Distances on Flat Earth Map

  • 57 Replies
  • 14344 Views
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2017, 03:43:26 PM »
Quote
The satnav will show your actual position as calculated from the GPS data.  Particular satnavs may show a nearest location, but this is unrelated to the received data.

See what a tablet app shows, including the location of the satellites, interesting stuff.

Look up how surveying equipment uses GPS, very accurate and repeatable.  Used across the world.

Did you look at the 2 links I posted?
I am not reading an entire wikipedia page when only a line or two is going to be remotely relevant to our conversation.
How exactly is the location determined from received data unrelated to received data? they're the same damn thing, just in a different format. How are you claiming GPS shows distances if you aren't applying it to locations? You need those locations if you want to calculate anything.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2017, 03:52:23 PM »
Quote
The satnav will show your actual position as calculated from the GPS data.  Particular satnavs may show a nearest location, but this is unrelated to the received data.

See what a tablet app shows, including the location of the satellites, interesting stuff.

Look up how surveying equipment uses GPS, very accurate and repeatable.  Used across the world.

Did you look at the 2 links I posted?
I am not reading an entire wikipedia page when only a line or two is going to be remotely relevant to our conversation.
How exactly is the location determined from received data unrelated to received data? they're the same damn thing, just in a different format. How are you claiming GPS shows distances if you aren't applying it to locations? You need those locations if you want to calculate anything.
A GPS receiver produces an accurate location.  A satnav uses that data to show the location on a preloaded map.  That map is based on measured data of the earth.  Each road has data associated with it to enable to calculate distance from A to B and measure a path taken.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2017, 04:36:03 PM »
Quote
A GPS receiver produces an accurate location.  A satnav uses that data to show the location on a preloaded map.  That map is based on measured data of the earth.  Each road has data associated with it to enable to calculate distance from A to B and measure a path taken.
Again, how do you intend to measure an accurate location if you don't have it in reference to anything?
GPS is only used in conjunction with the pre-made map, and it constantly adjusts based on location. There are no major errors on the small-scale, and any larger scale errors are just assumed to be difficulties with signal, and how it constantly readjusts.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #33 on: February 21, 2017, 12:24:43 AM »
Quote
A GPS receiver produces an accurate location.  A satnav uses that data to show the location on a preloaded map.  That map is based on measured data of the earth.  Each road has data associated with it to enable to calculate distance from A to B and measure a path taken.
Again, how do you intend to measure an accurate location if you don't have it in reference to anything?
GPS is only used in conjunction with the pre-made map, and it constantly adjusts based on location. There are no major errors on the small-scale, and any larger scale errors are just assumed to be difficulties with signal, and how it constantly readjusts.
Why do you use the word 'you' here?  GPS does not use a map, the output is the lat/long of the location.  The reference locations are positions of the satellites.

What are these large scale errors and where did you find out what they are assumed to be?  What do you mean by constantly adjusts, do you mean the location is constantly calculated?

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #34 on: February 21, 2017, 12:48:10 AM »
Quote
You have enough information available to you to easily map out the world.

One starting point is noting times of the sun peak level, when the sun is due north or due south, in many locations around the world, and noting that the sun has to travel 15 degrees an hour.
You can also use pre-measured distances, or measure some yourself.
Let's just start by noting this absurdity. "You can map out the world yourself." "Use pre-measured distances."
It is not mapping out the world to use an existing map. Can FEers and REers please unite to agree on this? As for measuring them out myself, would love to hear how you plan to do that.
Using pre-measured distances isn't necessarily using a map.
As for how to measure them yourself, you can try with a car or a boat and a good telescope and compass. Travel in straight lines as much as possible, check your angle from several points. Travel to these points.

Quote
I am not asking 'people' to believe in what I say, I am asking you to look at information on GPS to understand how it works.
Your issues make no sense.  What does 'GPS constantly adjusts' mean?  Adjusts? Why should GPS need landmarks?
Use a satnav, that's how they work. They run entirely on detecting where you are. When they detect you as being closer to another location, that's where they put you. They don't just note your starting point, and then somehow measure your velocity independently.
No. Your issue makes no sense.

