Antarctica?

  • 69 Replies
  • 12575 Views
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2012, 04:56:58 AM »
the coastline is estimated at 17,968 kilometers


In other words, you have never been to Antarctica, and therefore are able to make such a claim.

Very funny.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #31 on: May 22, 2012, 09:51:43 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #32 on: May 22, 2012, 09:55:42 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #33 on: May 22, 2012, 11:09:19 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #34 on: May 22, 2012, 11:20:14 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?

He's being paid by somebody. Maybe the Americans? They're a shady bunch. You know, maybe that's where all of Barack Obama's funding is going, into covering up the truth about Australia and Antarctica!

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #35 on: May 22, 2012, 11:23:21 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?

He's being paid by somebody. Maybe the Americans? They're a shady bunch. You know, maybe that's where all of Barack Obama's funding is going, into covering up the truth about Australia and Antarctica!

No, it's all NASA stuff.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2012, 11:29:44 AM »
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?

He's being paid by somebody. Maybe the Americans? They're a shady bunch. You know, maybe that's where all of Barack Obama's funding is going, into covering up the truth about Australia and Antarctica!

No, it's all NASA stuff.

Ah yes, the NASA coverup. Well if it isn't Obama covering up the truth about what's down under, who? I doubt it's Cameron; the queen wouldn't condone it.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2012, 12:35:09 PM »
O
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?

He's being paid by somebody. Maybe the Americans? They're a shady bunch. You know, maybe that's where all of Barack Obama's funding is going, into covering up the truth about Australia and Antarctica!

No, it's all NASA stuff.

Ah yes, the NASA coverup. Well if it isn't Obama covering up the truth about what's down under, who? I doubt it's Cameron; the queen wouldn't condone it.

Obama is a puppet in the hands of evil NASA.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2012, 12:38:37 PM »
O
Ive never been to Europe so that must not exist either

Yeah! I've never been to Australia. So it must be fictitious.

i know someone who lives in Australia. Is he a part of the conspiracy? Does he even exist?

He's being paid by somebody. Maybe the Americans? They're a shady bunch. You know, maybe that's where all of Barack Obama's funding is going, into covering up the truth about Australia and Antarctica!

No, it's all NASA stuff.

Ah yes, the NASA coverup. Well if it isn't Obama covering up the truth about what's down under, who? I doubt it's Cameron; the queen wouldn't condone it.

Obama is a puppet in the hands of evil NASA.

I wouldn't say evil... True, it's awfully rotten of them to fake all that moon landing footage and stuff. But still, it's a stretch for them to control and entire government. And what about classic scientists, like Hawking and Feynman? Are they part of the coverup too, or just loons?

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2012, 05:24:04 PM »
Antarctica is a separate continent.
It has been fully explored, mapped and people live there.
if an Ice wall exists it is Far beyond Antarctica.
What make the most sense that this "wall" is not a wall at all, but a barrier...
This is where our spherical suns light never shines upon our planar Earth.

Whats is beyond? UnKnown....but Master James has some interesting theories.

I'm afraid I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell you just said. If there is an ice wall, it's beyond Antarctica? The geographic and magnetic south poles have both been proven to be in Antarctica. And what do you mean, not a wall, but a barrier. Are you suggesting some magical, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey barrier of some metaphysical property?
And what do you mean, our spherical sun's light never shines or planar Earth? A) There are probably less than a thousand people who've been to college and believe the idea that Earth is planar, B) why would Earth be planar while Sol is spherical, and C) What do you mean, sunlight never shines on Earth? That entire thing made no sense.

What he means is that the sun never shines in the area beyond the ice wall, and "ice wall" is a metaphor.

Although most of the Flat Earth folk here wouldn't consider iwanttobelieve their spokesman, it is a common recourse in topics like this one -- to say "Well, we have this other theory where [something that addresses the issue]", in this case it would be "Antarctica really is a continent and the rim is further out". Of course, none of the alternate ideas are consistent with the original one, so eventually a sufficiently fatal incompatibility will be pointed out and force them to say "It works in the first theory though. Most of us don't subscribe to this one anyway". In other words, it's an endless ping-pong between half-explanations and the issues never really get addressed.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2012, 05:34:12 PM »
Bear in mind that the idea of there being an ice wall somehow beyond Antarctica has many holes. For example, such an ice wall, to hold in the over 1.3 billion cubic kilometers of water contained in Earth's oceans, and the large volume of atmosphere, including storms and the like, would have to be over 80 kilometers high, more than the height of five Mount Everests. If Antarctica were an ice wall, or there were a wall anywhere near Antarctica, it would be seen with absolutely no difficulty.

