If the earth is flat how does the Dubai to San Fransisco flight work?

Hey all, just registered. Recently been watching some Math Boylan videos - funny guy - and became perplexed by this theory of a flat earth.

How is the Dubai to San Fransisco flight able to fly across the Arctic to decrease flight time?

After speaking to a few people it seems an AE flat earth model would allow this sort of travel. But wouldn't allow Antarctic travel. I've found a flight that travels across the Antarctic, there's one in flight now as it happens: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/SAA280

I've found a flight that travels across the Antarctic, there's one in flight now as it happens: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/SAA280

That is the Indian Ocean.

Would It kill you roundies to do some actual research before coming here?

Would It kill you roundies to do some actual research before coming here?

No way to know how many have died of stroke before completing their first post.

Would It kill you roundies to do some actual research before coming here?

Who doesn't do research?

Here are some Southern Hemisphere aircraft routes:

• QANTAS flight QF28 flew from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia in 13 hrs 45 min (on May 6) and the Great Circle distance is 11,353 km
  
  
  Flight QF28 Santiago to Sydney
• QANTAS flight QF63 flew Sydney, Australia to Johannesburg, South Africa in 13 hrs 29 min (on May 6) and the Great Circle distance is 11,036 km
  
  
  Flight QF63 Sydney to Johannesburg
  
  
• South African Airways flight SA223 flew Sao Paulo (GRU), Brazil to Johannesburg (JNB), South Africa in 7 hrs 58 min (on May 9) and the Great Circle distance is 7,447 km
  
  
  Flight SA223 Sao Paulo to Johannesburg

Thousands of people take these flights, so there is no way that anyone can claim that they don't exist.
Anyone living in the Southern Hemisphere can easily see that the distances on the Flat Earth Map are completely wrong!

These distances and times do not fit the Flat Earth map. You compare those distances with the distances on the "Ice-Wall map"!

And please don't suggest that we look at the "Bipolar map"! Apart from many other problems, the shape and size of many countries (USA and Australia for a start) are grossly in error.

Quote from: LexicalJames on October 30, 2016, 04:30:48 PM

I've found a flight that travels across the Antarctic, there's one in flight now as it happens: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/SAA280

That is the Indian Ocean.

Your research is undeniable Rab, however I cannot say the same for the OP.

Also I think the Bipolar map is both ineffectual and innappropriate.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on October 30, 2016, 05:08:23 PM

Quote from: LexicalJames on October 30, 2016, 04:30:48 PM

I've found a flight that travels across the Antarctic, there's one in flight now as it happens: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/SAA280

That is the Indian Ocean.

Your research is undeniable Rab, however I cannot say the same for the OP.

Also I think the Bipolar map is both ineffectual and innappropriate.

I have researched. The flights I mention above are correct. It flies over the Antarctic regions (or at least very close to it). The reason the map in the link I shared shows a straight line is because the map is flat.

Go and look at how long a straight flight takes ... 14 hours. The one I linked to is 9 hours. Wouldn't be possible on a flat earth.



The red line on the left is similar to the flight the SA280 takes.



The fact is these flights happen. On a flat earth model they wouldn't work. Everything else is irrelevant.

Quote from: disputeone on October 30, 2016, 08:09:21 PM

Would It kill you roundies to do some actual research before coming here?

And please don't suggest that we look at the "Bipolar map"! Apart from many other problems, the shape and size of many countries (USA and Australia for a start) are grossly in error.

Have you personally measured the size of said countries to verify your own claim?

I have researched. The flights I mention above are correct. It flies over the Antarctic regions (or at least very close to it).

So, your argument is based on "at least very close to it"?

Solid.

The fact is these flights happen. On a flat earth model they wouldn't work. Everything else is irrelevant.

You must be new here, welcome to the FES, please enjoy your stay.

I'm almost certain this whole flat earth theory is mass global trolling. I'm finding it hard to believe so many people are this stupid. I've had more logical discussions with religious folk and that's saying something.

Have any of you even looked at the duration of the different flights? I have ... yet apparently I do not research. Where are you getting all this nonsense from?

What nonsense?

Please quote anyone on this thread to show "nonsense"

Except the OP that doesn't count.

Edit

Have any of you even looked at the duration of the different flights?

You simply must meet Intikam, he's just this way.

I'm finding it hard to believe so many people are this stupid.

WOW, what a rude little bitch.