Rather than deal with pure GPS, you deal with GPS with extras.
The GPS data itself tells you your location, quite accurately.
The satnav may (not always) use that and its mapping data to put you to the nearest road.

Pure GPS doesn't note your starting point, it just calculates where you are.

Quote
A GPS receiver produces an accurate location.  A satnav uses that data to show the location on a preloaded map.  That map is based on measured data of the earth.  Each road has data associated with it to enable to calculate distance from A to B and measure a path taken.
Again, how do you intend to measure an accurate location if you don't have it in reference to anything?
GPS is only used in conjunction with the pre-made map, and it constantly adjusts based on location. There are no major errors on the small-scale, and any larger scale errors are just assumed to be difficulties with signal, and how it constantly readjusts.
GPS is typically only used in conjunction with a pre-made map, but you don't have to.
You can measure your position relative to the GPS coordinate system and make your own map based off that.
Again, the GPS part doesn't magically adjust your position based upon the math. It isn't constantly readjusting (unless you mean updating its position and time based upon the received signals)

*

rabinoz

  • 22585
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2017, 04:09:02 AM »
Quote
A GPS receiver produces an accurate location.  A satnav uses that data to show the location on a preloaded map.  That map is based on measured data of the earth.  Each road has data associated with it to enable to calculate distance from A to B and measure a path taken.
Again, how do you intend to measure an accurate location if you don't have it in reference to anything?
GPS is only used in conjunction with the pre-made map, and it constantly adjusts based on location. There are no major errors on the small-scale, and any larger scale errors are just assumed to be difficulties with signal, and how it constantly readjusts.
One thing you must realise is that the GPS transmitters have absolutely no knowledge of where the receiver (your GPS unit) is. All receivers get exactly the same signals, just at different times. The GPS transmitters do not and cannot "constantly adjust based on location", they do not know your location.

Now, as for accuracy.
Maps, at least good ones, show the latitude and longitude of any location on it.

I have a Garmin computer based map of Australia that gives the Lat/Long for any point in Australia to very high accuracy.

If I get it to find where I am by street address I get my location as 26.68017S 152.04871E. (I changed the degrees, so as not to publicise exactly where I am)
Now if I use the GPS app on my tablet to find where I am I get the location as 26.68008S 152.04891E.

You might say that they are not the same,
but the first is from the street address and the second is where I am sitting now, not quite the same locations and they are only 22 m apart.
Not only that, but I can put the GPS coordinates (from the tablet) into Google Earth (on the computer) and it lands right in my house, almost right where I am.

I know that I can enter a Lat/Long into my navigator and get directed to within a few metres of the correct location in the ground.

I don't care what you say, GPS cannot use any local landmarks, yet agrees with modern maps to within a few metres.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2017, 05:37:13 AM »
@JRS - GPS is used to make maps.  As in:

The national positioning infrastructure

Ordnance Survey has fully adopted GPS positioning as the basis of all three national coordinate systems listed above. OSGB36 National Grid is no longer realised by triangulation stations but by the ETRS89 positions of the National GPS Network stations in conjunction with the definitive transformation model OSTN02. Likewise, orthometric heights (defined by ODN on mainland UK) will not be realised by levelled bench marks but by GPS positioning in conjunction with the Geoid model OSGM02. All surveyors who want to take advantage of the infrastructure will therefore need access to survey-grade GPS equipment.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2017, 06:05:38 AM by inquisitive »

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #37 on: February 23, 2017, 08:10:13 AM »
Quote
Why do you use the word 'you' here?  GPS does not use a map, the output is the lat/long of the location.  The reference locations are positions of the satellites.

What are these large scale errors and where did you find out what they are assumed to be?  What do you mean by constantly adjusts, do you mean the location is constantly calculated?
The large scale errors are the ones you are claiming would occur on a flat Earth. Why should I explain your argument to you?
Without a map nothing you're saying means anything. You get arbitrary reference points of "You are this far from this place," so what? You need distances to make an objection, and those distances only occur if you have a map. Those maps are not constructed from GPS data, no matter what you claim, the best GPS in the world is not going to be capable of detecting and mapping out every road, noting which is open, knowing the names... it is all programmed in. And then the location is calculated, over and over. if you ever use a GPS you'll note that your position seems to flicker constantly, and even if the receiver is stationary it can detect you moving all over the place. GPS is not the holy grail you're pretending it is, it works by matching your approximate location to programmed in interpretations of what certain locations mean.

