REs Please Explain

So which FETheorist do I believe? You, or the many who say Antarctica IS the Ice Wall?

I keep saying that Antarctica is the "ice wall".

So, Antarctica is the Ice Wall. Which means you must use the unipolar map. & there are no guards there. Except the FEers who say there are. & excepting the FEers who use a bipolar map, in which case there is no Ice Wall, or there is, but it's not Antarctica. & the Earth is either a disc w/ finite size & edges, or an infinite plane. & FEers can't agree on any of this! Not even on a map. All the navigational maps & charts are made by REers. Probably because all the navigators, helmsmen, pilots, & captains both of sea & air vessels are all REers. & thank the Lords of Kobol for that! Can you imagine a FE sea captain w/ 800 passengers & a unipolar map trying to get from the Falklands to Sydney? He'd probably crash headlong into Wellington, NZ on the way!

Quote from: Yaakov ben Avraham on February 15, 2014, 09:40:54 PM

So which FETheorist do I believe? You, or the many who say Antarctica IS the Ice Wall?

I keep saying that Antarctica is the "ice wall".

So what stops the sea from falling off "the edge"?  It clearly isn't Antarctica, as it's surrounded by sea.

Or, the sea is surrounded by Antarctica. 

Still no answer to the map issue?

To what map issue are you referring? 

Read my message that includes a reference to sailing from the Falklands to Sydney.

Oh, those were serious questions?  I thought the whole post was just a barely understandable rant.

Give me a minute to try to decipher the post. 

Let's be frank. There is not a single travel or freight transport system in the world that takes FET maps seriously. Why? Because they are all inaccurate from Hell to breakfast. You can't get there from here, ultimately.

Ok, I have read the post in question several times, and this is the only question I can find.

Can you imagine a FE sea captain w/ 800 passengers & a unipolar map trying to get from the Falklands to Sydney?

So, to answer your question, yes, I can. 

Exactly how? The distance between the 2 locations is severely exaggerated on a unipolar map. & there are other questions there. For example, why can't FEers agree on a proper map? Why can't they agree on the shape & extent of the Earth (discoid & finite or infinite plane)? You can't even tell me how far apart Sydney & the Falklands are (the answer is very different depending on which map, unipolar or bipolar, one uses) from each other.

Why do you assume that any of our maps present any distances?  I have not seen a scale on the uni-polar or bi-polar map, yet, somehow, you RE'ers can ascertain not only the distance between points, but also whether or not the distance is accurate, as if you have some kind of supernatural ability to measure distance with your eyes. 

Why do you assume that any of our maps present any distances?  I have not seen a scale on the uni-polar or bi-polar map, yet, somehow, you RE'ers can ascertain not only the distance between points, but also whether or not the distance is accurate, as if you have some kind of supernatural ability to measure distance with your eyes.

Why do you FE'ers always assume that things are done in the most illogical ways? There are many ways to work out the scale of a diagram with no scale listed.

What if it is a non-linear scale?  Have you ever considered that before? 

So, what you're telling me is that, whichever map you choose to work w/ (& remember that FEers can't decide which is correct), neither 1 can be used for navigation. So even FEers use RE navigational charts (which are the only ones made). Why? Because they have nothing to use themselves. You can't get there from here on a FE map. But, its harder than that. FEers have no math or logic to back them. Both their maps are navigationally worthless (we have seen the problem in the South w/ the unipolar map; the bipolar map makes it impossible to circumnavigate @ the equator). So, what answers do they have? A 150 yr old book of marginal value & conflicting theories on which none of them can agree. Any response would be welcome.

That's funny.  I don't remember ever seeing a globe in the cockpit of an airplane, yet somehow, the pilots still manage to get from point A to point B. 

That's a simply stupid response. They use Mercator-type maps, which assume the sphericity of the Earth. Further, they rely on Air Traffic Control & computers, all of which operate on RE science.

That's funny.  I don't remember ever seeing a globe in the cockpit of an airplane, yet somehow, the pilots still manage to get from point A to point B.

right outside the windows.

That's a simply stupid response. They use Mercator-type maps, which assume the sphericity of the Earth. Further, they rely on Air Traffic Control & computers, all of which operate on RE science.

So, back in the days before Air Traffic Control and Computers, flat maps were perfectly acceptable for navigation.  I see.

Why do you assume that any of our maps present any distances?  I have not seen a scale on the uni-polar or bi-polar map, yet, somehow, you RE'ers can ascertain not only the distance between points, but also whether or not the distance is accurate, as if you have some kind of supernatural ability to measure distance with your eyes.

Clearly distances are known for travel by sea and air, tested many times. Please answer the question about why you cannot provide a map for a flat earth.

But we have presented maps.    Just because you do not like them, that does not mean that we do not provide them. 

Again, Mercator maps have as their basic premise the fact that the Earth is round. You either never took 9th Grade Geography, or failed miserably when you did. A Mercator map bears no similarity to a FE map. A Mercator map seeks to render a 3D concept (a ball) into a 2D format. But no one looking @ the format pretends to think that it is the accurate shape of what we're observing. FE maps actually claim to be accurate representations of Earth.

One again, you assume the scale of our FE maps is linear. 

But we have presented maps.    Just because you do not like them, that does not mean that we do not provide them.

Link to recognised site please.  Do all distances agree with actual measured ones?

FEers can't present a map that all agree on is the point.

One again, you assume the scale of our FE maps is linear.

Why would they be anything else if they are representing a flat surface.

Link to recognised site please. 

Here you go.

Do all distances agree with actual measured ones?

I don't understand what you mean by that.  Of course, it would not be a map if it did not represent the actual Earth. 

Jroa, the point of a map is to get from here to there. That involves linear measurement. How many kilometers is it from the Falklands to Sydney? If your map can't indicate that, then it serves no purpose. And if it was not even intended for that purpose, then for what purpose was it intended?

Who uses a map of the entire Earth to get from one place to another?  Probably not very many people, whether they are RE or FE.  Yet, you people, for some reason, insist that you should be able to make a short trip using only a FE map, and if you can't, then it must be false.

Sometimes you people surprise me, but not when it comes to maps.  RE'ers are like a broken record, saying the same things over and over. 

Who uses a map of the entire Earth to get from one place to another?  Probably not very many people, whether they are RE or FE.  Yet, you people, for some reason, insist that you should be able to make a short trip using only a FE map, and if you can't, then it must be false.

Sometimes you people surprise me, but not when it comes to maps.  RE'ers are like a broken record, saying the same things over and over.

how about planning a trip say from west to east australia for example. Going by that portion of your map australia is about 6 times wider west to east than it is north to south.