I posted a genuine question, yet apparently I do not research. My original post was not rude, yet the responses that followed against me were.

The responses to my question make no sense. There hasn't been a valid response that counters my question. Are you expecting me to believe the world is flat because you say so? You can at least provide some logical theory as to why my question makes no sense.

Please do explain how this flight works on a flat earth model: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/fleet/ANZ

I came here expecting to learn something that's going to challenge my way of thinking, yet the responses are far from intelligent, logical or mature. If I'm incorrect is it so difficult to explain something to someone without being rude, or offensive?

I didn't come here to attempt to prove FE theory is incorrect.

I posted a genuine question, yet apparently I do not research. My original post was not rude, yet the responses that followed against me were.

The responses to my question make no sense. There hasn't been a valid response that counters my question. Are you expecting me to believe the world is flat because you say so? You can at least provide some logical theory as to why my question makes no sense.

Please do explain how this flight works on a flat earth model: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/fleet/ANZ

I came here expecting to learn something that's going to challenge my way of thinking, yet the responses are far from intelligent, logical or mature. If I'm incorrect is it so difficult to explain something to someone without being rude, or offensive?

I didn't come here to attempt to prove FE theory is incorrect.

I'm not sure if FE has a good answer for flight time discrepancies. For one thing they don't have one official map and all their maps are considered a work in progress as far as I can tell.

If you have a little patience you might get a more serious answer from someone. At any rate you should check out their answers for some of the other evidences for a round earth. They are amazingly resourceful.

Here is a tip: If you want a serious answer from them don't call them stupid.

Here are some threads about flight times: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=68183.0

 https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=68202.msg1834103#msg183410

Quote from: LexicalJames on October 31, 2016, 03:51:30 AM

I posted a genuine question, yet apparently I do not research. My original post was not rude, yet the responses that followed against me were.

The responses to my question make no sense. There hasn't been a valid response that counters my question. Are you expecting me to believe the world is flat because you say so? You can at least provide some logical theory as to why my question makes no sense.

Please do explain how this flight works on a flat earth model: https://uk.flightaware.com/live/fleet/ANZ

I came here expecting to learn something that's going to challenge my way of thinking, yet the responses are far from intelligent, logical or mature. If I'm incorrect is it so difficult to explain something to someone without being rude, or offensive?

I didn't come here to attempt to prove FE theory is incorrect.

I'm not sure if FE has a good answer for flight time discrepancies. For one thing they don't have one official map and all their maps are considered a work in progress as far as I can tell.

If you have a little patience you might get a more serious answer from someone. At any rate you should check out their answers for some of the other evidences for a round earth. They are amazingly resourceful.

Here is a tip: If you want a serious answer from them don't call them stupid.

I reacted out of frustration more than anything because I'm trying to make sense of this. Some things about FE theory are very interesting to me and I was hoping to be proven incorrect. Math's stuff is very interesting. Apologies for calling people stupid.

Researching the antarctic flights is equally frustrating because there doesn't seem to be much about it. It does appear that there are no flights that directly cross antarctica. At least I can't find any. All I can find are flight paths that go under the sphere from Oz. and then up to Johannesburg. But even on a FE model I think that could still be possible, but if it is the flight times make no sense.

I'm at work all week so I don't have much time to look into this until the weekend. My current task at work is develop software that calculates shortest route using Dijkstra's algorithm. Someone in the office mentioned FE theory and was pretty serious about it which is what got me started on researching this.

Are you expecting me to believe the world is flat because you say so?.

Who, so far, on this thread, has told you the earth is flat?

Who, so far, on this thread, has told you the earth is flat?

I am assuming that this being a FE forum that many people believe the earth is flat right? You called me "roundie" which gives me the impression you're not of the same opinion. I can't imagine many "roundies" wanting to spend a lot of time on a forum that goes against what they believe.

Quote from: rabinoz on October 30, 2016, 08:44:26 PM

Quote from: disputeone on October 30, 2016, 08:09:21 PM

Would It kill you roundies to do some actual research before coming here?

And please don't suggest that we look at the "Bipolar map"! Apart from many other problems, the shape and size of many countries (USA and Australia for a start) are grossly in error.

Have you personally measured the size of said countries to verify your own claim?

Why should I? Those countries have had accurate surveys available for well over a century!


The shapes on the Bipolar Map are so grossly distorted, it is laughable!

I hardly think I need worry about the exact sizes, when you look at the shapes of Australia and the USA on the Bipolar Map!
I know the dimensions of Australia, but rather than go into the details of that, just look at the official areas of some of the continents.