Quote
Using pre-measured distances isn't necessarily using a map.
As for how to measure them yourself, you can try with a car or a boat and a good telescope and compass. Travel in straight lines as much as possible, check your angle from several points. Travel to these points.
How many perfectly straight roads do you imagine exist, what angle are you planning to measure? If you're doing it by travel then just use the feature of the car, but you're still stuck with the fact there aren't nearly enough perfectly straight roads, particularly as I'm currently in the UK and if I drive far enough to detect what you claim is curvature I'd be underwater, even if there were straight roads.

Quote
One thing you must realise is that the GPS transmitters have absolutely no knowledge of where the receiver (your GPS unit) is. All receivers get exactly the same signals, just at different times. The GPS transmitters do not and cannot "constantly adjust based on location", they do not know your location.
I'm only talking about the receiver, what the hell are you on about?
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #38 on: February 23, 2017, 12:59:22 PM »
Quote
Why do you use the word 'you' here?  GPS does not use a map, the output is the lat/long of the location.  The reference locations are positions of the satellites.

What are these large scale errors and where did you find out what they are assumed to be?  What do you mean by constantly adjusts, do you mean the location is constantly calculated?
The large scale errors are the ones you are claiming would occur on a flat Earth. Why should I explain your argument to you?
Without a map nothing you're saying means anything. You get arbitrary reference points of "You are this far from this place," so what? You need distances to make an objection, and those distances only occur if you have a map. Those maps are not constructed from GPS data, no matter what you claim, the best GPS in the world is not going to be capable of detecting and mapping out every road, noting which is open, knowing the names... it is all programmed in. And then the location is calculated, over and over.
No. The GPS doesn't do that. Instead the GPS will determine the location, the thing which is calculated based upon the position of satellites and the time it takes to receive the signal from them.

if you ever use a GPS you'll note that your position seems to flicker constantly, and even if the receiver is stationary it can detect you moving all over the place. GPS is not the holy grail you're pretending it is, it works by matching your approximate location to programmed in interpretations of what certain locations mean.
If you use cheap GPS or GPS with extra crap.
GPS works by determining your location from satellite data.
The extra crap may then use that position and other data to determine what it thinks is an accurate location.

Quote
Using pre-measured distances isn't necessarily using a map.
As for how to measure them yourself, you can try with a car or a boat and a good telescope and compass. Travel in straight lines as much as possible, check your angle from several points. Travel to these points.
How many perfectly straight roads do you imagine exist, what angle are you planning to measure? If you're doing it by travel then just use the feature of the car, but you're still stuck with the fact there aren't nearly enough perfectly straight roads, particularly as I'm currently in the UK and if I drive far enough to detect what you claim is curvature I'd be underwater, even if there were straight roads.
Who said anything about roads?
There are other options, like deserts. Also, did you notice the boat?

As for the angles, that would be visible landmarks, however if you are willing to use GPS, that makes it a lot easier.

Quote
One thing you must realise is that the GPS transmitters have absolutely no knowledge of where the receiver (your GPS unit) is. All receivers get exactly the same signals, just at different times. The GPS transmitters do not and cannot "constantly adjust based on location", they do not know your location.
I'm only talking about the receiver, what the hell are you on about?
And the receivers calculate their location based upon the information sent from the transmitters, not from where you are.

*

rabinoz

  • 22585
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #39 on: February 23, 2017, 03:00:00 PM »
Without a map nothing you're saying means anything.
You get arbitrary reference points of "You are this far from this place," so what?
Quite wrong! What you get is the coordinates of where you are as Latitude/Longitude. For example, where I am sitting the GPS I am using has no connection to any phone system and shows my location as 26.68009S 152.04890E. (I changed the degrees, so as not to publicise exactly where I am). If you look back at an earlier post on Feb 21, it then read 26.68008S 152.04891E - differing only by 0.00001 in each of Lat and Long!

