Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m

  • 280 Replies
  • 148336 Views
Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« on: February 26, 2015, 03:10:30 AM »
To my fellow flat earthers, we might have a problem:
http://www.skyscanner.net/transport/flights/syd/scl/150313/airfares-from-sydney-kingsford-smith-to-santiago-arturo-merino-benitez-in-march-2015.html?adults=1&children=0&infants=0&cabinclass=economy&preferdirects=false&rtn=0&outboundaltsenabled=false&inboundaltsenabled=false



http://us.travel2be.com/HtmlRedirectT2BUS2/SYD/SCL/1/0/0/13-03-2015/13-03-2015/OW/false/true/d9aZEXUS/9@Efw@!@Qw@2E@_F@4@7@3tu@1@!@2@8@7G@4@1@_@Rg@=KE@7Z@2@!n@_@O@R6YEH@2/?cmp=d9aZEXUS&skyscanner_redirectid=48mxaL2oEeSlML9TLmRCgw&tgd=236c1x



I found this problematic flight for our theory, in that from Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile) this direct flight only takes 12 hours and 30 minutes, which seems in line with the spherical earth theory.

Please help me out, because I can't find an explanation for this, although I am still convinced of the earth being flat. The curvature formula vs. the photos and videos proves to me that the earth is flat, but this flight (the only one in contrast with our theory) poses a problem that we need to solve.

This, too, seems to confirm that the flight takes as much time as it can only take with a spherical earth:
http://www.flightmanager.com/content/TimeDistanceForm.aspx
Quote
Time and Distance Calculator Results
Departure Location
Name: Arturo Merino Benitez Intl
IATA: SCL
ICAO: SCEL
Santiago, Chile
Latitude: 3323' 40" S
Longitude: 7047' 38" W
Elevation: 1555 (Feet)   Arrival Location
Name: Sydney Intl
IATA: SYD
ICAO: YSSY
Sydney, Australia
Latitude: 3356' 46" S
Longitude: 15110' 38" E
Elevation: 21 (Feet)
Distance: 6,135.01 (NM) / 7,061.55 (MI) / 11,362.04 (KM)
Trip Time: 13:35 (includes 15 minute bias and air speed at 460Kts)

I mean, we do have a problem. The amount of shills on this forum seemed to confirm to me the flat earth, but now I realize that they may all be people who love science and enjoy arguing. Or people who like ganging up on minorities. But... we do have a problem.

The curvature formula (when compared to existing pictures and videos) still proves flat earth, but we definitely need to debunk this flight.

And if we cannot debunk this flight, and these flights do exist and they go as fast as they claim, flying over the path they claim, then we need to revise our official flat earth map:

« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 07:05:58 AM by acenci »

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2015, 04:46:24 AM »
To my fellow flat earthers, we might have a problem
No shit Sherlock.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome
Should I examine the all shits?

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2015, 07:34:01 AM »
Quote
Or people who like ganging up on minorities.

That escalated quickly.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2015, 08:23:40 AM »
Acenci, the problem is that we don't know what the real map looks like. Consequently, we can't estimate any distances within the FE model. This doesn't mean that the Earth is not flat though. The RE map is also wrong, and it is blatantly clear in its most common flat version which is based on a projection. On a globe allegedly everything matches with reality, but who exactly uses globes for navigation. What I am saying is that it is all relative, and it is true that the FE'ers don't have a very solid argument as to how exactly it all works and there are many holes in the theory. However, because we don't know how exactly it works and what it looks like doesn't mean the Earth is a sphere or spins. Of course, that is debatable, and if you haven't been to space you can't personally be 100% sure, I guess.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2015, 08:26:09 AM »
The RE map is also wrong,
Point out one error, and we can debate.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome
Should I examine the all shits?

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2015, 08:27:40 AM »
Acenci, the problem is that we don't know what the real map looks like.

Who's 'we' kemosabe? I'm not making an ad populum here, but well over 99% of the population does know what the real map looks like.

