Distances in the Flat Earth model

  • 32 Replies
  • 5421 Views
Distances in the Flat Earth model
« on: September 04, 2008, 04:57:42 PM »
In another effort to disprove you all, I have compared distances on a flat earth versus distances on a round earth.
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

I took two paths that would both be the about the same distance on a spherical earth, but quite different on a flat earth. They are:
Between Wellington, New Zealand and Sydney, Australia
Between Beijing, China and Tokyo, Japan
According to my globe, these two distances are almost exactly the same. But I plotted them on the Image of a flat earth, and the latter distance is almost 3x as long as the former for FE model.
I created the following image to show the two distances on a flat earth. The Sydney-Wellington route is red and the Beijing-Tokyo route is green.
http://s458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/?action=view&current=Flat_earth-1.jpg

To test whether the FE or RE model is true, I entered each route into Expedia to find the plane trip time for each. If FE were true, the Sydney-Wellington route should be 3x as long as the other. Results: A one-way non-stop trip between Sydney and Wellington is 3 hours, 20 minutes. A one-way non-stop trip between Beijing and Tokyo is 3 hours, 55 minutes. The fact that they are nearly the same contradicts what FE model predicts, and agrees completely with my round globe. What do you think about this?
« Last Edit: September 04, 2008, 05:08:53 PM by mlk256 »

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2008, 05:18:50 PM »
But you overlooked the existence of magical winds blowing the plane to their destinations faster! 

and in the sea, there are magical currents that do the same. 

and if they ever run out of explanations, then it is 'teh conspiracy'. 

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Video proof that the Earth is flat!

Run run, as fast as you can, you can't catch me cos I'm in the lollipop forest and you can't get there!

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2008, 05:31:41 PM »
Quote
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

That map is hypothetical only.

*

Snaaaaake

  • 1089
  • ROUND000
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2008, 05:32:53 PM »
Quote
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

That map is incorrect only.
We told you to go to rehab, but you were all like "no, no, no!" ::)

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2008, 05:41:16 PM »
Quote
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

That map is hypothetical only.

Then why don't you create a map yourself to show a flat earth? Or, if you can't get one of your followers to do that, then tell me what's wrong with mine? how about the fact that its shows A FLAT EARTH IS WRONG??????

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42683
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2008, 07:19:20 PM »
Quote
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

That map is hypothetical only.

It must be very hard to navigate the FE without any accurate maps.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2008, 09:09:14 PM »

To test whether the FE or RE model is true, I entered each route into Expedia to find the plane trip time for each. If FE were true, the Sydney-Wellington route should be 3x as long as the other. Results: A one-way non-stop trip between Sydney and Wellington is 3 hours, 20 minutes. A one-way non-stop trip between Beijing and Tokyo is 3 hours, 55 minutes. The fact that they are nearly the same contradicts what FE model predicts, and agrees completely with my round globe. What do you think about this?

Let me bring up the obvious here. The planes are flying based on RE maps, so they are not going in straight lines. If they were choosing the shortest route possible, then Sydney-Wellington would indeed be longer. But they are using flawed navigational data.

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #7 on: September 04, 2008, 11:59:17 PM »
It must be very hard to navigate the FE without any accurate maps.

It would be even harder to navigate on a FE with charts that assume RE.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2008, 12:14:12 AM »
It must be very hard to navigate the FE without any accurate maps.

It would be even harder to navigate on a FE with charts that assume RE.

I've never seen a chart or map which assumed an RE.

The last time I checked maps were flat.

*

The One True Rat

  • 615
  • Cannot Understand Sarcasm
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2008, 12:22:54 AM »
It must be very hard to navigate the FE without any accurate maps.

It would be even harder to navigate on a FE with charts that assume RE.

I've never seen a chart or map which assumed an RE.

The last time I checked maps were flat.

maps are flat sure, but there are several methods that use minor distortion in order to depict roundness on a flat plane. all flat maps are slightly wrong, being a 2-d depiction of a 3-d object. And there are RE maps that aren't flat, called globes.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2008, 01:12:01 AM »
So you place your faith in maps that you just said were distorted, and yet you can attack ours? I find this view deeply disturbing.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

?

spacemanjones

  • 281
  • Magic pushes earth
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2008, 01:18:01 AM »
Quote
The following image, I hope you will agree, shows basically a map of the earth being flat.
http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq307/mlk256/Flat_earth.jpg

That map is hypothetical only.

Remember the map is hypothetical when RE disproves it but when a FE needs it to prove it point it becomes a reliable tool.

?

spacemanjones

  • 281
  • Magic pushes earth
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2008, 01:21:21 AM »
So you place your faith in maps that you just said were distorted, and yet you can attack ours? I find this view deeply disturbing.

I find it deeply disturbing that you donít even have a map.

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #13 on: September 05, 2008, 01:24:52 AM »
I've never seen a chart or map which assumed an RE.

Gnomic projections...



Albers projections...



Mercator projections...



The definition of map projections assumes a non-flat Earth...

Quote from: Wikipedia
A map projection is any method used in cartography to represent the two-dimensional curved surface of the earth or other body on a plane.



Quote
The last time I checked maps were flat.

Not all of them.  Ever seen a globe?  They are definitely not flat.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2008, 01:32:27 AM »
Quote
Gnomic projections...


Albers projections...


Mercator projections...