Now than sort of thing is very useful. I have used it walking to record the starting location and the track so I can follow it back if I need to.
Numerous times when driving on off-road tracks I have used the GPS to record the track I took and then used that to find a way back, sometimes by a different track.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic
You need distances to make an objection, and those distances only occur if you have a map. Those maps are not constructed from GPS data, no matter what you claim, the best GPS in the world is not going to be capable of detecting and mapping out every road, noting which is open, knowing the names... it is all programmed in. And then the location is calculated, over and over. if you ever use a GPS you'll note that your position seems to flicker constantly, and even if the receiver is stationary it can detect you moving all over the place.
Yes, but my in-car GPS records the distance along the road, the car odometer records the distance along the road, most road maps show the distance along the road and roadside distance markers the distance along the road.
In almost every case I have found that these agree quite closely and in particular, the GPS distance agrees with the car odometer to within about 1% (I am very lucky in that the last two Toyotas I have had very accurate speedometers and odometers).

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic
if you ever use a GPS you'll note that your position seems to flicker constantly, and even if the receiver is stationary it can detect you moving all over the place.
GPS does have known errors but under good conditions they are only 4 to 6 metres. In the distances we are talking about that is extremely good!

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic
GPS is not the holy grail you're pretending it is, it works by matching your approximate location to programme in interpretations of what certain locations mean.
GPS does not work by "matching your approximate location". GPS independently of all outside points of interest gives you your Latitude and Longitude quite independently of any map.

The one I am using at the moment is doing just that, no map, just displaying Latitude and Longitude, and as well speed and elevation. Quite independently of anything else.

If you had been navigating boats before GPS, I think you would regard it near enough to "the holy grail".

As always Mr JRoweSkeptic you seem speak from a position of utter ignorance in the topic.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #40 on: February 23, 2017, 03:05:39 PM »
JRS was given some links to read but chose not to as there was too much to read.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #41 on: February 23, 2017, 04:27:04 PM »
I repeat my question to the Flat Earth Idea Believer:
If you look at the FE-map how the distances work with flight times?
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
How the Flat Earth Idea Believer explain this.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #42 on: February 24, 2017, 10:25:50 AM »
Quote
JRS was given some links to read but chose not to as there was too much to read.
Because 99.99% of the information contained in the links would be utterly irrelevant and if you're persistently going to be too lazy to type out your damn arguments or justify yourself as I do, I see no reason to sift through all of that.
You're incapable of writing more than one fucking line in your posts and you whinge when no one's going to read a damn encyclopedia, could you be more of a hypocrite?

Quote
Who said anything about roads?
There are other options, like deserts. Also, did you notice the boat?
As for the angles, that would be visible landmarks, however if you are willing to use GPS, that makes it a lot easier.
How many people do you imagine have a fucking boat? I talked about roads because for the only accessible instance there, of cars travelling in straight lines, they're needed. That wouldn't be remotely useful though, the handful of landmarks that are visible from a large distance away, you're just going to measure how steep the ground is, even in your own model.

Quote
Quite wrong! What you get is the coordinates of where you are as Latitude/Longitude. For example, where I am sitting the GPS I am using has no connection to any phone system and shows my location as 26.68009S 152.04890E. (I changed the degrees, so as not to publicise exactly where I am). If you look back at an earlier post on Feb 21, it then read 26.68008S 152.04891E - differing only by 0.00001 in each of Lat and Long!
Which it gets by measuring how far you are from a certain location. The GPS knows nothing else beyond how far it is from certain transmitters, it then works on the assumption that certain distances equal certain locations, and so gives you the lat/long.