Continent		Area
Australia		7.692 million km2
Africa		30.37 million km2
North America		24.71 million km2
South America		17.84 million km2

If you doubt the official area data, there's not much I can do about. I don't intend trying to prove things when there is not the slightest reason to doubt them.

But, there are numerous other reasons why the Bipolar Map is ridiculous, not the least of which are the gyrations the sun and light paths must follow to "match" reality, but that would need another thread.

Quote from: disputeone on October 31, 2016, 04:31:21 AM

Who, so far, on this thread, has told you the earth is flat?

I am assuming that this being a FE forum that many people believe the earth is flat right?

Most of the posters here believe the earth is an oblate spheroid.

You called me "roundie" which gives me the impression you're not of the same opinion.

Roundie is more of a derogatory term than an earth shape belief.

I can't imagine many "roundies" wanting to spend a lot of time on a forum that goes against what they believe.

Well turns out you are incorrect, Rab believes the earth is round and look how much time and effort he spends here.

Well turns out you are incorrect, Rab believes the earth is round and look how much time and effort he spends here.

How is what Rab said (in the first post) any different to what I was asking? Rab provided some good information. In my original post I included the link, but I removed the link by mistake after editing the message and removing a chunk of unnecessary information after realising that Arctic flights work on an AE model (Dubai to SF). A mod can view post edits and confirm that. I added a second post to question the southern flights.

Yet your instant response was assuming I hadn't looked into this. You've already stated the term roundie is derogatory, so it was used to insult and show disrespect to a new member who was looking for genuine discussion. Did I show you any disrespect previous to your insult?

I came here for open ubias discussion not to prove or disprove. After all, doesn't FE theory fall under philosophical debate - which doesn't including challenging a persons questions with rude remarks that are irrelevant.

So angry...

I am assuming that this being a FE forum that many people believe the earth is flat right?

Well...that I think is a mistake most people have made at first.  As near as I've been able to tell, at least among active posters the round earth people significantly outnumber the flat people.  They start off like this asking basically reasonable questions, not realizing this site has been around for what, fifteen years or so.  Every conceivable reasonable question/argument has been posted a thousand times by a thousand people who came here expecting to righteously destroy flat earth.

Spoiler:  it never works.  Some get angry and rage quit.  Some (like me) decide to let it go and just mostly stick to "Complete Nonsense" (really a much more worthwhile use of your time on this site).  Some (like Rabinoz) keep up the good fight with mostly patient and good faith arguments, but to date I'm pretty sure no one on either side has ever been "convinced" of anything.

Really it's an interesting mix.  You have at least a couple of round-earthers who nonetheless agree that the moon landing was a hoax.  Round earthers who play devil's advocate and argue the side of flat-earth theory (well, dual-earth theory) as an intellectual exercise.  The few serious flat-earthers tend to have diverging theories with even more diverging side-theories that don't seem to have anything to do with the earth's shape at all--whether it's human history beginning a few centuries ago, somehow implying that all of the Beatles' songs were written by one shadowy super-composer, or that dinosaurs are fake and were probably giants instead, or aether, or that space CAN'T be real because if it were birds would have evolved space flight, or basically whatever Intikam is talking about.  (Someone mentioned him above--Intikam is amazing.)

Additionally you will see plenty of temper tantrums and atrocious debating skills on all sides.  My advice is do not take this place too seriously and you may get something out of it.  If you think you're going to change anyone's mind, or get a coherent convincing description of how the flat earth works, you'll be frustrated.  I've stretched my mind some and definitely learned a lot.  The earth is still round, but it's been fun thinking about things here.  By the way, I don't think you seemed very angry

Well...that I think is a mistake most people have made at first. 

Reading your response I see what you mean. I did make that exact same mistake. I assumed that the FE theory was something new because I've never heard of it before apart from the stuff that's been in the media from the celebrities. I thought the forum was relatively new too. Some very helpful advice in your response though. I do apologize if I was out of place.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Well turns out you are incorrect, Rab believes the earth is round and look how much time and effort he spends here.

Not quite, I'm always ready for a dispute with the "trivial dispute" specialist!

Flat Earthers believe the earth is "round" (as junker at "the other place" is at pains to point out)
Or if you want to be more specific, within a hundred metres or so of an elipsoid with a "flattening" of 1/298.257223563 as used "for the WGS84 spheroid used by today's GPS systems". Data from Figure of the Earth.