And everyone uses a globe to navigate, since projection maps are projections of... wait for it... globes.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2015, 09:03:57 AM »
Acenci, the problem is that we don't know what the real map looks like. Consequently, we can't estimate any distances within the FE model. This doesn't mean that the Earth is not flat though.
Actually it kind of does.  If the earth was flat then drawing a map on a flat piece of paper would be trivial.  The fact is it is impossible to draw a map on a flat piece of paper.  It simply can not be done.  The only answer is to think for your self and free yourself from the tyranny of FE and place the paper over a sphere.
The RE map is also wrong, and it is blatantly clear in its most common flat version which is based on a projection. On a globe allegedly everything matches with reality, but who exactly uses globes for navigation.
Well, anyone with a GPS in their phone these days.  All navigation uses a globe, at least at the computational level.  Sure, there is not an actually physical globe inside your phone, but all the coordinates are based on a sphere (i.e. WGS84 Latitude, Longitude and Height).  Google WGS84 and you will see that navigation very much uses a sphere -- or spheriod to be more precise.  WGS84 defines a reference ellipsoid
What I am saying is that it is all relative, and it is true that the FE'ers don't have a very solid argument as to how exactly it all works and there are many holes in the theory. However, because we don't know how exactly it works and what it looks like doesn't mean the Earth is a sphere or spins. Of course, that is debatable, and if you haven't been to space you can't personally be 100% sure, I guess.
It is not a debate, the matter has been completely solved and proved at the level of proving that the shortest distance between two points is a line. 

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2015, 09:36:24 AM »
1. FLIGHT TIME BELOW EQUATOR : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=54792.60#.VO5eXfLLKXU

Tom Bishop says :


According to the Department of Transportation, the average on-time arrival rate is 75% among the 16 largest carriers.

http://www.gadling.com/2011/06/08/airline-industry-best-and-worst-of-april-2011/

    "Overall, the airline industry posted an average on-time arrival rate of 75.5 percent. This means that a quarter of the time, they miss the mark. It's almost as easy as being a weather man!"

1 in 4 world-wide flights were delayed. Weather conditions, or a slight misunderstanding of the earth's shape?

Acenci says :

A) 11,362 km / 912 = 12 hours and a half

B) Twenty-six passengers were struck down with gastroenteritis 30,000 feet in the air today, turning an already arduous 13 hour and 51 minute flight into a trip from hell.

2.

Acenci, watch this video : False FLAT EARTH MAP deception : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

From above video it is obvious that in northern hemiplan flights are perfectly in accordance with FET, and absolutely in discord with RET!

Question : What does this tell you?

3.



Any comment on picture above?




Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2015, 09:59:27 AM »
The table of flights tells me that National Carriers of several countries will fly you from Johanesburg to Sao Paulo via their main operating hub. SAA being the National Carrier of SA will fly you direct.

What does it tell you?

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2015, 10:11:26 AM »
Tom Bishop says :


According to the Department of Transportation, the average on-time arrival rate is 75% among the 16 largest carriers.

1 in 4 world-wide flights were delayed. Weather conditions, or a slight misunderstanding of the earth's shape?
If the earth is a radically different shape, then none of the planes would be on time would they?  Anyway, many carriers hit  >90% punctuality  - how the hell does the fact they are meant to be traveling 3 times as far as they actually do only affect less than one in ten planes?

If the polar projection flat earth map were correct, the planes wouldn't even be able to carry enough fuel for the journey, let alone be worrying about slight delays.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome
Should I examine the all shits?

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2015, 10:17:11 AM »
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2015, 10:29:06 AM »
HOW DO YOU THINK THE EARTH IS FLAT. THESE PEOPLE THINK THE SUN IS 3000 MILES AWAY. ALSO YOU SAY YOU FOUND AN ISSUE? REALLY I'VE FOUND PLENTY WITH YOU. AND WE'VE SEEN REAL MAPS! FROM SATELLITES THAT YOU SAY DON'T EXIST GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEADS. ACTUALLY DON'T STOP BECAUSE  YOUR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE IS INCREDIBLY ENTERTAINING.
-Sincerely
An educated person (don't be afraid to be stupid)(stay classy) (and stupid ;))

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2015, 11:08:03 AM »
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.
Were you not breast feed enough as a child?  You sure have a hangup about being spoon feed.  What is so obviously wrong?  The RET maps are accurate to the cm level.  Seems pretty good to me, especially considering FET can't even draw a map to begin with.  So now pilots are in on the conspiracy, who isn't in on it at this point?  And if you are feed up with airline delays, why don't you start an FE airline, always on time because FE pilots 'think for themselves'.  Oh, wait, there is not a single FE pilot in the world.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2015, 02:18:33 PM »
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.

