South Polar Base

Yes indeed.  Infact Australian antartic researchers would have to travel halfway around the circumference of the earth just to get to the South Pole.  Somehow I think they would notice this.

Yes indeed.  Infact Australian antartic researchers would have to travel halfway around the circumference of the earth just to get to the South Pole.  Somehow I think they would notice this.

"Australia" again. I mean, seriously, who makes up the names for these imaginary places?

On a more serious note, Tausami what kind of ninja maths made you come up with that arbitrary spot on a made-up map? Are you trolling?

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 09, 2011, 05:04:11 PM

Yes indeed.  Infact Australian antartic researchers would have to travel halfway around the circumference of the earth just to get to the South Pole.  Somehow I think they would notice this.

"Australia" again. I mean, seriously, who makes up the names for these imaginary places?

Yes quite I agree, and as one such imaginary Australian I must say the proposition that I exist at all is quite preposterous, but we are discussing a map with Australia marked on it clearly.  I think it's important in scientific matters to be consistent.

No one except for Thork claims that map is an accurate representation of reality.

Quote from: flat_earth_really? on October 09, 2011, 05:09:45 PM

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 09, 2011, 05:04:11 PM

Yes indeed.  Infact Australian antartic researchers would have to travel halfway around the circumference of the earth just to get to the South Pole.  Somehow I think they would notice this.

"Australia" again. I mean, seriously, who makes up the names for these imaginary places?

Yes quite I agree, and as one such imaginary Australian I must say the proposition that I exist at all is quite preposterous, but we are discussing a map with Australia marked on it clearly.  I think it's important in scientific matters to be consistent.

How much does it cost to pay off the Manic Street Preachers to sing about this imaginary place as if it exists? " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
That should probably be taken into account in all calculations of the cost of the conspiracy.

my favorite part about the FE map used in this thread and others is that South America is roughlt the same size as Europe and Asia combined.

Also my favorite thing about FET and thier silly maps is that not one of them has been industrious enough to do a little scale matching on a flat earth map. Its all just versions of the UN logo.

Even if not one single FE guy has any photoshop skills, a few minutes on a site Like 4chan and you could get some pimply faced kid to make a FE map with at least proper scale to it. in 4 years lurking and posting on this site I have yet to see a PLAUSIBLE FE map.

Just a tiny shred of effort and a map could be made. the problem is that each map makes for a different set of FE problems. it is funny to see though. Especially Tsunami and his South pole plot. Thats classic.

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 09, 2011, 06:28:56 PM

Quote from: flat_earth_really? on October 09, 2011, 05:09:45 PM

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 09, 2011, 05:04:11 PM

Yes indeed.  Infact Australian antartic researchers would have to travel halfway around the circumference of the earth just to get to the South Pole.  Somehow I think they would notice this.

"Australia" again. I mean, seriously, who makes up the names for these imaginary places?

Yes quite I agree, and as one such imaginary Australian I must say the proposition that I exist at all is quite preposterous, but we are discussing a map with Australia marked on it clearly.  I think it's important in scientific matters to be consistent.

How much does it cost to pay off the Manic Street Preachers to sing about this imaginary place as if it exists? " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
That should probably be taken into account in all calculations of the cost of the conspiracy.

Haha, add another few million to the kitty...

Quote from: Tausami on October 09, 2011, 07:44:22 AM

Quote from: flat_earth_really? on October 09, 2011, 07:29:37 AM

Quote from: Tausami on October 09, 2011, 06:35:11 AM

It's around there.

Is this a joke? I mean seriously? Not only is that map so inaccurate and inconsistent with reality as to be laughable to a 10 year old, but you have just marked a random point on your imaginary ice wall area and said that its the south polar base.

If you are joking, that's just fine and is actually pretty funny. If you're serious, then wow. Seriously, wow. That is all.

That's not a random point. I took some measurements and did some math, and that's the spot I came up with.