Now, no more "roundies" please, the "in" derogatory term is  "Globularists"  .Just ask ski.
Of course we could call "flatties" "Planoterrestrialists" as per Leo Ferrari!

Quote from: LexicalJames on October 31, 2016, 04:40:11 AM

I am assuming that this being a FE forum that many people believe the earth is flat right?

Well...that I think is a mistake most people have made at first.  As near as I've been able to tell, at least among active posters the round earth people significantly outnumber the flat people.  They start off like this asking basically reasonable questions, not realizing this site has been around for what, fifteen years or so.  Every conceivable reasonable question/argument has been posted a thousand times by a thousand people who came here expecting to righteously destroy flat earth.

Spoiler:  it never works.  Some get angry and rage quit.  Some (like me) decide to let it go and just mostly stick to "Complete Nonsense" (really a much more worthwhile use of your time on this site).  Some (like Rabinoz) keep up the good fight with mostly patient and good faith arguments, but to date I'm pretty sure no one on either side has ever been "convinced" of anything.

Really it's an interesting mix.  You have at least a couple of round-earthers who nonetheless agree that the moon landing was a hoax.  Round earthers who play devil's advocate and argue the side of flat-earth theory (well, dual-earth theory) as an intellectual exercise.  The few serious flat-earthers tend to have diverging theories with even more diverging side-theories that don't seem to have anything to do with the earth's shape at all--whether it's human history beginning a few centuries ago, somehow implying that all of the Beatles' songs were written by one shadowy super-composer, or that dinosaurs are fake and were probably giants instead, or aether, or that space CAN'T be real because if it were birds would have evolved space flight, or basically whatever Intikam is talking about.  (Someone mentioned him above--Intikam is amazing.)

Additionally you will see plenty of temper tantrums and atrocious debating skills on all sides.  My advice is do not take this place too seriously and you may get something out of it.  If you think you're going to change anyone's mind, or get a coherent convincing description of how the flat earth works, you'll be frustrated.  I've stretched my mind some and definitely learned a lot.  The earth is still round, but it's been fun thinking about things here.  By the way, I don't think you seemed very angry

My favorite side-theory is Dinosaur Boat Theory. 

Ok. Soo serious question. If the corryelous effect is in fact causeing bullet and or slash target to rise or drop because of rotation of the heliocentric model. Well under that understanding if i make a shot twards north or south on the quote  unquote equator then i should hypotheticaly have to compensate like 100 ft to 200 ft the left of right to make the shot on a 1 mile shot or more. I would realy like an actual fact based response with at least one reference point. Perferably not some back yard chump that could be bribbed 10 g`S to be a coconspirators. So a renoun sciencetist should not be to hard or too much to ask for._. After all you are suppost to be defending a scientific fact we teach children. 

Ok. Soo serious question. If the corryelous effect is in fact causeing bullet and or slash target to rise or drop because of rotation of the heliocentric model. Well under that understanding if i make a shot twards north or south on the quote  unquote equator then i should hypotheticaly have to compensate like 100 ft to 200 ft the left of right to make the shot on a 1 mile shot or more. I would realy like an actual fact based response with at least one reference point. Perferably not some back yard chump that could be bribbed 10 g`S to be a coconspirators. So a renoun sciencetist should not be to hard or too much to ask for._. After all you are suppost to be defending a scientific fact we teach children.

You don't believe "scientists", so what about arms experts? Go and read a bit for yourself in The ARMS GUIDE.

The effect is nothing like as large as "100 ft to 200 ft the left of right to make the shot on a 1 mile shot or more". From what I remember it is more like 5" and few rifle shooters are good enough to notice that!

There are actually two distinct effects described in the article referenced.
1) The Coriolis effects South-North shots and causes lateral deviation and
2) The Eötvös Effect which affects the vertical component of East-West and West-East shots.

You might be interested in this video " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Demonstrating how Coriolis effects bullet drop at 1000 yards.  Mind you what that video calls "Coriolis effect" is really "Eötvös Effect".

Over the range of rifle shooting both effects are small, but for long range artillery shooting the effect can be very serious.

This reference has a lot more on that aspect Application to Long-Range Artillery - Shelling Paris in WW1.

Flat earth society does not even have an official map. It's all an imagination. No foundation. How can you build a leadership without any foundation?

I guess imagination is the best way to say 'f$&k you' to reality.