Is this nonsense?

  • 24 Replies
  • 2492 Views
Is this nonsense?
« on: June 04, 2013, 12:27:37 PM »
A fantasy land flat earth has only ONE direct route between two points.  The real world we live in has many direct routes between two points.  But I guess all the pilots in the world are in on the conspiracy right?

Go ahead and hide this thread in nonsense and don't reply.  It only provides further proof that you dont want your following of lowbrows to see it because it something they might actually understand.

What I see here is a bunch of sheeple being fooled by a couple smart wannabe Ron L Hubbards.  They are taking a centuries old poorly done experiment as proof the world is flat and backing it up with a bunch of formulas that the sheeple cant understand.  They sit around drinking beer and laughing their asses off at you.  That experiment was a joke when it was done and any research based on that experiment is a joke.  There are real conspiracy actually worth debating.  The earth being a sphere isn't a theory.  Its a fact. 

When asked if it was a joke, I said "No flat earth is probable a metaphor for conspiracy theorists kinda like zombies for preppers."  Then I read the wiki page...

 I could see this forum being a fun debate, but to take it serious is equated with taking pro wrestling serious.  May god have mercy on your souls.



Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2013, 02:31:27 PM »
I haven't a clue what he's saying either.  ::)

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2013, 02:50:05 PM »
Sigh.  I'm so disappointed in humanity right now that this would even need further clarification.  Because its such a simple concept Im surprised the brains around here cant infer or conceptualize without every detail being laid out.

In the picture you see all the direct lines between the two points.  If you were to get in an airplane you could fly any of those routes between the two points without deviating/changing course.

In the flat world fantasy map from your wiki page, there is only one "direct" route possible from any two points on the map.  (again by "direct" is meant setting a course and not deviating from it') We know there are more than one direct route, as every pilot in the world will tell you.

Or yet another way to conceptualize this is to imagine setting a course from Mexico that crosses hawaii and ends in china.  In the real world this can be accomplished without course deviation.  In fantasy land you can not take a direct line from Mexico to china and be anywhere near Hawaii because there is only one direct line, straight up over the Midwest and Canada.

The sad thing is now that Ive posted more then a two sentence answer Ive surpassed the 99% of posters attention span so this will all be lost on them.  Congratulations!  You have yet furthered your website again by sucking me into replying to this nonsense.  Enjoy your beer and the good laugh at my expense.  You win.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2013, 02:52:34 PM »
In both worlds there is only 1 direct route. Unfortunately pilots cannot fly us through the ground so they instead choose an arc.

Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

?

spoon

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 1370
  • ho ho ho
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2013, 04:13:58 PM »
Your condescending tone is amplifying your stupidity with every word you type. Your inability to grasp the concept of a three dimensional earth and it's effects on flight paths is pretty entertaining though, so keep ranting.
I work nights are get the feeling of impennding doom for things most people take for granted.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2013, 04:26:11 PM »
With your smart replies all I hear is "I cant really dispute what your saying so Ill just be funny instead."  Awesome.  I replied and you win again.

Also to add, you asked what I meant by direct and I defined it by a flight taken without changing course.  I did not define it as the shortest distance between two points.  You failed to grasp that concept which brings images of Forest Gump behind a keyboard to mind.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 04:31:20 PM by hellyeah »

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2013, 04:33:47 PM »
No, it isn't nonsense.  Your first thread was.  I do hope you can see the difference and plan your future activity on these forums accordingly.

It is, however, wrong.  I think FlatOrange explained it well enough.  He's on your side of the debate by the way.  Based on your last post you seem to have missed it; please look back through the thread a bit more carefully.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2013, 05:10:49 PM »
No he didn't.  Again, refer to my definition of direct route.  Flatorange's post was just a silly answer from a guy that thinks he's smarter than the rest of the class. 

I really don't think I need to get into defining it more carefully with things like "Flying at a constant level altitude of X above sea level at a rate of Y with the sun at my back and the breeze blowing slightly from the south blah blah blah, because it doesn't change anything. My original definition of direct route will stand as sufficient to make my point to anyone with cognitive thinking exceeding that of a trained monkey.

