Flat Earth Map

  • 47 Replies
  • 10060 Views
Flat Earth Map
« on: September 28, 2017, 11:23:05 PM »
Let's cut through all the obfuscation. A map of the Earth has been around and used for navigation for well over five centuries. That map has been useful for navigation with eye to sky navigation and has remained useful with satellite navigation. That map is confirmed in its accuracy daily by every ship that sails the sea and every plane that flys.
Here are my questions: if that map is wrong, why does it work? If the earth is flat and not a globe, why can you not produce a map?

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2017, 02:10:33 AM »
And before anyone says it is too hard to produce a map, it is quite easy.

First, observe that the sun makes a cyclic appearance, that is it takes roughly 24 hours to return to the same position in the sky.


Using this we can determine the longitude of any point.

Using the observation that on the equinox for the equator the sun rises due east, goes directly overhead and sets due west, we can note that the equinox needs to be a straight line or a circle curving into the ground.

So the last part is distance from the equator (or latitude), and that can be determined by measuring the angle of elevation of the sun and some simple trig.

Using this you should be able to produce a map with one x scale and one y scale.

An alternative to measure latitude is to not that Polaris is directly above the north pole, or the south celestial pole is directly above the south pole.
Using this, and the fact that the sun circles the North/South pole, you know the north/south pole must be the centre of this flat Earth. (I know, 2 centres makes no sense, that is a problem with the FE, not reality).
Then, you can use the angle of elevation to the north/south celestial pole to determine your latitude using the same simple trig.

Then you just need to plots these out to make a map.

Here is a google sheet to help:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iwFa5a2VFkpS9Smv60xKAT1iTXZDDsg6G_tw61bdRm0/edit?usp=sharing

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2017, 07:17:23 AM »
Apparently the only reason no FE map exists is because there are no cartographers amongst the believers. If there were, you can bet there would be the best and most accurate flat earth maps you can imagine.

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2017, 10:52:31 AM »
Apparently the only reason no FE map exists is because there are no cartographers amongst the believers. If there were, you can bet there would be the best and most accurate flat earth maps you can imagine.

and why are there no FEIB that are cartographers, simply because when somebody looks deeply into that topic will see that a flat earth is not possible with the results of the work they do.

*

Sentinel

  • 575
  • Open your eyes...
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2017, 12:06:01 PM »
There are actually plenty of FE-maps out there covering multiple FE-theories (bar quite adventurous ones like dual earth, infinte earth and non-euclidean space). Problem is all of them raise more questions than answering them, at least one could state for a fact pretty much all of their respective supporters avoid seemingly basic topics as Sunsets, Polaris and the southern hemisphere like the devil avoids Holy Water.  :P
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible."

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2017, 02:22:17 PM »
Apparently the only reason no FE map exists is because there are no cartographers amongst the believers. If there were, you can bet there would be the best and most accurate flat earth maps you can imagine.
It does not take a cartographer to produce a simple map.

The reason multiple FE maps exists is because Earth isn't flat, and thus it cannot be accurately represented on a flat surface without some distortion.
There are many ways to project the surface of a sphere onto a flat surface, but they are not all the same. As such you end up with contradictory maps.
To make matters even worse, you also end up with none of these maps not being able to predict observed reality when considered as a flat map of a flat Earth.

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2017, 03:14:43 PM »
Apparently the only reason no FE map exists is because there are no cartographers amongst the believers. If there were, you can bet there would be the best and most accurate flat earth maps you can imagine.
It does not take a cartographer to produce a simple map

Totally. I was just quoting (one of) their excuses

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2017, 04:10:00 PM »
Apparently the only reason no FE map exists is because there are no cartographers amongst the believers. If there were, you can bet there would be the best and most accurate flat earth maps you can imagine.
It does not take a cartographer to produce a simple map.

The reason multiple FE maps exists is because Earth isn't flat, and thus it cannot be accurately represented on a flat surface without some distortion.
There are many ways to project the surface of a sphere onto a flat surface, but they are not all the same. As such you end up with contradictory maps.
To make matters even worse, you also end up with none of these maps not being able to predict observed reality when considered as a flat map of a flat Earth.
Jack, you really have to become familiar with the  :P impeccable :P qualifications of Prof. John Frink. You could look him up in
Professor John I.Q. Nerdelbaum Frink Jr.

 ;D You just do not appreciate the expertise he bestows on us. ;D
Surely you would not expect someone with that depth of knowledge to fall for something like neo-flatularism religion?