None of those maps represent a Round Earth. There are distance discrepancies in all of them. Have you even seen the size of Greenland on the Mercator Projection? It's huge!

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #15 on: September 05, 2008, 01:33:47 AM »
So you place your faith in maps that you just said were distorted, and yet you can attack ours? I find this view deeply disturbing.

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #16 on: September 05, 2008, 01:40:31 AM »
of those maps represent a Round Earth. There are distance discrepancies in all of them. Have you even seen the size of Greenland on the Mercator Projection? It's huge!

Have you even been to Greenland to measure it?

But seriously, if you look at the the distance scale, it shows the fact that the distance/unit increases as you get closer to the poles.  This fact of Mercator projections is one thing that makes them less than ideal for polar areas.  For areas with little change in north-south distance, they are accurate, even in polar regions.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #17 on: September 05, 2008, 01:43:38 AM »
So you believe maps get more and more distorted as you go to the poles? Are you secretly on our side?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #18 on: September 05, 2008, 06:30:00 AM »
So you believe maps get more and more distorted as you go to the poles? Are you secretly on our side?

Well, your map gets distorted because it's not accurate. My FE map at the North Pole precisely describes actual measured distance.

*

enjee

  • 27
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #19 on: September 05, 2008, 06:59:11 AM »
Ah okay I get it now... FETers don't know how to read maps!

another win for the RE... battle was won ageeeeeeeeeeeees ago

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #20 on: September 05, 2008, 07:07:16 AM »
Ah okay I get it now... FETers don't know how to read maps!

another win for the RE... battle was won ageeeeeeeeeeeees ago
RE has not won a single battle. Either contribute to the thread or troll somewhere else.

?

Holy crap!?!

  • 37
  • can't...look...away.....
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #21 on: September 05, 2008, 10:07:18 AM »
Could someone representing FE please post an accepted map of earth? I have an experiment I want to try but don't want to use the wrong map.

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #22 on: September 05, 2008, 10:11:48 AM »
Could someone representing FE please post an accepted map of earth? I have an experiment I want to try but don't want to use the wrong map.

There are a few in the FAQ if I recall correctly.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #23 on: September 05, 2008, 10:18:34 AM »
Ah okay I get it now... FETers don't know how to read maps!

another win for the RE... battle was won ageeeeeeeeeeeees ago
RE has not won a single battle. Either contribute to the thread or troll somewhere else.

A mod makes a worthless trolling statment and then a mod deletes mine.  How cool. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #24 on: September 05, 2008, 11:03:09 AM »

A mod makes a worthless trolling statment and then a mod deletes mine.  How cool. 

That's the flat earth way! 
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Video proof that the Earth is flat!

Run run, as fast as you can, you can't catch me cos I'm in the lollipop forest and you can't get there!

*

The One True Rat

  • 615
  • Cannot Understand Sarcasm
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #25 on: September 05, 2008, 12:00:31 PM »
heres how maps work:
they are two-dimensions! both FE and RE are three-dimensional objects, so any two-dimensional depiction of Any landscape would be slightly off... This is why different RE distorsions are used on different maps.

Unfortunately, i have looked into FE maps and have found nothing that has been any of the following:
proven/measured in real life/mass-produced/drawn by an actual cartographer and not a FE user/accurate/standardized/consistant with FE views/plausible

the truth is RE maps are slightly worng, whereas FE maps no dot exist.
(at least yet, i would be interested to see a decent FE map or scale image)

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42683
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #26 on: September 05, 2008, 12:53:47 PM »
So you place your faith in maps that you just said were distorted, and yet you can attack ours? I find this view deeply disturbing.

But the thing is, we know why and by how much RE maps are distorted and can compensate accordingly.  Can you say the same for your FE maps?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #27 on: September 06, 2008, 06:13:43 AM »
So you place your faith in maps that you just said were distorted, and yet you can attack ours? I find this view deeply disturbing.

I don't place my faith in maps, thats why I have a globe. They taught us the inaccuraciesd of maps in the third grade, but apparently Tom didn't go to the third grade! You still need to respond to my original question. if FE were true, one of the planes would be flying 3x the distance! explanations?!

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #28 on: September 06, 2008, 07:12:55 PM »
Search, idiot! This has been asked so many times we changed the subject so we'd have more to talk about. Back off topic, isn't a globe just this distorted map stuck on a ball?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

The One True Rat

  • 615
  • Cannot Understand Sarcasm
Re: Distances in the Flat Earth model
« Reply #29 on: September 07, 2008, 04:09:49 PM »
Search, idiot! This has been asked so many times we changed the subject so we'd have more to talk about. Back off topic, isn't a globe just this distorted map stuck on a ball?

A globe is an accurate representation of RE.
The most accuarte there is for RE.
If you accept FE, then yes. A globe is a FE stuck on a ball.
If you accept RE, then the globe is a win for RE because it is a 100% accurate representation of RE
Such a thing as a 100% accurate map for FE doesn't exist... wich is strange if FE is accepted... because then that would mean that for hundereds of years humans have walked the earth and never found out how to measure and depict a relitively flat surface...

Even stranger that if FE is correct, then RE-ers have created a 100% accurate map in less than half the time RE-ers have had... Unless the conspiracy theory aslo sugests that NASA tracked down EVERY FE map, destroyed it, killed the person who drew it, and replaced it...