One vs one debate

It depends which flat earth theory you are looking at.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 01, 2013, 09:01:33 AM

It depends which flat earth theory you are looking at.

Anything.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:03:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 01, 2013, 09:01:33 AM

It depends which flat earth theory you are looking at.

Anything.

You are the one who posed a debate.  Please suggest a topic, otherwise this thread will have to be moved.

Quote from: Junker on November 01, 2013, 09:10:24 AM

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:03:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 01, 2013, 09:01:33 AM

It depends which flat earth theory you are looking at.

Anything.

You are the one who posed a debate.  Please suggest a topic, otherwise this thread will have to be moved.

First I need to find a contestant. Someone who has a lot of knowledge about FET to discuss it thoroughly. But let me start the debate and introduce my point of view.

The Earth's shape is something no one has to lie about. There are no benefits to propagate a certain shape. Therefore the whole conspiracy idea about lying governments and the vast mayority of persons who are into this conspiracy makes no sense at all. But all of that aside for now.

The FET also does not correspond with real world observations, to name one. Flights for example. On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance. In real life however these flights fly close to the Southpole. Furthermore, the distance between Australia and South Africa would take much longer than a flight from London to Honolulu on a flat earth, while in real life these flights take about the same time.

Furthermore there are a whole lot of other issues with the FET which contradict observations. This while the RET has no contradiction at all.

The Earth's shape is something no one has to lie about. There are no benefits to propagate a certain shape. Therefore the whole conspiracy idea about lying governments and the vast mayority of persons who are into this conspiracy makes no sense at all. But all of that aside for now.

The FET also does not correspond with real world observations, to name one. Flights for example. On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance. In real life however these flights fly close to the Southpole. Furthermore, the distance between Australia and South Africa would take much longer than a flight from London to Honolulu on a flat earth, while in real life these flights take about the same time.

Furthermore there are a whole lot of other issues with the FET which contradict observations. This while the RET has no contradiction at all.

I'm not a pilot so I do not know exactly why they fly certain routes but it may not be about the shortest route.  It may have more to do with speed/time/air resistance...fuel useage.  That might explain the reason for flying near the South Pole from Australia to South Africa.  And the length of time from London to Honolulu is about the same as Australia to South Africa because the distances are about the same.  The thing with flight times though is, it's all relative to speed and air resistance...you don't know these things unless you are flying the plane.

The FET also does not correspond with real world observations, to name one. Flights for example. On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance. In real life however these flights fly close to the Southpole.

There are too many variables. Performance is effected by fuel loads, ambient temperatures and pressures, engine models, the list goes on. Depending on what is happening with other traffic you might be in a hold, or routed out of your way to avoid other traffic or storms. The pilots do not fly direct to their destination either. Depending on the wind they might take off in the opposite direction to the intended route. They then fly SIDS (Standard Instrument Departures) onto a route, follow some beacons, get onto an Oceanic Highway on the way their, follow a STAR (STandard ARrival) on approach, and again go right round the back of an airport to land in the right direction. When pilots are following routes like the typical ones below, how can anyone make a simple straight line DST comparison to ascertain shape? Only the aircraft's Flight Management System really knows how far that trip is. The pilot just uses the data it provides. However FMS source code is closely guarded.

Below is a SID example. Note how the pilots fly curves and loops. They do not go direct.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:25:51 AM

The Earth's shape is something no one has to lie about. There are no benefits to propagate a certain shape. Therefore the whole conspiracy idea about lying governments and the vast mayority of persons who are into this conspiracy makes no sense at all. But all of that aside for now.

A lot of FErs are divided on certain topics.  Some believe in a conspiracy, others don't.  Those that do recognize there is a benefit for the few at the top who are funneling money to line their own pockets, while proclaiming to be doing space exploration.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:25:51 AM

The FET also does not correspond with real world observations, to name one. Flights for example. On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance. In real life however these flights fly close to the Southpole. Furthermore, the distance between Australia and South Africa would take much longer than a flight from London to Honolulu on a flat earth, while in real life these flights take about the same time.

There is no FE map.  The one you see here is a polar projection map used for reference.  Conclusions based on that map will be inaccurate.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:25:51 AM

Furthermore there are a whole lot of other issues with the FET which contradict observations. This while the RET has no contradiction at all.

You will have to be more specific.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 09:25:51 AM

Ever since the Copernican theory was accepted, that is how the leaders of the world have depicted the Earth, as a sphere.  I seriously doubt satellites and mankind have been far enough away from the Earth to see it's entire shape.  Therefore, by them saying "the Earth IS a sphere" without actually KNOWING it is, is deceitful.  It's quite possible NO ONE will ever see the Earth from afar, until we pass on....like in 2001 A Space Odyssey.  So in a way, this debate is worthless.