Quote
If you had been navigating boats before GPS, I think you would regard it near enough to "the holy grail".
Yes, because it's better than hoping the stars'll be out. No one's saying it isn't accurate, you're just turning it into something it's not. Small-scale distances are always going to be fine. Large scale ones are adjusted for within the GPS' error. If you can get 6m error just from sitting still (pretty sure I've had bigger on my phone, been read as close to two houses away), then over the time and distance that a long journey would be, a journey long enough for departure between RE and FE distances to be notable, that error is going to be add up. As GPS naturally self-corrects and self-adjusts, certain distances = certain locations (made explicit in satnavs), any variation is just going to be handwaved away as error, and it's not given a chance to add up.
This isn't anything grand, this is how any good system would be designed; don't create a situation where errors in reading could add up. That's true regardless of the shape of the Earth.

Quote
If you look at the FE-map how the distances work with flight times?
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
Travel times aren't just based on distance, they're based on speed. Jet streams, weather... Flight times are an unreliable means of measuring distance.
They match under DET.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #43 on: February 24, 2017, 10:28:13 AM »
Quote
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
And also where's this map that someone claims is accurate, rather than just a placeholder? It's the height of stupidity to look at something that isn't meant to work and complain it doesn't work.
No FEer has a good map because mapping out the entire fucking world with the resources of a handful of people in a short span of time is completely impossible and if you had an honest bone in your body you would stop whinging that it hadn't been done.

If it's so easy, you do it.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #44 on: February 24, 2017, 11:36:03 AM »
...
Quote
If you look at the FE-map how the distances work with flight times?
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
Travel times aren't just based on distance, they're based on speed. Jet streams, weather... Flight times are an unreliable means of measuring distance.
They match under DET.

 a variance of 2.25 is a lot.
a flight from Sidney to Johannesburg has to be 2.25 faster than the flight to Frankfurt.

ok and in the other post you admit that there is not map of a flat earth existing.
why do these maps than always get posted here?

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #45 on: February 24, 2017, 12:35:44 PM »
Surely it's about mapping the earth correctly, whatever the shape?

Where is there evidence that the current maps are incorrect?

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #46 on: February 24, 2017, 01:56:06 PM »
Quote
JRS was given some links to read but chose not to as there was too much to read.
Because 99.99% of the information contained in the links would be utterly irrelevant and if you're persistently going to be too lazy to type out your damn arguments or justify yourself as I do, I see no reason to sift through all of that.
And what's the point in writing out the argument ourselves when you just ignore it anyway?

Quote
Who said anything about roads?
There are other options, like deserts. Also, did you notice the boat?
As for the angles, that would be visible landmarks, however if you are willing to use GPS, that makes it a lot easier.
How many people do you imagine have a fucking boat? I talked about roads because for the only accessible instance there, of cars travelling in straight lines, they're needed.
No. They're not.
Cars can travel in straight lines over deserts as well.

That wouldn't be remotely useful though, the handful of landmarks that are visible from a large distance away, you're just going to measure how steep the ground is, even in your own model.
You are aware that was how early mapping was done, and provided fairly accurate maps?
Using GPS would be a better option to get a coordinate system which you can them map to these distances.

Quote
Quite wrong! What you get is the coordinates of where you are as Latitude/Longitude. For example, where I am sitting the GPS I am using has no connection to any phone system and shows my location as 26.68009S 152.04890E. (I changed the degrees, so as not to publicise exactly where I am). If you look back at an earlier post on Feb 21, it then read 26.68008S 152.04891E - differing only by 0.00001 in each of Lat and Long!
Which it gets by measuring how far you are from a certain location. The GPS knows nothing else beyond how far it is from certain transmitters, it then works on the assumption that certain distances equal certain locations, and so gives you the lat/long.
Debatably, yes.
But what are these locations? The several satellites in orbit it is receiving data from.
So no, it isn't a certain distance from a certain location.
It is a certain distance from several locations, which it uses to determine your position in a particular coordinate system.

Quote
If you had been navigating boats before GPS, I think you would regard it near enough to "the holy grail".
Yes, because it's better than hoping the stars'll be out. No one's saying it isn't accurate, you're just turning it into something it's not. Small-scale distances are always going to be fine. Large scale ones are adjusted for within the GPS' error.
No. They aren't.

