit of the flat surface (or of the known surface), where the surface drops away and the sides of the flat planet begin.  It isn't Antarctica because it's possible to completely circumnavigate Antarctica in a plane or boat and plenty of people have done that and continue doing it every year.  That Edge is somewhere by Flat Earthers aren't talking -- and, frankly, some photographs -- or better, some guided tours -- of The Edge would convince everybody.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Is this true?
« on: August 07, 2018, 04:53:41 PM »
By pure happenstance, the star called Polaris is very nearly aligned with the earth's axis (the difference is metaphorically microscopic and can only be detected with advanced equipment) so that it ALWAYS appears in the direction of the Earth's celestial north pole.   To an observer on the Equator it would be at 0 elevation, meaning it would be on or below the horizon and therefore not visible;  in fact for many miles north of the equator it would be so very near the horizon that trees and landscape would conceal it from an observer on the ground.

There is no visible star that has such a fortuitous position in the southern sky.  Measuring latitude from the stars in the southern hemisphere would require a little extra knowledge and equipment.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Encyclopedia Americana dome at 13,000 ft
« on: August 07, 2018, 04:43:44 PM »
Congratulations, you've discovered the Filchner Ice Shelf in Antarctica.  It may have been considered an ice dome in 1958 but I suspect that warming trends over the last 50 years have changed the configuration a bit.   

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that an FE advocate cannot read a map.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE - No Pillars?
« on: August 07, 2018, 04:33:36 PM »
It seems to me that if the flat earth were drifting through space then the stars and planets would not rise and fall so consistently and predictably.  Moreover we might occasionally have some clue about the shape of the planet from seeing objects like asteroids and meteors pass us, hurtling below the horizon and nobody on this side of the flat planet being about to see where they go next - only that doesn't happen. 

Flat Earth Debate / Re: About the moon landing
« on: August 07, 2018, 04:27:10 PM »
I have an independently verified source (a professor of astronomy with an observatory, at the time) who confirmed to me that labs and observatories in many countries had successfully bounced laser and maser signals off the retroflector -- some had been sending beams continuously since the touchdown and got a reflection the very minute that the astronauts set up the retroflector.

Additionally, other labs, those using ultra high frequency radio, were able to listen to the astronauts's radio messages -- this was at wavelengths that pass through the ionosphere, unlike shortwave wavelengths that bounce back from the ionosphere, so those signals must have originated in outer space and not on earth.

Whenever the astronauts went to the moon they very deliberately photographed themselves doing something that would have been impossible on earth, even with tricks, such as batting a golf ball a mile or taking enormous bouncing steps or floating loose water in mid--air.

Flat Earth General / Re: What is wrong with this?
« on: August 03, 2018, 08:01:18 AM »
I have to admit that I have trouble understanding the original question and that my math skills are not too good, BUT the view from the top of the Empire State Building goes only about 250 miles to the horizon.

The fact that the higher up you go the farther is the horizon, seems to me very persuasive evidence that the Earth is Round.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17