Enjoy the circle jerk boys, because that's all this forum really is.  When you guys are done fluffing each others ego's about how you're smarter than the rest of the world, this will be your legacy left for eternity to laugh at.  I wish Columbus was here to read this with me.  We'd be having a great chuckle together.  Some people are simply on this earth to waste oxygen.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2013, 05:21:33 PM »
Quote
In the picture you see all the direct lines between the two points.  If you were to get in an airplane you could fly any of those routes between the two points without deviating/changing course.

I may have been a bit confused.  Your OP made it sound like you were saying that between any two points on a globe there are multiple direct routes.  But your picture illustrates two points that are antipodal to each other (like the north and south pole, according to RE geography).  Were you only talking about two points on opposite sides of the globe from each other, or did you also have in mind more realistic routes, like New York to San Francisco?  ???
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3305
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2013, 05:24:29 PM »
Also, the gridball posted above has no relevance to Earth shape reality.  Conclusions for anything using that as a reference should be understood to be for amusement purposes only.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 05:32:00 PM by gotham »

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2013, 05:35:03 PM »
No he didn't.  Again, refer to my definition of direct route.  Flatorange's post was just a silly answer from a guy that thinks he's smarter than the rest of the class. 

I really don't think I need to get into defining it more carefully with things like "Flying at a constant level altitude of X above sea level at a rate of Y with the sun at my back and the breeze blowing slightly from the south blah blah blah, because it doesn't change anything. My original definition of direct route will stand as sufficient to make my point to anyone with cognitive thinking exceeding that of a trained monkey.

Enjoy the circle jerk boys, because that's all this forum really is.  When you guys are done fluffing each others ego's about how you're smarter than the rest of the world, this will be your legacy left for eternity to laugh at.  I wish Columbus was here to read this with me.  We'd be having a great chuckle together.  Some people are simply on this earth to waste oxygen.

K, I'm done fluffing my ego.

How are there many direct routes on a globe? Disregarding the earth-boring example I made earlier, how do you find more than one shortest distance?
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2013, 06:00:07 PM »
I never said shortest distance did I?  Where in my definition of direct route did I say shortest distance?

HERE IS THE DEFINITION LAID OUT ONE TIME ALL TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE SO YOU CAN NO LONGER CLAIM RETARD:

Definition of "Direct route" for this discussion: A flight traveled without deviating course between two points on our planet earth.

------------------

What I want really want to say here is "does it really matter if I mean any point or just polar points?"  That would just confuse the sheeple.  It really doesn't matter because yes any 2 points have multiple direct routes. The two most obvious are in opposite directions.  But of course you'd have us believe that if we travel on the same heading in any direction we'd end up in Antarctica and eventually....what?

So to not confuse things, lets just stick with the polar points if you intend to answer.

FYI, I really don't expect to get any kind of legitimate answer.  I see another thread below mine with a bunch of game playing designed at infuriating the OP.  I'm not kidding when I say "I get it" and "you win."  I'm just posting at this point for entertainment value because a person really cant take this as more serious than a fart in a hurricane.

And by the way...whats up with statements like "gridball no relevence to reality".  It is a sphere yes?  So it does have relevance in reality.  Or whats up with posts about not taking your map serious?  So you'd have me believe you guys have this thing all figured out but cant be bothered to make a map?  Or is it that any map you make will be quickly disproved so its best to not make something definitive.  I will stand by my cheesy "gridball".  Why wont you stand by your flat map?

And btw my first thread was just as compelling. If you fly from mexico to china you could take a piss out the window on hawaii on your way.  In fantasy land you would be pissing on nebraska.

*

Junker

  • 3751
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2013, 06:13:19 PM »
I wish Columbus was here to read this with me.
Why would you want all of the capital city of Ohio with you to read it?