GPS is more accurate at larger scales.
It has the same error (absolute) regardless of the scale used.
So trying to plot 2 things 10 m apart will be somewhat inaccurate (depending on the equipment used), where for example (using your 6 m below), you will plot the distance to within 12 m, so it could be -2 m apart, or 22 m apart.
Trying to plot 2 things 10 km apart you will not notice any error, as you have the same 6 m error in each point and thus have a range of 9 994 - 10 006 m

If you can get 6m error just from sitting still (pretty sure I've had bigger on my phone, been read as close to two houses away), then over the time and distance that a long journey would be, a journey long enough for departure between RE and FE distances to be notable, that error is going to be add up.
No. It isn't.
That error will remain the same, due to the same error in determining your location.

As GPS naturally self-corrects and self-adjusts, certain distances = certain locations (made explicit in satnavs), any variation is just going to be handwaved away as error, and it's not given a chance to add up.
No. It doesn't.
It constant re-determines your position without any concern for where you were previously.
It doesn't go:
You were here. You moved 10 m. You should be there.
It goes:
I don't give a shit, you are here now.

You can keep on lying about it all you want, it wont make you any less full of shit.

This isn't anything grand, this is how any good system would be designed; don't create a situation where errors in reading could add up. That's true regardless of the shape of the Earth.
And do you know one of the best ways to get a system like that?
Have one which doesn't use your previous location, and instead just determines what your location is.
If it does that then it has the same error in location regardless of how far you have travelled, without any need for correction.
If you are using previous location data and trying to determine a new position from where you are, the errors will continue to add and after a short distance you will be in a completely different location to what it says.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #47 on: February 24, 2017, 01:59:12 PM »
Quote
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
And also where's this map that someone claims is accurate, rather than just a placeholder? It's the height of stupidity to look at something that isn't meant to work and complain it doesn't work.
No FEer has a good map because mapping out the entire fucking world with the resources of a handful of people in a short span of time is completely impossible and if you had an honest bone in your body you would stop whinging that it hadn't been done.

If it's so easy, you do it.
No, it is quite easy.

Just because it is easy doesn't mean it can be done in a few seconds and cost nothing.
I have no reason to do it.
If I did, you would just reject it because it shows Earth to be a globe.
There is no point in us doing any of the experiments FEers often suggest as they have already been done.

Plenty of people use the common Flat Earth map to explain things and use it as an actual map, rather than a place holder, even using it along with some multi-stop routes to try claiming that flight paths match that flat map rather than a round one.
Stop acting like people are just using it as a placeholder.

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #48 on: February 24, 2017, 02:26:52 PM »
its easy to get muddled down in this argument of, if our gps lied to us we'd never notice (which is probably true). however distances in the southern hemisphere would be absolutely insane compared to what they actually are. what about crab fisherman who spend most of their time fishing in the antarctic, don't you think they'd realize that distances are more than 4x what their map says they should be.

not to mention that there are flights in the southern hemisphere:
https://www.metabunk.org/flat-earth-theory-debunked-by-short-flights-qf27-qf28-from-australia-to-south-america.t6483/
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #49 on: February 24, 2017, 02:36:04 PM »
its easy to get muddled down in this argument of, if our gps lied to us we'd never notice (which is probably true). however distances in the southern hemisphere would be absolutely insane compared to what they actually are. what about crab fisherman who spend most of their time fishing in the antarctic, don't you think they'd realize that distances are more than 4x what their map says they should be.

not to mention that there are flights in the southern hemisphere:
https://www.metabunk.org/flat-earth-theory-debunked-by-short-flights-qf27-qf28-from-australia-to-south-america.t6483/
Crazy biscuits here uses dual earth BS instead of the typical flat Earth BS. That means the distances near either pole is correct and it just gets horribly wrong as you approach the equator.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #50 on: February 25, 2017, 10:42:30 AM »
Quote
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
And also where's this map that someone claims is accurate, rather than just a placeholder? It's the height of stupidity to look at something that isn't meant to work and complain it doesn't work.
No FEer has a good map because mapping out the entire fucking world with the resources of a handful of people in a short span of time is completely impossible and if you had an honest bone in your body you would stop whinging that it hadn't been done.

If it's so easy, you do it.
The only map is one that is correct.  How would you start to produce a map if you were given the resources?