OK, I agree. Then let us propose an alternative map. And then another question is why is the NASA whistleblower saying that the South Pole is the edge, too? Wouldn't he know? Or are you saying the map is wrong, but the South Pole is still the edge?

But then if the South Pole is the edge, how is this flight possible?

What if the plumb bob is not a valid argument because buildings are too small to worry about the curvature?

What if my only valid argument is the curvature formula not matching the videos of the horizon?

It is still good enough. I am still a flat earther.
I don't think you were ever an flat earther.  You tried to get some chops as an FEer, and are now slowly loosing all your own arguments.  It is a pretty obvious RE attempt to subvert from the inside.  Nice try, but I don't approve, it muddies the water.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2015, 03:15:51 PM »
Acenci is not a shill, and the earth is flat. Acenci, how would you comment this picture:
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 03:18:18 PM by cikljamas »

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2015, 03:27:00 PM »
Tom Bishop says :

According to the Department of Transportation, the average on-time arrival rate is 75% among the 16 largest carriers.

http://www.gadling.com/2011/06/08/airline-industry-best-and-worst-of-april-2011/

    "Overall, the airline industry posted an average on-time arrival rate of 75.5 percent. This means that a quarter of the time, they miss the mark. It's almost as easy as being a weather man!"

1 in 4 world-wide flights were delayed. Weather conditions, or a slight misunderstanding of the earth's shape?
Man, you people will believe anything you read if it sounds remotely like a straw to grasp.

About 25% of all flights did not arrive at their destination on time. About 40% of these (10% of all flights) were due to the flight leaving late because the aircraft itself hadn't arrived in time for an on-time departure. Another 30% (7.5% of all flights) are because of air-carrier problems like maintenance issues, late-arriving crews, fueling delays, and the like. 5% (~1% of all flights) are due to severe weather that cause gate or ground holds, diversions, or cancellations. Now we're up to about 74% of the 25% of not-on-time arrivals due to delayed takeoffs, diversions, or outright cancellations, instead of the flight mysteriously taking longer than scheduled.

This leaves only about 6.5% of all flights not arriving on time due to other causes. Of those, the lion's share are National Aviation System delays (another 24% of the 25%; 6% of all flights). Many, but certainly not all, of these result in delayed takeoffs while a problem like traffic congestion elsewhere, often due to weather, is cleared; sometimes the aircraft is required to stay in a holding pattern, keeping it aloft longer than scheduled. If we take a WAG that fully half of the NAS delays extend time in flight, now we're down to a mere 3% of all flights "in the air much longer than expected". Of those, how many just "mysteriously take too long"? Some do, I'm sure, due to routing issues or unexpected headwinds, but some, at least, fall into the "folks, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to circle Chicago for a little while because of a problem on the ground" and, sure enough, there's Chicago, Lake Michigan, the northern midwest, etc. a few miles below you while you're fretting about making your connections.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/help/aviation/html/understanding.html#q4

I've flown enough to recognize that nearly all late arrivals are due to late takeoffs. The above rings true.

Tom Bishop apparently just tossed out the fact that "only" 75% of all flights arrive on time (which is true) and let you guys gleefully assume that 25% of all flights are in the air much longer than scheduled. You ate it up and uncritically repeated it here. The next time any of you FE proponents think of accusing the rest of us of "just parroting what you're told", please look in the mirror (or, even better, check your "facts" and what they mean, first). The world (whatever its shape) will be better for it.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

sokarul

  • 15455
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2015, 03:38:18 PM »
Guess I will post my pictures again.


Impossible if the earth was flat. 
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2015, 03:54:02 PM »
Tom Bishop says :

According to the Department of Transportation, the average on-time arrival rate is 75% among the 16 largest carriers.

http://www.gadling.com/2011/06/08/airline-industry-best-and-worst-of-april-2011/

    "Overall, the airline industry posted an average on-time arrival rate of 75.5 percent. This means that a quarter of the time, they miss the mark. It's almost as easy as being a weather man!"

1 in 4 world-wide flights were delayed. Weather conditions, or a slight misunderstanding of the earth's shape?
Man, you people will believe anything you read if it sounds remotely like a straw to grasp.