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2012, 05:42:31 PM »
Antarctica is a separate continent.
It has been fully explored, mapped and people live there.
if an Ice wall exists it is Far beyond Antarctica.
What make the most sense that this "wall" is not a wall at all, but a barrier...
This is where our spherical suns light never shines upon our planar Earth.

Whats is beyond? UnKnown....but Master James has some interesting theories.

I'm afraid I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell you just said. If there is an ice wall, it's beyond Antarctica? The geographic and magnetic south poles have both been proven to be in Antarctica. And what do you mean, not a wall, but a barrier. Are you suggesting some magical, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey barrier of some metaphysical property?
And what do you mean, our spherical sun's light never shines or planar Earth? A) There are probably less than a thousand people who've been to college and believe the idea that Earth is planar, B) why would Earth be planar while Sol is spherical, and C) What do you mean, sunlight never shines on Earth? That entire thing made no sense.

What he means is that the sun never shines in the area beyond the ice wall, and "ice wall" is a metaphor.

Although most of the Flat Earth folk here wouldn't consider iwanttobelieve their spokesman, it is a common recourse in topics like this one -- to say "Well, we have this other theory where [something that addresses the issue]", in this case it would be "Antarctica really is a continent and the rim is further out". Of course, none of the alternate ideas are consistent with the original one, so eventually a sufficiently fatal incompatibility will be pointed out and force them to say "It works in the first theory though. Most of us don't subscribe to this one anyway". In other words, it's an endless ping-pong between half-explanations and the issues never really get addressed.

Do you all want to know what is beyond Antarctica? If you where to start a voyage from Isla Deceit and head due south you would hit Antarctica, then sail around the western coast line you would be between the South Pacific and Indian Oceans sail further south you would hit Australia. Every chart that is used in navigation can show this... if you use a different chart form of chart that does not show this... I think you might crash into that magical wall...

I am starting to find this forum more humorous then anything. Magical "ice wall" barriers... a mountain in the middle of earth that is where the only magnetic pole is... satellites are fictional... NASA is a sham..... the sun is merely 3,000 km from us... and finally... the earth is flat.. I am very doubtful that this society is actually real... just a group of people that are playing a fun little trick on everyone by arguing the FE theory.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 05:44:09 PM by BoatswainsMate »

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2012, 05:46:01 PM »
Antarctica is a separate continent.
It has been fully explored, mapped and people live there.
if an Ice wall exists it is Far beyond Antarctica.
What make the most sense that this "wall" is not a wall at all, but a barrier...
This is where our spherical suns light never shines upon our planar Earth.

Whats is beyond? UnKnown....but Master James has some interesting theories.

I'm afraid I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell you just said. If there is an ice wall, it's beyond Antarctica? The geographic and magnetic south poles have both been proven to be in Antarctica. And what do you mean, not a wall, but a barrier. Are you suggesting some magical, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey barrier of some metaphysical property?
And what do you mean, our spherical sun's light never shines or planar Earth? A) There are probably less than a thousand people who've been to college and believe the idea that Earth is planar, B) why would Earth be planar while Sol is spherical, and C) What do you mean, sunlight never shines on Earth? That entire thing made no sense.

What he means is that the sun never shines in the area beyond the ice wall, and "ice wall" is a metaphor.

Although most of the Flat Earth folk here wouldn't consider iwanttobelieve their spokesman, it is a common recourse in topics like this one -- to say "Well, we have this other theory where [something that addresses the issue]", in this case it would be "Antarctica really is a continent and the rim is further out". Of course, none of the alternate ideas are consistent with the original one, so eventually a sufficiently fatal incompatibility will be pointed out and force them to say "It works in the first theory though. Most of us don't subscribe to this one anyway". In other words, it's an endless ping-pong between half-explanations and the issues never really get addressed.

Do you all want to know what is beyond Antarctica? If you where to start a voyage from Isla Deceit and head due south you would hit Antarctica, then sail around the western coast line you would be between the South Pacific and Indian Oceans sail further south you would hit Australia. Every chart that is used in navigation can show this... if you use a different chart form of chart that does not show this... I think you might crash into that magical wall...