HERE IS THE DEFINITION LAID OUT ONE TIME ALL TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE SO YOU CAN NO LONGER CLAIM RETARD:

Definition of "Direct route" for this discussion: A flight traveled without deviating course between two points on our planet earth.
Can we all make up our own definitions and just claim it is for "this discussion?"


And by the way...whats up with statements like "gridball no relevence to reality".  It is a sphere yes?  So it does have relevance in reality.
Even in RET, Earth is not a sphere.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #13 on: June 04, 2013, 06:20:48 PM »
Is deviation relative?

By instrument-standards this pilot would not be deviating and has multiple options for a direct route:


I'm sure this post will infuriate you... but... there's got to be a better way to argue this.

EDIT: Both the globe and the flat-earth pilots would 'deviate' by taking a shorter / more direct-route. But how could they measure their directness when they're going north and then south...?
« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 06:23:29 PM by FlatOrange »
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #14 on: June 04, 2013, 06:37:11 PM »
Definition of "Direct route" for this discussion: A flight traveled without deviating course between two points on our planet earth.

Then you are indeed absolutely wrong.  There are only two guaranteed ways to do this on a global Earth between two random points: the shortest one FlatOrange discussed and the one going in the opposite direction.  Any other course (unless the points are antipodal) will not take you to your destination.  It would appear you simply don't understand the diagram you posted. 

It seems that I was wrong before: what you posted is, indeed, nonsense.  But I won't hold it against you since you clearly thought it wasn't so.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Art

  • 133
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2013, 01:20:01 AM »
The most direct route for a sphere would be a straight line.
The most direct route that could be traveled if there is no terrain or obstacles,
is the route across the Earth's surface that is of the shortest distance which is an arc.
If the arc is continued, it always completes a circle around the sphere, no matter where the two points are.

If it's a flat surface, the most direct possible route to travel, with the same assumption of no obstacles,
is always a straight line, and a shorter distance in comparison, the greater the two distances get.

It is important to know one way or the other if you are planning a very long distance trip which involves the purchase of fuel.



« Last Edit: June 05, 2013, 01:21:59 AM by Art »
RET:0 - FET:0

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2013, 03:41:07 PM »
Roundy guess what?  2>1
 
I feel like Juan Martinez questioning Jodie Arias.  Yes you are sooo correct their is only 2 direct routes that bi-sect the earth between two non-polar points.  Good for you.  I'm so glad you caught that one.  Didn't take as long as I thought it would to get you snake oil salesman to say something that contradicts your theory.  Since 2 is greater than 1 you all FAIL!  Congrats!

The prosecution rests.

________________________

Next person that uses the term "shortest distance" in this thread is banned.  You have no value here.  ::)

(Definition of "Junker": Any person with IQ below 80.)  Now every time I use the work "junker"  we all know what I'm talking about and I don't have to write all that out again.  See how that works?

Orange, your post is not infuriating at all.  I'm happy to see see someone actually attempt to dispute my point.  You must not be in the inner circle because you broke the rule of never directly answering anything.  I am honestly trying to understand your post so I can argue it, but I just don't get it.  I must be a junker.  Can you clarify about the instrument panels and how they would end up flying in a circle on a flat earth?

Dudes, gotta say its actually been entertaining so I did find some value with this forum.  Now back to debating over ballistics coefficient and trajectories.  Keep up the good fight.  You might win this one.  Maybe the earth will listen and morph flat.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2013, 04:24:30 PM »
You are obviously an a-hole. Not only do you seem to lack interest in FE theory, but you practically insult us.
I advise you log off this website permanently, get off your ass, and do something with your life.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2013, 04:43:47 PM »
You are obviously an a-hole. Not only do you seem to lack interest in FE theory, but you practically insult us.
I advise you log off this website permanently, get off your ass, and do something with your life.

I miss the Joni Michell that was all about peace and love.
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2013, 06:59:02 PM »
Roundy guess what?  2>1

Indeed, but it is much less than "many".

The real world we live in has many direct routes between two points.

See, nonsense.

