Map

It would be fun to see a map of our flat world with approximate distances. Has there been any progress on producing this?

It seems like a fairly essential aspect of the flat earth proposal.

do you have any idea how many resources it takes to come up with a detailed, working map? at present, the flat earth society is more concerned with raising awareness. it doesn't have the budget or resources, and neither do individual members. you try producing a working map alone.

approximately for a dual earth map:

Distances between places are well known. Just need to find what shape they will all fit on.

Distances between places are well known.

Apparently they're not, from what I've gathered from a different thread.

Quote from: inquisitive on March 21, 2015, 04:02:46 PM

Distances between places are well known.

Apparently they're not, from what I've gathered from a different thread.

That explains why my bus arrived early today.  In the northern hemisphere.

Both these maps are planar projections of a spherical earth model.  The current FES has had decades to produce a working flat earth map complete with distances, but has yet to do so.  I wonder why LOL.

You were asked to provide a genuine flat earth map JRoweSkeptic.  This is a cop-out.

Thanks for at least providing something JRowe.


It can't be that difficult in this day and age to produce a map. A cheap GPS device would give a good enough approximation of distances.

There's a (completely insane) thread called Advanced Flat Earth Theory. How can you have an advanced theory, if you haven't got something as fundamental as even an approximate map?

It can't be that difficult in this day and age to produce a map. A cheap GPS device would give a good enough approximation of distances.

But GPS is in on the conspiracy 
FET's reached the point where you can't trust any measured distances (which can't exist on a flat plane), so at least JRowe's consistent. He can't actually trust any existing map, so he basically would need to work from scratch. FET relies on no one bothering to come up with a map.

There's a (completely insane) thread called Advanced Flat Earth Theory. How can you have an advanced theory, if you haven't got something as fundamental as even an approximate map?

Have you seen that thread? Very little of it has to do with an actual Flat Earth.

Also, I think the default map is this one.
Sorry, I've no idea how to cut down image size, bit too big to include in the post.

Real map looks something like this:

Real map looks something like this:

Ilive in Malaysia. Do I exist?

Quote from: iWitness on March 22, 2015, 07:02:28 AM

Real map looks something like this:

Ilive in Malaysia. Do I exist?

Hardy Har har.... America isn't on the map either... so what?

I said it looks SOMETHING like this map, I didn't say it looks exactly like it.

There isn't a perfect map available to the public, but I'm sure one has existed at some point. The fact of the matter is, Israel is in the Middle of the Flat Earth next to the Mediterranean Sea (Middle of the Earth Sea).

This is the huge discrepancy between the real flat earth map and the UN Logo and FES map.

This fact has been known for thousands of years::



See Jerusalem right in the middle?

Thank you iwitness. That's the best effort so far.

Thank you iwitness. That's the best effort so far.

Seriously looking for a accepted map.
From what I understand from iWitness, there is no current working map of the world?

How do we travel?

 This book is all about the math required to represent the real earth on a flat map.

And flat earthers are on here posting maps from before the dark ages. In veritate victoria

See Jerusalem right in the middle?

No.

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Out of curiosity, why are measurements with aircraft not reliable? It is speed over time = distance

I am going to copy-pasta from a previous post of mine that has had little attention from FE people

This map is the most used flat earth map proposal, so I am using it as the source of the flat earth model map.

Points on map are
A - Johannesburg
B- Sau Paulo
C- Dubai
D- Hong Kong
E- Sydney

flights from A-B, A-C, A-D I have personally flown
Flights from A-E have been flown by close family members

All the flight times can be verified as
A-B  Sau Paulo - Johannesburg; 8h 35min
A-C Johannesburg to Dubai; 8h15*
A-D Johannesburg to Hong Kong; 12h 55min*
A-E Sydney to Johannesburg; 14h 15min

* due to not having the fligh information available that myself/family member flew information was gathered from http://www.skyscanner.net/

Now the round earth distances from the points in italics and adjusted distances from the flat earth model Bold
A-B  Sau Paulo - Johannesburg; 7442km ; 16774km
A-C Johannesburg to Dubai; 6405km ; 6405km
A-D Johannesburg to Hong Kong; 10713km ; 24147km
A-E Sydney to Johannesburg; 11062km ; 24933km

Disclosure - distances calibrated from the Johannesburg to Dubai, if another distance of calibration is preferred please let me know

To summaries
Flat earth model suggests that
1 - A-B of 16774km takes approximately (only 20min more) the same flight time as A-C of 6405km
2 - Flight  A-E is done mostly over land
3 - Flight A-D is done mostly over land
4 - Flight A-B is done about 50% over land
5 - Flight A-B taking 8h;35 min over a distance of 16 774km travels on average       1973km/h, that is 1.6x the speed of sound

So the obvious question, how does this work in a flat earth model?