I am starting to find this forum more humorous then anything. Magical "ice wall" barriers... a mountain in the middle of earth that is where the only magnetic pole is... satellites are fictional... NASA is a sham..... the sun is merely 3,000 km from us... and finally... the earth is flat.. I am very doubtful that this society is actually real... just a group of people that are playing a fun little trick on everyone by arguing the FE theory.

Well said, though I'm afraid you won't convince many people here. Those that already agree already agree, and those that don't...well, don't.
People like Ski will simply claim you're somehow stupid, or in on the 'conspiracy.'

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2012, 06:10:48 PM »
I don't think I've ever called anyone a conspirator, but I'll admit to thinking this forum has an unbelievably large number of visitors who are "stupid".
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2012, 06:14:27 PM »
I don't think I've ever called anyone a conspirator, but I'll admit to thinking this forum has an unbelievably large number of visitors who are "stupid".

And to you, Ski dearest, I would imagine that an unbelievably large number of visitors who walk away thinking that there is an unbelievably large number of 'stupid' people one this forum. Including moderators. I, of course, do not like to judge people. Just providing a larger perspective. With a snarky attitude, of course.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2012, 06:50:50 PM »
Antarctica is a separate continent.
It has been fully explored, mapped and people live there.
if an Ice wall exists it is Far beyond Antarctica.
What make the most sense that this "wall" is not a wall at all, but a barrier...
This is where our spherical suns light never shines upon our planar Earth.

Whats is beyond? UnKnown....but Master James has some interesting theories.

I'm afraid I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell you just said. If there is an ice wall, it's beyond Antarctica? The geographic and magnetic south poles have both been proven to be in Antarctica. And what do you mean, not a wall, but a barrier. Are you suggesting some magical, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey barrier of some metaphysical property?
And what do you mean, our spherical sun's light never shines or planar Earth? A) There are probably less than a thousand people who've been to college and believe the idea that Earth is planar, B) why would Earth be planar while Sol is spherical, and C) What do you mean, sunlight never shines on Earth? That entire thing made no sense.

What he means is that the sun never shines in the area beyond the ice wall, and "ice wall" is a metaphor.

Although most of the Flat Earth folk here wouldn't consider iwanttobelieve their spokesman, it is a common recourse in topics like this one -- to say "Well, we have this other theory where [something that addresses the issue]", in this case it would be "Antarctica really is a continent and the rim is further out". Of course, none of the alternate ideas are consistent with the original one, so eventually a sufficiently fatal incompatibility will be pointed out and force them to say "It works in the first theory though. Most of us don't subscribe to this one anyway". In other words, it's an endless ping-pong between half-explanations and the issues never really get addressed.

Do you all want to know what is beyond Antarctica? If you where to start a voyage from Isla Deceit and head due south you would hit Antarctica, then sail around the western coast line you would be between the South Pacific and Indian Oceans sail further south you would hit Australia. Every chart that is used in navigation can show this... if you use a different chart form of chart that does not show this... I think you might crash into that magical wall...

I am starting to find this forum more humorous then anything. Magical "ice wall" barriers... a mountain in the middle of earth that is where the only magnetic pole is... satellites are fictional... NASA is a sham..... the sun is merely 3,000 km from us... and finally... the earth is flat.. I am very doubtful that this society is actually real... just a group of people that are playing a fun little trick on everyone by arguing the FE theory.

1) Yes, a chart would indeed show that. What's your point?
2) What's so magical about Antarctica?
3) Reductio ad ridiculum and petitio principii. You suggest that these ideas are absurd without providing evidence of this, and claim that the Earth isn't flat because it isn't flat.
4) I assure you that, while some who profess their belief are simply trolls, many of us do indeed believe in a Flat Earth

Anyway, I'm almost certain you're TK's alt. You accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being a troll, call things you don't believe in 'magical', and came into existence just after he was banned. Someone should check that.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2012, 06:59:56 PM »
Antarctica is a separate continent.
It has been fully explored, mapped and people live there.
if an Ice wall exists it is Far beyond Antarctica.
What make the most sense that this "wall" is not a wall at all, but a barrier...
This is where our spherical suns light never shines upon our planar Earth.

Whats is beyond? UnKnown....but Master James has some interesting theories.