Seeing a light fly over at a scheduled time does not prove it is what they say it is.  I have yet to see positive proof of it.

Seeing a light fly over at a scheduled time does not prove it is what they say it is.  I have yet to see positive proof of it.

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on November 01, 2013, 11:44:40 AM

Seeing a light fly over at a scheduled time does not prove it is what they say it is.  I have yet to see positive proof of it.

Agreed. When you feel your heartbeat, this is not necessarily proof that you have this organ within you. Positive proof is needed. In fact, according to this train of thought, you have no positive proof that you were born (doctor conspiracy), or that your parents are really your parents.

So many things are suspect......why bother caring about the shape of the Earth? You do not even have positive proof of more important aspects of your life.

You see, with this ideology, you have created your interpretation of this world to boil down to one of two things. Either:

A) everyone else on this planet is crazy

or

B) you are.

And that's quite a pickle.

It does NOT show that pilots fly in loops and all directions when flying to their destination. I show you what an air route looks like from Johannesburg to Sydney. Here you go http://postimg.org/image/s16sf2hnl/

On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance.

Quote from: Don Quichotte on November 01, 2013, 11:02:52 AM

It does NOT show that pilots fly in loops and all directions when flying to their destination. I show you what an air route looks like from Johannesburg to Sydney. Here you go http://postimg.org/image/s16sf2hnl/

Your post demonstrates EXACTLY what I was talking about. On RE planes don't take the shortest path to their destinations. There are many other factors that weigh in. So your assertion:

Quote

On the FE map distances between Australia and South Africa would take them across China, India and the Middle east, because that is the shortest distance.

doesn't make sense because planes intentionally don't take direct routes.

Quote from: SeekerOfTruth on November 01, 2013, 11:57:37 AM

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on November 01, 2013, 11:44:40 AM

Seeing a light fly over at a scheduled time does not prove it is what they say it is.  I have yet to see positive proof of it.

Agreed. When you feel your heartbeat, this is not necessarily proof that you have this organ within you. Positive proof is needed. In fact, according to this train of thought, you have no positive proof that you were born (doctor conspiracy), or that your parents are really your parents.

So many things are suspect......why bother caring about the shape of the Earth? You do not even have positive proof of more important aspects of your life.

You see, with this ideology, you have created your interpretation of this world to boil down to one of two things. Either:

A) everyone else on this planet is crazy

or

B) you are.

And that's quite a pickle.

I don't need your sarcasm.  Your comments don't even make sense.  Of course my fricken heart is with me if I FEEL it.  You're acting like an idiot.

Feeling it does not equate to existence. Feeling is just one of the senses. Just when you see the ISS this does not mean it exists: your senses could be deceiving you. Same thing with the Earth looking flat. Senses, apparently, cannot be trusted, so we need something more compelling.

Quote from: SeekerOfTruth on November 01, 2013, 01:29:43 PM

Feeling it does not equate to existence. Feeling is just one of the senses. Just when you see the ISS this does not mean it exists: your senses could be deceiving you. Same thing with the Earth looking flat. Senses, apparently, cannot be trusted, so we need something more compelling.

Ok, then everything must be thrown out!  Every experiment, every test, E V E R Y    T H I N G.  We can't trust our eyesight so we can't say anything we've seen in a lab can be true.  But ohhhhhh, the videos and pictures from space ARE true.     As a human, your 5 senses determine your reality.  Just because there are illusions and your senses can be tricked doesn't mean that nothing we experience is real.  You've got to be good at deciphering the difference.  Obviously some of us are better at it than most.

The two routes look pretty much the same to me. You are just zoomed in on the "short" route so that the curve in it is more exaggerated. In the other one you can see half the US, so of course it looks more like a line. That first image is also completely ridiculous. Your evidence for a "direct" route is ANYTHING but that.

No.  Take a length of string, a globe and a map and you can figure out the difference.

Quote from: Rama Set on November 01, 2013, 05:00:09 PM

No.  Take a length of string, a globe and a map and you can figure out the difference.

Assuming the flat map of the globe is a correct depiction, right?

If that's the case and you run the string over a set point to a set point, then do the same by using the same curve of the string from a set point to a set point on the flat map...what difference would there be? Have you tried this?

Wouldn't going over a curve as in your globe be the same as going around a circle as in flat earth.