Ooh, you've just piqued my curiosity. What did you measure and what maths made you pick this arbitrary spot on a bad map?

I'd love to explain, but it used fractions...

Seriously though, that's an estimate based on the fact that, in RET, the base is just South of that one peninsula near Argentina. Thus, I took an approximation of the distances (there's no legend on the FET map) and came up with that.

I'd love to explain, but it used fractions...

Seriously though, that's an estimate based on the fact that, in RET, the base is just South of that one peninsula near Argentina. Thus, I took an approximation of the distances (there's no legend on the FET map) and came up with that.

You seem to not have noticed the fact that, in RET, the South Pole Base is, by definition, just south of the entire coastline of Antartica. Why take the random peninsula?

"Just south of the entire coastline" ...?

That peninsula is very recognizable. It's also south of SA in both models.

"Just south of the entire coastline" ...?

That peninsula is very recognizable. It's also south of SA in both models.

My point is that, in RET, you can pick any part of Antarctica's coastline, head south and reach the south pole. Why pick that peninsula? Why not pick some other random point, put an X there and say "I picked here because it's just south of where I started".

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 12:10:25 PM

I'd love to explain, but it used fractions...

Seriously though, that's an estimate based on the fact that, in RET, the base is just South of that one peninsula near Argentina. Thus, I took an approximation of the distances (there's no legend on the FET map) and came up with that.

You seem to not have noticed the fact that, in RET, the South Pole Base is, by definition, just south of the entire coastline of Antartica. Why take the random peninsula?

Because it's significantly closer to that peninsula than to any other coast. Look it up.

Quote from: flat_earth_really? on October 11, 2011, 01:12:34 PM

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 12:10:25 PM

I'd love to explain, but it used fractions...

Seriously though, that's an estimate based on the fact that, in RET, the base is just South of that one peninsula near Argentina. Thus, I took an approximation of the distances (there's no legend on the FET map) and came up with that.

You seem to not have noticed the fact that, in RET, the South Pole Base is, by definition, just south of the entire coastline of Antartica. Why take the random peninsula?

Because it's significantly closer to that peninsula than to any other coast. Look it up.

So what if its closer? By definition, if you start at the opposite side, such as Queen Mary Land on this map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antarctica_Station_South_Pole_Amundsen-Scott.gif and head south, you will reach the south pole & the south polar base.

Why not put the X at the opposite side of your funny flat earth map?

Are you really not getting this?

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 02:57:56 PM

Quote from: flat_earth_really? on October 11, 2011, 01:12:34 PM

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 12:10:25 PM

I'd love to explain, but it used fractions...

Seriously though, that's an estimate based on the fact that, in RET, the base is just South of that one peninsula near Argentina. Thus, I took an approximation of the distances (there's no legend on the FET map) and came up with that.

You seem to not have noticed the fact that, in RET, the South Pole Base is, by definition, just south of the entire coastline of Antartica. Why take the random peninsula?

Because it's significantly closer to that peninsula than to any other coast. Look it up.

So what if its closer? By definition, if you start at the opposite side, such as Queen Mary Land on this map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antarctica_Station_South_Pole_Amundsen-Scott.gif and head south, you will reach the south pole & the south polar base.

Why not put the X at the opposite side of your funny flat earth map?

Are you really not getting this?

Because it's significantly closer to that peninsula than to any other coast. Look it up.

Also, it's the only route ever taken to the base.

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Hey give Tsunami a break here. Everyone know its a 30 hour plane flight from austrailia to the South pole base. and that you have to go over eastern siberia, north america and south america to get there. These are commonly accepted facts in RE or FE.

Making up 'known' facts like FE'ers do hurts my soul a little. I'm gunna stop that now.

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Links please.

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 04:22:56 PM

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Links please.

A quick Google search gives this flight that used to do a round trip in 11 hours.http://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/history/te901.html

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 06:12:16 PM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 04:22:56 PM

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Links please.