I'm afraid I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell you just said. If there is an ice wall, it's beyond Antarctica? The geographic and magnetic south poles have both been proven to be in Antarctica. And what do you mean, not a wall, but a barrier. Are you suggesting some magical, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey barrier of some metaphysical property?
And what do you mean, our spherical sun's light never shines or planar Earth? A) There are probably less than a thousand people who've been to college and believe the idea that Earth is planar, B) why would Earth be planar while Sol is spherical, and C) What do you mean, sunlight never shines on Earth? That entire thing made no sense.

What he means is that the sun never shines in the area beyond the ice wall, and "ice wall" is a metaphor.

Although most of the Flat Earth folk here wouldn't consider iwanttobelieve their spokesman, it is a common recourse in topics like this one -- to say "Well, we have this other theory where [something that addresses the issue]", in this case it would be "Antarctica really is a continent and the rim is further out". Of course, none of the alternate ideas are consistent with the original one, so eventually a sufficiently fatal incompatibility will be pointed out and force them to say "It works in the first theory though. Most of us don't subscribe to this one anyway". In other words, it's an endless ping-pong between half-explanations and the issues never really get addressed.

Do you all want to know what is beyond Antarctica? If you where to start a voyage from Isla Deceit and head due south you would hit Antarctica, then sail around the western coast line you would be between the South Pacific and Indian Oceans sail further south you would hit Australia. Every chart that is used in navigation can show this... if you use a different chart form of chart that does not show this... I think you might crash into that magical wall...

I am starting to find this forum more humorous then anything. Magical "ice wall" barriers... a mountain in the middle of earth that is where the only magnetic pole is... satellites are fictional... NASA is a sham..... the sun is merely 3,000 km from us... and finally... the earth is flat.. I am very doubtful that this society is actually real... just a group of people that are playing a fun little trick on everyone by arguing the FE theory.

1) Yes, a chart would indeed show that. What's your point?
2) What's so magical about Antarctica?
3) Reductio ad ridiculum and petitio principii. You suggest that these ideas are absurd without providing evidence of this, and claim that the Earth isn't flat because it isn't flat.
4) I assure you that, while some who profess their belief are simply trolls, many of us do indeed believe in a Flat Earth

Anyway, I'm almost certain you're TK's alt. You accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being a troll, call things you don't believe in 'magical', and came into existence just after he was banned. Someone should check that.

Calling something magical because it disagrees with your belief is one thing. But supposing this person really is a deck hand? Then he could easily call the ideas of the current FET 'incorrect,' as he claims to've sailed completely around Antarctica.
On another note, FET actually does have some pretty magical ideas; it calls itself a legitimate theory, but has no mathematical support in the way of a theorem, formula, or equation, not a single bit, to support its claims. There's no pictorial evidence to support FET, in contrast to more widely accepted science. There are gaping holes in Flat Earth Theory, but not in RE ("Real Earth" principles--term I borrowed from somebody). People who vehemently, or even lukewarmly, support FET have never seen any of the things they claim to believe in. Their theorists suggest a myriad of reasons why every prodigious scientist and scientific organization and laboratory acknowledges that Earth is spherical, or mostly so, most of which are totally implausible conspiracy theories.
Sounds pretty magical...

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2012, 07:05:56 PM »
Yes a chart shows that. Are you so narrow minded to belive that navigational charts are wrong? How on earth do people sail around antarctica so often without the use of these charts? Go sail these waters using a chart FE gives you to navigate by. Probbily won't go so well.

You claim I discredit FE with no valid proof? Do you lack comon sense or are you just messing with everyone? Proof the earth is spherical is all around you. You just choose not to see it.

I have sailed around antarctica. I can scan my line crossing certificat for you, but I know you would call that a hoax and me a lier. Comon sense people.

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2012, 07:08:45 PM »
Yes a chart shows that. Are you so narrow minded to belive that navigational charts are wrong? How on earth do people sail around antarctica so often without the use of these charts? Go sail these waters using a chart FE gives you to navigate by. Probbily won't go so well.

You claim I discredit FE with no valid proof? Do you lack comon sense or are you just messing with everyone? Proof the earth is spherical is all around you. You just choose not to see it.

I have sailed around antarctica. I can scan my line crossing certificat for you, but I know you would call that a hoax and me a lier. Comon sense people.

You desperately need to work on your "Speillng."

Aside from that, they do not only think you are a liar, they have suspected that you are a hostile ex-user who was recently banned.

?

Robbyj

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 5459
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2012, 07:19:38 PM »
Yes a chart shows that. Are you so narrow minded to belive that navigational charts are wrong? How on earth do people sail around antarctica so often without the use of these charts?