Even if measuring distances are not to your exact accuracy over land and sea, how would you explain some of these observations?

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 03:48:06 AM

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Fair enough, if you agree the dimensions of land masses, you have a good starting point. Assuming you agree with the general layout of continents, there is no reason a map cannot be produced *ocean sizes to be confirmed.

Although I believe you can use a GPS watch on planes,if you sit next to the window.

And you can calibrate a GPS watch to your own measured distance.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:18:30 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 03:48:06 AM

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Fair enough, if you agree the dimensions of land masses, you have a good starting point. Assuming you agree with the general layout of continents, there is no reason a map cannot be produced *ocean sizes to be confirmed.

Although I believe you can use a GPS watch on planes,if you sit next to the window.

And you can calibrate a GPS watch to your own measured distance.

and in that case, i've provided such a map. it's based on a round earth map, because they're all that exist, and it's the same world so of course there will be similarities.
gps is unreliable though. if you accept gps, then the world's round, that's an automatic consequence. this has been discussed in several other threads.

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 04:30:26 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:18:30 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 03:48:06 AM

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Fair enough, if you agree the dimensions of land masses, you have a good starting point. Assuming you agree with the general layout of continents, there is no reason a map cannot be produced *ocean sizes to be confirmed.

Although I believe you can use a GPS watch on planes,if you sit next to the window.

And you can calibrate a GPS watch to your own measured distance.

and in that case, i've provided such a map. it's based on a round earth map, because they're all that exist, and it's the same world so of course there will be similarities.
gps is unreliable though. if you accept gps, then the world's round, that's an automatic consequence. this has been discussed in several other threads.

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Why is GPS unreliable?   Used by millions every day.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:45:02 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 04:30:26 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:18:30 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 03:48:06 AM

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Fair enough, if you agree the dimensions of land masses, you have a good starting point. Assuming you agree with the general layout of continents, there is no reason a map cannot be produced *ocean sizes to be confirmed.

Although I believe you can use a GPS watch on planes,if you sit next to the window.

And you can calibrate a GPS watch to your own measured distance.

and in that case, i've provided such a map. it's based on a round earth map, because they're all that exist, and it's the same world so of course there will be similarities.
gps is unreliable though. if you accept gps, then the world's round, that's an automatic consequence. this has been discussed in several other threads.

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Why is GPS unreliable?   Used by millions every day.

it's used over land. over air and sea it just makes a best guess, on a flawed round earth model. this is too much to go into here, use the search function.

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Your almost on the answer.
Many ways to calculate the air speed itself. But modern aircraft use a pitot tube, that measures air pressure. Increased air speed results in increased air pressure.
Calibrate this instrument with ground based measurements and now you have an accurate means to measure air speed. Speed over time gives you distance.
My father has been a pilot before he stuck a gps in this plane and that is exactly how he calculated his distance.
Obviously wind will change your ground speed. But this is not an unknown, and can to a certain degree be calculated before taking off with proper planning, by calling in ground based weather stations on your route. This is generally how pilots used to do it before gps, and they managed to still get to a 2 km long airstrip over 1000km away.

JRowe, as I am not sure on your perspective of the world map, is the map I linked above your accepted map? If not I can do some calculations on your version.

Quote from: inquisitive on March 23, 2015, 04:53:38 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:45:02 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 04:30:26 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:18:30 AM

Quote from: Weatherwax on March 23, 2015, 03:48:06 AM

I don't see why this is so difficult. All you need to do is take a few measurements from different locations, if these fit with the published distances you will know that land masses on maps are correct. Then you just have to plonk them on a flat map.

i don't have a problem with measured distances on land, it's distances across sea and through air i have a problem with. how would you suggest we measure those? first, say how they could reliably be measured in the first place, and second say how you expect someone without a plane or ship to do the same, without supposing existing round earth maps are accurate.

you could not come up with a map yourself without relying on technology that is not acceptable. why do you expect us to?

Fair enough, if you agree the dimensions of land masses, you have a good starting point. Assuming you agree with the general layout of continents, there is no reason a map cannot be produced *ocean sizes to be confirmed.

Although I believe you can use a GPS watch on planes,if you sit next to the window.

And you can calibrate a GPS watch to your own measured distance.

and in that case, i've provided such a map. it's based on a round earth map, because they're all that exist, and it's the same world so of course there will be similarities.
gps is unreliable though. if you accept gps, then the world's round, that's an automatic consequence. this has been discussed in several other threads.