A quick Google search gives this flight that used to do a round trip in 11 hours.http://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/history/te901.html

And didn't go to the Amundsen-Scott Base. Try again.

Quote from: Tausami on October 11, 2011, 06:12:16 PM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 04:22:56 PM

Incorrect. Flights to the Antarctic bases often leave from New Zealand. Oh look, New Zealand's on the other side of the earth...

Links please.

A quick Google search gives this flight that used to do a round trip in 11 hours.http://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/history/te901.html

Even you can tell that that is not a good place to fly to. They were shot down.

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

They aren't on nearly opposite sides of the disc either.

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Other Side Of The Disc = considerably greater distance than 1500km. Think about all the ramifications, not just what you define "close" to be.

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 02:49:42 AM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Other Side Of The Disc = considerably greater distance than 1500km. Think about all the ramifications, not just what you define "close" to be.

The point is, people don't just go between them just 'cause. Think of all the paper work and planning that would go into it. It'd be easy for the Conspiracy to intervene.

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 12, 2011, 07:47:52 AM

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 02:49:42 AM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Other Side Of The Disc = considerably greater distance than 1500km. Think about all the ramifications, not just what you define "close" to be.

The point is, people don't just go between them just 'cause. Think of all the paper work and planning that would go into it. It'd be easy for the Conspiracy to intervene.

People don't go between them "just cause", but people DO go between them from time to time. Sorry, blaming the conspiracy in such a general sense is just a cop out, not an explanation.

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 12:23:03 PM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 12, 2011, 07:47:52 AM

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 02:49:42 AM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Other Side Of The Disc = considerably greater distance than 1500km. Think about all the ramifications, not just what you define "close" to be.

The point is, people don't just go between them just 'cause. Think of all the paper work and planning that would go into it. It'd be easy for the Conspiracy to intervene.

People don't go between them "just cause", but people DO go between them from time to time. Sorry, blaming the conspiracy in such a general sense is just a cop out, not an explanation.

Yes, they do. And this happens because of the conspiracy. Also, petitio principii.

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 12, 2011, 12:50:07 PM

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 12:23:03 PM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 12, 2011, 07:47:52 AM

Quote from: Tausami on October 12, 2011, 02:49:42 AM

Quote from: The Knowledge on October 11, 2011, 10:26:19 PM

http://www.antarcticanz.govt.nz/home

This has details about how to get to Scott Base which is 1500km from the pole itself. Interestingly close considering you guys are sure it's on the opposite side of a disc. 

There's also a webcam which proves the day/night effect in Antarctic summer and winter.

I wouldn't consider New York City and Lake Michigan to be particularly close (also 1500 km away).

Other Side Of The Disc = considerably greater distance than 1500km. Think about all the ramifications, not just what you define "close" to be.

The point is, people don't just go between them just 'cause. Think of all the paper work and planning that would go into it. It'd be easy for the Conspiracy to intervene.

People don't go between them "just cause", but people DO go between them from time to time. Sorry, blaming the conspiracy in such a general sense is just a cop out, not an explanation.

Yes, they do. And this happens because of the conspiracy. Also, petitio principii.

See above for conspiracy /= explanation. Also, speak english.

See above for conspiracy /= explanation. Also, speak english.

Here's some English for you. Specifically, a quote from Tim Minchin's "Storm":

Does the idea that there might be truth
Frighten you?
Does the idea that one afternoon
On Wiki-fucking-pedia might enlighten you
Frighten you?
Does the notion that there may not be a supernatural
So blow your hippy noodle
That you would rather just stand in the fog
Of your inability to Google?

Not so much the supernatural part, but the Wikipedia/Google bit is incredibly relevant.
Let me help you out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii

Also, just in case you were wondering, "petitio principii" is a term in the English language:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/petitio_principii
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/petitio+principii?region=us
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definitions/Petitio%20Principii

So, everyone that goes to the base at the South Pole has to be paid off by The Conspiracy to be quiet?

That is an interesting assumption to make.