About 25% of all flights did not arrive at their destination on time. About 40% of these (10% of all flights) were due to the flight leaving late because the aircraft itself hadn't arrived in time for an on-time departure. Another 30% (7.5% of all flights) are because of air-carrier problems like maintenance issues, late-arriving crews, fueling delays, and the like. 5% (~1% of all flights) are due to severe weather that cause gate or ground holds, diversions, or cancellations. Now we're up to about 74% of the 25% of not-on-time arrivals due to delayed takeoffs, diversions, or outright cancellations, instead of the flight mysteriously taking longer than scheduled.

This leaves only about 6.5% of all flights not arriving on time due to other causes. Of those, the lion's share are National Aviation System delays (another 24% of the 25%; 6% of all flights). Many, but certainly not all, of these result in delayed takeoffs while a problem like traffic congestion elsewhere, often due to weather, is cleared; sometimes the aircraft is required to stay in a holding pattern, keeping it aloft longer than scheduled. If we take a WAG that fully half of the NAS delays extend time in flight, now we're down to a mere 3% of all flights "in the air much longer than expected". Of those, how many just "mysteriously take too long"? Some do, I'm sure, due to routing issues or unexpected headwinds, but some, at least, fall into the "folks, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to circle Chicago for a little while because of a problem on the ground" and, sure enough, there's Chicago, Lake Michigan, the northern midwest, etc. a few miles below you while you're fretting about making your connections.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/help/aviation/html/understanding.html#q4

I've flown enough to recognize that nearly all late arrivals are due to late takeoffs. The above rings true.

Tom Bishop apparently just tossed out the fact that "only" 75% of all flights arrive on time (which is true) and let you guys gleefully assume that 25% of all flights are in the air much longer than scheduled. You ate it up and uncritically repeated it here. The next time any of you FE proponents think of accusing the rest of us of "just parroting what you're told", please look in the mirror (or, even better, check your "facts" and what they mean, first). The world (whatever its shape) will be better for it.

Sometimes I think they are not government agents, but I can't understand then why they spend so much time here.

I would tend to agree with his points.

This flight seems to exist. Until we find a way to prove that all passengers are lying about the fact that it's not taking over 3 times as much time, or we prove there are no passengers, and that all these youtube videos and the few tripadvisor pages I found... either we prove that they are all fake, and find some mistakes like we do for the rest of the hoaxes, or we cannot just discard this flight as a lie. We need to find some evidence of tampering and fakery. If we don't, then we need to revise our map.
Think outside of the box and you will figure it out!  Just take that map you have and hold in one hand and make a fist with the other.  Now put the paper on your fist and let it droop over and you will start to get the picture.  Be bold, think for yourself, don't listen to the tricksters!

*

Mikey T.

  • 2366
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2015, 10:10:47 PM »
Ive been waiting this whole thread for someone to say either the passengers were lying, they were drugged, or there was no flights, that its all a conspiracy by the travel agencies.  I see my friend cik here almost hit all those points, very good sir.

One problem though, I have flown from Santiago non-stop to Aukland, was awake the whole time and some how my flight took less time than my wifes flight that left from LA to get there to meet up with me.  Amazing how my flight was basically an hour shorter than hers.  So unless I and my wife are lying, or the flights do exist.  I betting on you cik to say I'm lying.  Please do not let me down, I'm a NASA shill.  Thanks for playing.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2015, 01:53:07 AM »
So, OK, yet another witness (albeit not as neutral as those posting videos on youtube), so now I'd like the flat earthers to come forward and tell me what we are going to do about this ridiculous map or how they are going to debunk these rare flights, which although rare when compared to the frequency of the other flights, do seem to exist.

Flat earthers, we can't waste years arguing with these agents/sheeple and then not address their best arguments. Before wasting any further time arguing with them, I ask you to address the evidence of these flights, and if you can't debunk it, to get to work on drawing a new flat earth map.

How can you not have solved this problem yet? How can you not have either debunked these flights or worked on a new map? I've only been a flat-earther for 2 weeks and this problem seems evident.

And, by the way, where are all the flat earthers? I have only met 5 flat earthers so far.

Some additional information from trans pacific flights.
Santiago to sydney- 11339 km
Hong kong to Los angeles-11645 km

The first should be double the second if the earth was flat.

As a side note- why do people always assume that all round earthers are government agents?
Was Eratosthenes also bankrolled by the CIA, was Copernicus' research funded by NASA?
Give me a break
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #20 on: February 27, 2015, 02:08:20 AM »
OK, I am going to tell you once and for all. All these people work at the service of Lucifer, who lived for thousands of years and is planning everything that you see happening. That is why you see freemasons worship Lucifer. NASA actors are all freemasons, and freemasons worship Lucifer. Demons do exist. Lucifer does exist.