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Why is GPS unreliable?   Used by millions every day.

it's used over land. over air and sea it just makes a best guess, on a flawed round earth model. this is too much to go into here, use the search function.

That is wrong, provide a link.  How can it guess?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:45:02 AM

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Your almost on the answer.
Many ways to calculate the air speed itself. But modern aircraft use a pitot tube, that measures air pressure. Increased air speed results in increased air pressure.
Calibrate this instrument with ground based measurements and now you have an accurate means to measure air speed. Speed over time gives you distance.
My father has been a pilot before he stuck a gps in this plane and that is exactly how he calculated his distance.
Obviously wind will change your ground speed. But this is not an unknown, and can to a certain degree be calculated before taking off with proper planning, by calling in ground based weather stations on your route. This is generally how pilots used to do it before gps, and they managed to still get to a 2 km long airstrip over 1000km away.

JRowe, as I am not sure on your perspective of the world map, is the map I linked above your accepted map? If not I can do some calculations on your version.

planes work by being pointed in the correct direction, and the pilots using their eyes. they don't predict the wind speed caused by, for example, aetheric whirlpools which don't exist in the round earth model.

i accept dual earth theory, in which the top and bottom of the earth is inhabited. an approximate map is given in the first reply to this thread.

i accept dual earth theory, in which the top and bottom of the earth is inhabited. an approximate map is given in the first reply to this thread.

Incidentally, what happens in that moment when one cross the equator?

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 23, 2015, 04:59:29 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:45:02 AM

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Your almost on the answer.
Many ways to calculate the air speed itself. But modern aircraft use a pitot tube, that measures air pressure. Increased air speed results in increased air pressure.
Calibrate this instrument with ground based measurements and now you have an accurate means to measure air speed. Speed over time gives you distance.
My father has been a pilot before he stuck a gps in this plane and that is exactly how he calculated his distance.
Obviously wind will change your ground speed. But this is not an unknown, and can to a certain degree be calculated before taking off with proper planning, by calling in ground based weather stations on your route. This is generally how pilots used to do it before gps, and they managed to still get to a 2 km long airstrip over 1000km away.

JRowe, as I am not sure on your perspective of the world map, is the map I linked above your accepted map? If not I can do some calculations on your version.

planes work by being pointed in the correct direction, and the pilots using their eyes. they don't predict the wind speed caused by, for example, aetheric whirlpools which don't exist in the round earth model.

i accept dual earth theory, in which the top and bottom of the earth is inhabited. an approximate map is given in the first reply to this thread.

How do they fly at night?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 05:05:26 AM

i accept dual earth theory, in which the top and bottom of the earth is inhabited. an approximate map is given in the first reply to this thread.

Incidentally, what happens in that moment when one cross the equator?

i've explained dual-earth theory at length several terms. 'my flat earth model' thread in the information repository, at the end of page two, answers everything in a lot of detail. it's a case of aetheric transmission, but it's too much to go into here. read the other posts.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 05:05:26 AM

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 23, 2015, 04:59:29 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 23, 2015, 04:45:02 AM

wolf, if you can tell me how you calculate an aircraft's speed, then your equation makes sense. the fact is, there's no way to do that unless you already know the distance you're travelling. as you're trying to find the distance, you can't calculate speed.

Your almost on the answer.
Many ways to calculate the air speed itself. But modern aircraft use a pitot tube, that measures air pressure. Increased air speed results in increased air pressure.
Calibrate this instrument with ground based measurements and now you have an accurate means to measure air speed. Speed over time gives you distance.
My father has been a pilot before he stuck a gps in this plane and that is exactly how he calculated his distance.
Obviously wind will change your ground speed. But this is not an unknown, and can to a certain degree be calculated before taking off with proper planning, by calling in ground based weather stations on your route. This is generally how pilots used to do it before gps, and they managed to still get to a 2 km long airstrip over 1000km away.

JRowe, as I am not sure on your perspective of the world map, is the map I linked above your accepted map? If not I can do some calculations on your version.

planes work by being pointed in the correct direction, and the pilots using their eyes. they don't predict the wind speed caused by, for example, aetheric whirlpools which don't exist in the round earth model.

i accept dual earth theory, in which the top and bottom of the earth is inhabited. an approximate map is given in the first reply to this thread.

How do they fly at night?

electric lights. have you ever been on a plane? it is easy to spot cities, and even see which parts are airfields. in addition, gps towers exist on land, so the system is more reliable there, they can correct far more easily.