Are you telling me that an astute sailor of the highest caliber such as yourself requires an accurate chart to follow a coastline?
Why justify an illegitimate attack with a legitimate response?

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #50 on: May 22, 2012, 07:21:33 PM »
Yes a chart shows that. Are you so narrow minded to belive that navigational charts are wrong? How on earth do people sail around antarctica so often without the use of these charts?

Are you telling me that an astute sailor of the highest caliber such as yourself requires an accurate chart to follow a coastline?

Perhaps to land at a specific point on that coastline. And lots of astute sailors were duped by ice on the Titanic. There are lots of underwater formations that need avoiding, that are not necessarily visible from the deck of a ship.

?

Robbyj

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 5459
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #51 on: May 22, 2012, 07:30:20 PM »
Perhaps to land at a specific point on that coastline. And lots of astute sailors were duped by ice on the Titanic. There are lots of underwater formations that need avoiding, that are not necessarily visible from the deck of a ship.

We aren't talking about avoiding underwater anomolies, but plain and simply not getting lost.
Why justify an illegitimate attack with a legitimate response?

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #52 on: May 22, 2012, 07:37:08 PM »
Perhaps to land at a specific point on that coastline. And lots of astute sailors were duped by ice on the Titanic. There are lots of underwater formations that need avoiding, that are not necessarily visible from the deck of a ship.

We aren't talking about avoiding underwater anomolies, but plain and simply not getting lost.

But one certainly does use a chart to navigate a coastline, so as to avoid sandbars, reefs, juts, rocks, riptides, wrecks, and other potential problems.

?

Robbyj

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 5459
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #53 on: May 22, 2012, 07:46:37 PM »
But it is not completely necessary.  I could put my 10 year old neice in a canoe and tell her to paddle south until she hits land then turn right.
Why justify an illegitimate attack with a legitimate response?

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #54 on: May 22, 2012, 07:55:43 PM »
But it is not completely necessary.  I could put my 10 year old neice in a canoe and tell her to paddle south until she hits land then turn right.

But your niece in a canoe would be at little risk to such things. We're talking about a schooner, or something like it, which floats much lower in the water, and is at much more risk.

?

Robbyj

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 5459
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #55 on: May 22, 2012, 08:00:30 PM »
Navigational safety is not the issue at hand.
Why justify an illegitimate attack with a legitimate response?

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #56 on: May 22, 2012, 08:04:39 PM »
Navigational safety is not the issue at hand.

Then what are you talking about?

?

Robbyj

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 5459
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #57 on: May 22, 2012, 08:08:33 PM »
Basically what he said was, you cannot sail south until you hit land then turn left or right to navigate and that a chart would be required to do so.
Why justify an illegitimate attack with a legitimate response?

?

BoatswainsMate

  • 675
  • You just been Tom Bishop'ed
Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #58 on: May 22, 2012, 08:11:33 PM »
Hi robby,

Yes, your niece would be OK in a canoe around the coast line. The problem would be for vessel with a draft more then 8 feet. Take a look on a chart and find the coastline of a land mass. You will notice many obstructions. This would be most noticeable on the antarctic coast. There are many partially submerged objects. The coast is a mine field of ice and even on the Polar Star which has a reinforced bow for breaking ice we have to be careful.

On any naval or coast guard ship in restricted waters (when you are less then three nautical miles from land) you are doing constant fixes and reporting every three minutes. Coast lines are the most dangerous to make way through.

Sorry for any spelling this is on my phone.

Robby, when sailing a great distance a chart is always needed. If you had the best luck in the world, then maybe you can get to a place without using a chart... maybe. That would be way dangerous though. For an example Haitian and Cuban immigrants attempt to sail to America with no charts and we have found some of them going into east past the Turks and Caicos Islands.

If you where planning a trip from Florida to California do you not use some sort of map, google maps, or map quest? bad analogy sense the ocean does not have any raods only known routes ships take regularly
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 09:03:36 PM by BoatswainsMate »

Re: Antarctica?
« Reply #59 on: June 08, 2012, 01:15:36 AM »
Silly you only think you are going around Antarctica you are realy following the ice wall the charts you use are made to trick you into thinking you are going around a made up continent the time tables are adjusted to count for the farther distance thats why you couldn't do it with a FE map you would get lost trying to go around it because its not ther