Do your research. I can even prove to you the existence of demons in case you're skeptical (look up "magician demons" series on youtube). You lazy pseudo-scientist.

How do freemasons worship lucifer?
And I'm not lazy, i just didn't think that the existence of demons had any bearing on the subject of a flat earth? I was prepared to debate the flat earth, not the existence of satan. But here goes.
If lucifer exists, and god is omnipotent, why does lucifer still exist?
It would do god and humanity a world of good to just rid the universe of him.
But supposedly, he still lives
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #21 on: February 27, 2015, 03:21:23 AM »
Freemasons worship Lucifer and do human sacrifices (cf. John Todd).

"bearing on the subject of a flat earth?": absolutely, Copernicus was either inspired by Lucifer or used by Lucifer. All you need to do is publicize a theory that fits your plans. It doesn't matter if the author is in good faith or not.

I have a lot of objections and questions to God myself. It seems as if he is not acting very much in this world. But demons are definitely afraid of "Jesus". That's how exorcisms are done, in his name.

I've never spoken to Jesus or God. I was agnostic until recently. But then I found out that demons exist (cf. "demon magicians" on Youtube) and that they are afraid of Jesus. So I will try to be a good Christian, just in case he exists. I think he probably exists, but the active ones are the demons, at least in this world.

He is omnipotent, but for some reason I cannot explain and I am not enthusiastic about, he lets evil happen.

By "this world" I mean this coin we live in. It's not a sphere, but a coin. That's the shape of the earth, including the dome over it. It may not correspond to the mainstream flat earth map, but it is still flat (cf. curvature formula vs horizon evidence in my other threads).

----

I am still waiting for answers from the flat-earthers. Either disprove these flights or give me a new flat earth map.

Acenci, about the map that would take a lot of time to coordinate all the different locations and make a correct projection. There is no flat Earth map just a regular inversion of the current map on a flat disc, which obviously can't be correct.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2015, 04:46:55 AM »
Acenci, watch this:

New York - Helsinki : 4112 miles
Montevideo - Capetown : 4139 miles

Now, carefully analyze these two pages :

CAPETOWN - MONTEVIDEO : http://www.prokerala.com/travel/flight-time/from-cape-town/to-montevideo/
NEW YORK - HELSINKI : http://www.finnair.com/fi/gb/flights-helsinki-new-york

Let me know what is your conclusion after careful analysis of two above pages?


Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2015, 05:06:45 AM »
Acenci, watch this:

New York - Helsinki : 4112 miles
Montevideo - Capetown : 4139 miles

Now, carefully analyze these two pages :

CAPETOWN - MONTEVIDEO : http://www.prokerala.com/travel/flight-time/from-cape-town/to-montevideo/
NEW YORK - HELSINKI : http://www.finnair.com/fi/gb/flights-helsinki-new-york

Let me know what is your conclusion after careful analysis of two above pages?

After careful analysis you actually see the folowing:

Capetown to Montevideo via Paris:

Capetown to Paris - 8,931km - 11 hours
Stopover - 18 hours
Paris to Montevideo - 10,954km - 16 hours

Total distance 19,885 km over 27 hours
Approx 736 km/h

New York to Helsinki - 6,626km - 9 hours
Approx 736 km/h

The only issue is that clearly Montevideo is not a busy destination and that Paris is possibly one of the few airports that will actually fly direct. Hence requiring a hefty diversion from Cape Town. This is purely economics.

Fits round earth perfectly.

Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2015, 05:47:49 AM »
Acenci, watch this:

New York - Helsinki : 4112 miles
Montevideo - Capetown : 4139 miles

Now, carefully analyze these two pages :

CAPETOWN - MONTEVIDEO : http://www.prokerala.com/travel/flight-time/from-cape-town/to-montevideo/
NEW YORK - HELSINKI : http://www.finnair.com/fi/gb/flights-helsinki-new-york

Let me know what is your conclusion after careful analysis of two above pages?