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #51 on: February 26, 2017, 10:17:50 AM »
Quote
And also the flight routes do not match the FE map.
And also where's this map that someone claims is accurate, rather than just a placeholder? It's the height of stupidity to look at something that isn't meant to work and complain it doesn't work.
No FEer has a good map because mapping out the entire fucking world with the resources of a handful of people in a short span of time is completely impossible and if you had an honest bone in your body you would stop whinging that it hadn't been done.

If it's so easy, you do it.

You're correct to say no FEer has a good map but not because they lack resources. It's impossible to produce a good flat earth map because the earth is not flat. Every 2 dimensional map is a compromise because it's impossible to translate the surface of a globe onto a flat sheet of paper and retain accuracy in all dimensions. That's why you have no FE mapth, not because there are only a few dozen who are gullible enough to believe youtube nonsense but because the earth is effectively a sphere.

The rest of us do have a good map of the globe hearth, though. Look on a globe and you'll find dimensions are accurate in all directions. North-south, east-west. The area of each land mass is represented accurately on a globe along with distances between points where they cannot be on a 2 dimensional map.

I wouldn't bother with this nonsense if it wasn't becoming apparent that the rise of willful ignorance typified by FE believers was not taking the world down a dangerous path. If things carry on the way they are then people like this are going to be following the path of the Khmer Rouge and burning books, murdering intellectuals and all because they want to remove anything which makes them see how ridiculously stupid they are.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #52 on: February 26, 2017, 10:45:33 AM »

Which it gets by measuring how far you are from a certain location. The GPS knows nothing else beyond how far it is from certain transmitters, it then works on the assumption that certain distances equal certain locations, and so gives you the lat/long.


Nope. GPS gets a location based on calculations of time taken for a number of signals from different sources to arrive at a single point. The "assumption that certain distances equal certain locations" is the process of putting that point on a map. If the map is accurate then the GPS position will match with the expected geographic location. If the map is not accurate it won't. There's no "corrections for large scale errors", whatever that means, no small scale accuracy vs large scale inaccuracy, there's only accurate maps and inaccurate maps. That's how we know the world has been mapped very very accurately indeed.

If GPS worked the way you seem to think it does then if you took a reading at point A, switched your GPS off then traveled a long distance to point B and switched it on again the GPS would not be able to give an accurate position until it had found a way to take account of all these large scale inaccuracies you talk about but it does. It reports the position accurately to within a few meters without any need, or indeed means, to account for some imaginary errors which you claim accumulate over large distances.

Besides, if you look at ANY supposed FE map then you will find that it is not an accurate analogue of the surface of the earth but refuse to accept the truth as to why. It's got nothing to do with the cost of producing FE map and everything to do with the fact that it's impossible to represent the surface of a sphere with accuracy in both dimension on a flat plane. The UN map is accurate for distances north south but not for east-west and the further south you go the more inaccurate it is. That's why Australia on that particular map is shown as being something like twice as wide as it actually is though it's height is reasonably accurate.

You can get in your car and check that out even with the level of inaccuracy common in an ordinary car odometer. But of course no FEer will do that because they like to shout about us poor globe heads being fed lies by the "scientists" and not doing our own measurements but they come out with every excuse under the sun for not doing any themselves. They are especially unwilling to accept simple facts which are cheap and easy to obtain with simple equipment which show conclusively that the earth cannot be stationary and flat.


?

evolvealready

  • 8
  • Building errors is so much easier in groups.
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #53 on: February 22, 2019, 12:22:01 PM »
This map, the unofficial FE map, is a Polar Azimuthal Equidistant (PAE) projection.  Similar to the map on the UN flag.  The Azimuthal Equidistant projection can be centered on any point on earth (frequently on important cities) but the North Pole seems to be politically neutral (at least to white people).  Altho very popular with FEers, especially because it feeds the nonsense about an ice wall, congruent with Antarctica, surrounding the rim of a flat planet, it is not the "official" or definitive Flat Earth map - there is no such official map.

This map is reliable for distances only from the central point (here, the North Pole) and not from any other place, and the distortion in distance becomes worse as the distance from the center increases. 