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2017, 05:05:01 PM »
I have updated the google sheets to produce a combined one, it's an extra sheet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iwFa5a2VFkpS9Smv60xKAT1iTXZDDsg6G_tw61bdRm0/edit?usp=sharing

Now it just calculates latitude and longitude, ignoring if it should be curved or not.
Basically, put in the time the sun is due north/south to calculate the longitude, then put in if it is north or south of the equator, then the angle of elevations of the sun (when due north/south), and the north and south celestial poles. (You may need to take a timelapse video/long exposure photo to trace the circles and determine the AoE from that).
Then it is just a case of copying the formulas.

If Earth was flat, the results should be consistent in the FE rows. If Earth is round, the results should be consistent in the RE rows.

Also note that some values will produce "N/A", as the latitude from the NCP in the FE model requires the AoE of the NCP to be positive. So these values also mean that Earth isn't flat.

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3543
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2017, 02:53:31 PM »
Can someone post a link to a cartography curriculum that includes FET? Without this, making claims that cartography knowledge is all inclusive of truth in mapping is nonsensical.

Once a cartographers studies are complete then their first task should be assisting with Earth mapping projects.  Flat maps are already in circulation and used in navigation. 

With the assistance of fully schooled and trained cartographers, a finalized Earth map can more easily be rendered.     



 

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2017, 03:12:00 PM »
Can someone post a link to a cartography curriculum that includes FET? Without this, making claims that cartography knowledge is all inclusive of truth in mapping is nonsensical.
Can you provide a link to a cartography curriculum that provides the necessary parts which makes it unable to work with a FE?

Once a cartographers studies are complete then their first task should be assisting with Earth mapping projects.  Flat maps are already in circulation and used in navigation. 
Sure, flat maps which are projections of the globe. No full scale FE map of the entire Earth which is accurate.

With the assistance of fully schooled and trained cartographers, a finalized Earth map can more easily be rendered.     
Again, you don't need to be a trained cartographer to make a simple map, which is good enough to show the FE is false.

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2017, 04:32:51 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
quod erat demonstrandum

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2017, 04:48:26 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
No, she just provided a pathetic excuse.

Making a simple map is not that difficult.
I have provided the tools required.

The difficulty is that there are multiple methods that you can use to make the map, which produce contradictory results if you try and have your map be of a flat surface.

The only real issue with producing a map of a flat Earth, is that Earth is not flat.

The only way in which a flat Earth can be mapped and not reach a contradiction is if space/light is warped in such a way to make the FE in this magic space/with this magic light, indistinguishable from a round Earth in flat space, at which point the globe is the best model.

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2017, 04:57:32 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
No, she just provided a pathetic excuse.
No, she did not. In fact, she provided an elaborate explanation for her case. If I can find the post, I will quote it. Mind you, she is an REer.

Making a simple map is not that difficult.
I have provided the tools required.
What? You have provided the funding and training necessary to create a map of the flat Earth? You are insane.

The only way in which a flat Earth can be mapped and not reach a contradiction is if space/light is warped in such a way to make the FE in this magic space/with this magic light, indistinguishable from a round Earth in flat space, at which point the globe is the best model.
Yeah, no. As I said in my other post, space is absolute void and cannot "bend." Though popular in academia, the notion of "bent and bendable" space is wildly non-intuitive, unfalsifiable nonsense. You make me laugh.
quod erat demonstrandum

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2017, 06:27:09 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.

you chose the wrong word, you should say impossible, because a flat earth is impossible.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2017, 06:36:50 PM »
No, she did not. In fact, she provided an elaborate explanation for her case. If I can find the post, I will quote it. Mind you, she is an REer.
Go ahead and find it.
All I have seen her provide is pathetic excuses where she bitches and moans about how hard it would be while ignoring all arguments to the contrary.

What? You have provided the funding and training necessary to create a map of the flat Earth? You are insane.
No, not insane, quite rational, realising just how easy it is to make a simple map.
It was provided a few posts up in this thread.
It is not difficult at all, requires very little training and no funds.
All it needs is people to make simple observations.

Yeah, no. As I said in my other post, space is absolute void and cannot "bend." Though popular in academia, the notion of "bent and bendable" space is wildly non-intuitive, unfalsifiable nonsense. You make me laugh.
And as I explained in my other post, space can bend. It is quite falsifiable once you decide what determines the "straight" lines through space.
It may be non-intuitive, but it makes sense to quite a lot of people.

Have you ever played pacman, where you leave one side and come back in the other? That uses bent space.

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2017, 09:41:32 PM »
Can someone post a link to a cartography curriculum that includes FET? Without this, making claims that cartography knowledge is all inclusive of truth in mapping is nonsensical.
FET stands for "Flat Earth Theory", if I'm not mistaken, and there is no Flat Earth Theory.  There is a Flat Earth Hypothesis, at best, but nowhere near enough evidence to warrant the label of theory.