After careful analysis you actually see the folowing:

Capetown to Montevideo via Paris:

Capetown to Paris - 8,931km - 11 hours
Stopover - 18 hours
Paris to Montevideo - 10,954km - 16 hours

Total distance 19,885 km over 27 hours
Approx 736 km/h

New York to Helsinki - 6,626km - 9 hours
Approx 736 km/h

The only issue is that clearly Montevideo is not a busy destination and that Paris is possibly one of the few airports that will actually fly direct. Hence requiring a hefty diversion from Cape Town. This is purely economics.

Fits round earth perfectly.

11 hours 20 minutes + 18 hours = 29 hours, NOT 46 hours!!!

Well, you don't have to convince me that the earth is flat -- I agree with you on it -- and I know that it is odd that there are such few direct flights (as your links confirm), but some flights do seem to exist (or please debunk them), so I am now looking for a new flat earth map, because the one we have does not provide for the southern hemisphere intercontinental flights that I found and no one has disproved yet.

Acenci, think about this:

Sydney Australia - Santiago Chile : 7055 miles
Montevideo - Capetown: 4139 miles

Difference : 3000 miles

Sydney - Santiago flight time : 14 h 38 min (not 12 h 30 min) : http://www.travelmath.com/flying-time/from/Santiago,+Chile/to/Sydney,+Australia

Now, 3000 miles = 4800 km / 800 (flight speed) = 6 hours

Does this mean that the direct flight between Montevideo and Capetown should last 8 hours and 38 minutes? BUT IT DOESN'T LAST THAT LONG!!!! According to them it lasts THREE HOURS MORE THAN THAT!!! Although, it seems that there is no such flight anywhere, anyway???

Now if we presume that flight time between Sydney and Santiago is 12 hours and 30 minutes, then direct flight between Montevideo and Capetown should last just 6 hours and 30 minutes, which is absolute nonsense!!!

Regarding your "new flat earth map", i have never seen such a bullshit in my whole life. Aren't you able to discern utter bullshit from something normal and sane?

Haven't you watch this video : False FLAT EARTH MAP deception : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Haven't you watch this video : Mark Sargents video ANTARCTICA No 7 : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Think!!!

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2015, 06:06:58 AM »
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.
Were you not breast feed enough as a child?  You sure have a hangup about being spoon feed.  What is so obviously wrong?  The RET maps are accurate to the cm level.  Seems pretty good to me, especially considering FET can't even draw a map to begin with.  So now pilots are in on the conspiracy, who isn't in on it at this point?  And if you are feed up with airline delays, why don't you start an FE airline, always on time because FE pilots 'think for themselves'.  Oh, wait, there is not a single FE pilot in the world.
if you think round earther maps are accurate then you're being incoherent. a sphere cannot be spread onto a rectangle, so they're not accurate even by your own reckoning. no one pretends maps are accurate.
i'm sorry you struggle to believe people want money, but that's a problem with your ability to reason.

there are hundreds of flat earthers and yet not one is allowed to be a pilot. might want to think about that. perfect proof of the conspiracy. go into any field where flat earth theory could be disproven, and you're not going to find a flat earther. why? because they'll question the obvious bs spoon-fed to them.
think for yourself.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #26 on: February 27, 2015, 06:10:00 AM »
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.

OK, I agree. Then let us propose an alternative map. And then another question is why is the NASA whistleblower saying that the South Pole is the edge, too? Wouldn't he know? Or are you saying the map is wrong, but the South Pole is still the edge?

But then if the South Pole is the edge, how is this flight possible?

What if the plumb bob is not a valid argument because buildings are too small to worry about the curvature?

What if my only valid argument is the curvature formula not matching the videos of the horizon?

It is still good enough. I am still a flat earther.

how could anyone know where the edge is? nasa wouldn't give full details even to their employees.
we can't work on a better map when every effort is obstructed, and all information given to us is lies.

i disagree with your curvature argument. the equation itself is obvious bs, made up by nasa to provide evidence. they would not give it out if it could be such a simple disproof. the easiest way to be sure that the earth is flat, is that there is no way for a round earth to form. everything accelerates, even according to round earthers, and if you push something like sand or flour along, it flattens to a disc, not a sphere.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2015, 07:01:44 AM »
Acenci, watch this:

New York - Helsinki : 4112 miles
Montevideo - Capetown : 4139 miles

Now, carefully analyze these two pages :

CAPETOWN - MONTEVIDEO : http://www.prokerala.com/travel/flight-time/from-cape-town/to-montevideo/
NEW YORK - HELSINKI : http://www.finnair.com/fi/gb/flights-helsinki-new-york

Let me know what is your conclusion after careful analysis of two above pages?