I hope you at least appreciate the geometry lesson.  I always say that if people leave this site a little more knowledgeable than they came then their visit was fruitful and worthwhile, whether they've opened their mind to the truth about the shape of the Earth or not.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #20 on: June 05, 2013, 08:20:55 PM »
Roundy guess what?  2>1

Indeed, but it is much less than "many".

The real world we live in has many direct routes between two points.

See, nonsense.

I hope you at least appreciate the geometry lesson.  I always say that if people leave this site a little more knowledgeable than they came then their visit was fruitful and worthwhile, whether they've opened their mind to the truth about the shape of the Earth or not.

I am not one of the more frequent posters to this site (by the numbers of my postings)  but my experience has been of that of one who has  left with "a little more knowledgeable  than when they came , then their visit was fruitful and worthwhile".

Thank you for this website. It does make you think.

But I have had the advantage of  a little more experience and have done a little more reference to back up my knowledge than some .......That is . : Of the truth about the shape of the Earth.....But I am afraid that it was just the opposite of what  FE would hope for, but rather what RE would hope for. ;D

I think my signature line says it all.  :)
« Last Edit: June 05, 2013, 08:57:17 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

?

darknavyseal

  • 439
  • Round Earth, for sure, maybe.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #21 on: June 05, 2013, 10:55:59 PM »
Quote
I hope you at least appreciate the geometry lesson.  I always say that if people leave this site a little more knowledgeable than they came then their visit was fruitful and worthwhile, whether they've opened their mind to the truth about the shape of the Earth or not.

This. I very much agree with this statement. Things can and have been learned on both sides of the argument, myself included. I love this website.

As for the OP, read what others have said. You don't understand geometry very well. As far as I have been taught, on a sphere, travelling in a perfectly straight line will make a perfect circle around said sphere. So, the "multiple paths" to the same object is going forward to it, or backwards. Not very practical, as this has not been proven. Unless this object is on the exact other side of the Earth, than yes, any direction you choose would lead to it. But that is it.

btw, not sure if you knew this or not, but I am going to say this anyway. Lines of latitude do not travel in a straight line. In RE, depending on north or south hemisphere, curve slightly. Only the equator travels in a "perfectly straight" line.

Also, the Earth not being a perfect sphere does not add anything to what you are saying. Cheers.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2013, 09:10:51 PM »
 ??? So...I've been reading through the forums trying to figure this site out.  I wasn't sure if it was meant some kind of strange scientific challenge for fun (like that recent news story about trying to prove the universe isn't a big computer simulation), an ironic joke, or just commentary about scientific debate in general.  But regardless of it's true intentions I'm now convinced that there are members here who really are convinced the earth is flat.  Either that or they have reached a level of trolling unseen before by the internet.

So in case there really are people losing sleep over this question:

1) Flat earth theory has a lot of loose ends with overly complicated explanations in order to hold the theory together (e.g. Why are all the other observable planatoids in the solar system round but the earth flat?).
2) You can walk to the beach and see the curvature of the ocean.
3) You can book passage on a ship and watch the beach disappear over the horizon.
4) You can look up at the satellites orbiting at night.  You can take a picture of the ISS with a nice telescope.
5) A round earth fits observation and doesn't require needlessly complicated explanations nor does it require a belief in a mass conspiracy (The NSA can't keep a classified power point secret as it is). ;D
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 09:12:36 PM by FlatEarthDenier »

?

RyanTG

  • 312
  • If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.
Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #23 on: June 10, 2013, 07:06:57 AM »
There are real conspiracy actually worth debating.

I beg to differ.

Re: Is this nonsense?
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2013, 01:05:18 AM »
Why is everyone debating the definition of direct route when it's insanely obvious what he means? I mean the point still clearly stands and is correct. The lack of arguement against it is in comparison to how much is posted is a little sad.

Flat Earth you should be able to take x directions and reach location b from location a. In reality however you can travel >x amount of directions and reach location b from location a. There we go we can all go home.