Every world map on flat paper has some sort of distortion - in shape, distances, direction, and/or area; usually at least two of the four characteristics.  Maps of smaller portions of the world, such as of a single country, also have distortion - usually nearer the edges - but less dramatic, and maps of even smaller portions, such as of cities would have very slight distortions (probably not greater than the width of the lines used to represent highways).  IF (big if) the Earth were really flat then a map on an equally flat paper should have no distortions and not involve any "projection" but only a ratio of scale (e.g. "one inch equals ten thousand miles"), and every other map of the world would be a larger or smaller version of the very same map.
Flat maps only necessarily have distortion if the world is not flat. If it is a sphere, a flap map can't be right, no matter how it is configured. Do you want an easy way to prove round or flat earth? Contact people from every continent and have them measure distances to see if the are all consistent with a sphere. If they are, the earth can't possibly be flat.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #54 on: February 22, 2019, 02:02:00 PM »
Until some flat earther comes up with a map that has the same scale throughout, the continents are appropriately sized with respect to each other, and distances between cities are correct, there is no point in even discussing it.

No flat earther can present such a map.  And they never will be able to.


*

rabinoz

  • 22585
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #55 on: February 22, 2019, 02:29:31 PM »
This map, the unofficial FE map, is a Polar Azimuthal Equidistant (PAE) projection.  Similar to the map on the UN flag.  The Azimuthal Equidistant projection can be centered on any point on earth (frequently on important cities) but the North Pole seems to be politically neutral (at least to white people).  Altho very popular with FEers, especially because it feeds the nonsense about an ice wall, congruent with Antarctica, surrounding the rim of a flat planet, it is not the "official" or definitive Flat Earth map - there is no such official map.

This map is reliable for distances only from the central point (here, the North Pole) and not from any other place, and the distortion in distance becomes worse as the distance from the center increases. 

Every world map on flat paper has some sort of distortion - in shape, distances, direction, and/or area; usually at least two of the four characteristics.  Maps of smaller portions of the world, such as of a single country, also have distortion - usually nearer the edges - but less dramatic, and maps of even smaller portions, such as of cities would have very slight distortions (probably not greater than the width of the lines used to represent highways).  IF (big if) the Earth were really flat then a map on an equally flat paper should have no distortions and not involve any "projection" but only a ratio of scale (e.g. "one inch equals ten thousand miles"), and every other map of the world would be a larger or smaller version of the very same map.
Flat maps only necessarily have distortion if the world is not flat. If it is a sphere, a flap map can't be right, no matter how it is configured. Do you want an easy way to prove round or flat earth? Contact people from every continent and have them measure distances to see if the are all consistent with a sphere. If they are, the earth can't possibly be flat.
I've done quite a bit of measurement around Australia and the East-West distances certainly do not agree with the usual North Pole centred map.
All cars and rulers are part of the conspiracy Message by rabinoz on January 16, 2019, 06:31:59 PM
And another shorter almost East-West distance:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Just a few weeks back I drove 333 km (on the car oddo) from here to Miles, Queensland, almost due west of here.
The longitude of Miles is about 150.2 E and the longitude here is about 153.0 E, the difference is 2.855 so even the road distance is only 117 km/deg.
But on that usual flat-earth map the straight line distance would be about 174 km/deg or a total of 498 km.

No great accuracy is needed to prove that the Ice-Wall map "makes no sense at all compared to reality".

Of course you might claim that the Ice-Wall map is not the official map
but all other maps do is to move the problem around - Shuffling the deck-chairs in the Titanic.

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #56 on: February 26, 2019, 07:00:49 PM »
Hi, I am new here but after reading some of the comments and topics in this website I would like to know if anyone can tell me how deep is FE ? if I started drilling straight down, how far would I get before punching out?
Thank you  Kindly!

Re: Distances on Flat Earth Map
« Reply #57 on: February 27, 2019, 07:55:48 AM »
Hi, I am new here but after reading some of the comments and topics in this website I would like to know if anyone can tell me how deep is FE ? if I started drilling straight down, how far would I get before punching out?
Thank you  Kindly!

Nobody knows how far it is to the first turtle.