After careful analysis you actually see the folowing:

Capetown to Montevideo via Paris:

Capetown to Paris - 8,931km - 11 hours
Stopover - 18 hours
Paris to Montevideo - 10,954km - 16 hours

Total distance 19,885 km over 27 hours
Approx 736 km/h

New York to Helsinki - 6,626km - 9 hours
Approx 736 km/h

The only issue is that clearly Montevideo is not a busy destination and that Paris is possibly one of the few airports that will actually fly direct. Hence requiring a hefty diversion from Cape Town. This is purely economics.

Fits round earth perfectly.

11 hours 20 minutes + 18 hours = 29 hours, NOT 46 hours!!!
That's an 18-hour layover in Paris. We're concerned with flight times (11h + 16h = 27h), not sightseeing or sitting around the airport time (18h).

Quote
Well, you don't have to convince me that the earth is flat -- I agree with you on it -- and I know that it is odd that there are such few direct flights (as your links confirm), but some flights do seem to exist (or please debunk them), so I am now looking for a new flat earth map, because the one we have does not provide for the southern hemisphere intercontinental flights that I found and no one has disproved yet.

Acenci, think about this:

Sydney Australia - Santiago Chile : 7055 miles
Montevideo - Capetown: 4139 miles

Difference : 3000 miles

Sydney - Santiago flight time : 14 h 38 min (not 12 h 30 min) : http://www.travelmath.com/flying-time/from/Santiago,+Chile/to/Sydney,+Australia
Quote from: travelmath.com
This assumes an average flight speed for a commercial airliner of 500 mph, which is equivalent to 805 km/h or 434 knots. It also adds an extra 30 minutes for take-off and landing. Your exact time may vary depending on wind speeds.
It's an estimate. Get over it.

Quote
Now, 3000 miles = 4800 km / 800 (flight speed) = 6 hours

Does this mean that the direct flight between Montevideo and Capetown should last 8 hours and 38 minutes? BUT IT DOESN'T LAST THAT LONG!!!! According to them it lasts THREE HOURS MORE THAN THAT!!! Although, it seems that there is no such flight anywhere, anyway???
I think you mean nonstop, not direct, but whatever. Which flight is it that you say lasts three hours longer than 8h 38m? The one you say doesn't exist? Umm... OK.  ???

Quote
Now if we presume that flight time between Sydney and Santiago is 12 hours and 30 minutes, then direct flight between Montevideo and Capetown should last just 6 hours and 30 minutes, which is absolute nonsense!!!
That's kind of a strange way to arrive at that number. Maybe there's the problem.

Quote
Regarding your "new flat earth map", i have never seen such a bullshit in my whole life.
Apparently you don't see what you write. That would explain a lot.

Quote
Aren't you able to discern utter bullshit from something normal and sane?
::)
Quote
Think!!!
You might consider this yourself. Seriously, how could you miss a 17h20m connection in Paris in an itinerary between South Africa and Uruguay and mistake it for a nonstop flight? You really don't read what you post, do you?

[Edit] Fixed /quote tag.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 07:04:17 AM by Alpha2Omega »
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2015, 07:19:02 AM »
11 hours 20 minutes + 18 hours = 29 hours, NOT 46 hours!!!

There is an 18 hour stopover, you retard.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: brotherhood of the dome
Should I examine the all shits?

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2015, 07:28:32 AM »
Acenci, watch this:

New York - Helsinki : 4112 miles
Montevideo - Capetown : 4139 miles
...

Regarding your "new flat earth map", i have never seen such a bullshit in my whole life. Aren't you able to discern utter bullshit from something normal and sane?

Haven't you watch this video : False FLAT EARTH MAP deception : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Haven't you watch this video : Mark Sargents video ANTARCTICA No 7 : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Think!!!

Seriously, Cikjamas, this attitude of yours only discredits the FE idea. How can you not understand that it is totally counterproductive to write super long posts with meaningless redundant information and on top of that insult your fellow FE'ers? How many arguments are you going to make? Why not simply focus on one and explain it well instead of simply changing the subject and trying to convince using a totally different argument. It is a miracle people are still responding. Acenci simply said he wants to make such a map, because the current one is obviously wrong. Where is the bullshit in this? Are you claiming now the FE map is absolutely correct?