Cartography curricula have no need to deal with whatever unsupported hypotheses people come up with.  They will be dealing with facts.  Like the fact of a round Earth. 

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2017, 10:00:32 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
No, she just provided a pathetic excuse.
No, she did not. In fact, she provided an elaborate explanation for her case. If I can find the post, I will quote it. Mind you, she is an REer.

Making a simple map is not that difficult.
I have provided the tools required.
What? You have provided the funding and training necessary to create a map of the flat Earth? You are insane.

The only way in which a flat Earth can be mapped and not reach a contradiction is if space/light is warped in such a way to make the FE in this magic space/with this magic light, indistinguishable from a round Earth in flat space, at which point the globe is the best model.
Yeah, no. As I said in my other post, space is absolute void and cannot "bend." Though popular in academia, the notion of "bent and bendable" space is wildly non-intuitive, unfalsifiable nonsense. You make me laugh.

First, no she doesn't like to hurt peoples feelings so she will do the best to make it so no side can be wrong.  It is the same as the everyone gets a trophy mentality.  He logic is terrible.   In her arguments, if you do not support my idea, it is wrong for me to use actual observations as an argument against your opinion that contradict your opinion.  So if it doesn't already support or could be possible in the FE model, then it cannot be used in an argument against it, no matter how many times it has been observed.  i.e. if you proposed a model that would only work if the sky is never blue, no pictures of the blue sky are valid to put forth in the discussion.

Second, why do you need funding to show a basic layout of the world.  Using size, shape, distances and directions that are roughly correct.  My kids can draw projections of the globe that are far more accurate than anything I have ever seen from FE.  They need no major funding.   The first step for this FE map would be to get beyond 40% accuracy.  None have.  Anyone who says otherwise needs to deny the southern circumpolar star trails and flight times. 

It may be non-intuitive to you, it is pretty simple to visualize.  Your personal mental shortcomings are not proof of anything other than you being rather closed minded.



*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2017, 03:38:59 AM »
The only way in which a flat Earth can be mapped and not reach a contradiction is if space/light is warped in such a way to make the FE in this magic space/with this magic light, indistinguishable from a round Earth in flat space, at which point the globe is the best model.
Yeah, no. As I said in my other post, space is absolute void and cannot "bend." Though popular in academia, the notion of "bent and bendable" space is wildly non-intuitive, unfalsifiable nonsense. You make me laugh.
JackBlack did say that he supported such an idea.
And no, "the notion of 'bent and bendable' space" in not "popular in academia". That would by curved spacetime, a bit different.

But, whether you like it or not, that is the idea behind the non-Euclidean Earth theory, of John Davis
that AltSpace, Flat Earth Believer tries to present it Davis Relativity Model (Debate/discussion edition) « on: September 25, 2017, 01:06:52 PM »

Maybe you could read what John Davis has to say on it in
Quote from: The Flat Earth Society Wiki
Davis Model
The Terra, or Earth, is an slab, as well as all large bodies such as stars and other planets.
Aether
Aether causes space to bend due to mass. In a way it is space itself. It is why the heavenly bodies rotate.

Read the rest in:Davis Model
All those "curved space" ideas are from John Davis and AltSpace.

Yes, Einstein''s General Relativity does have spacetime curvature,
but that is quite different from the massive curvature of space demanded by John Davis's non-Euclidean Earth Theory.

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2017, 04:48:48 AM »
First, no she doesn't like to hurt peoples feelings so she will do the best to make it so no side can be wrong.  It is the same as the everyone gets a trophy mentality.  He logic is terrible.   In her arguments, if you do not support my idea, it is wrong for me to use actual observations as an argument against your opinion that contradict your opinion.  So if it doesn't already support or could be possible in the FE model, then it cannot be used in an argument against it, no matter how many times it has been observed.  i.e. if you proposed a model that would only work if the sky is never blue, no pictures of the blue sky are valid to put forth in the discussion.
This was almost English, ****.

Reported because of racism.

You clearly show what kind of beliefs you have.

*

Sentinel

  • 575
  • Open your eyes...
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #20 on: October 01, 2017, 06:22:03 AM »
First, no she doesn't like to hurt peoples feelings so she will do the best to make it so no side can be wrong.  It is the same as the everyone gets a trophy mentality.  He logic is terrible.   In her arguments, if you do not support my idea, it is wrong for me to use actual observations as an argument against your opinion that contradict your opinion.  So if it doesn't already support or could be possible in the FE model, then it cannot be used in an argument against it, no matter how many times it has been observed.  i.e. if you proposed a model that would only work if the sky is never blue, no pictures of the blue sky are valid to put forth in the discussion.
This was almost English, nigga.

You probs should be a bit more respectful towards Mikey, considering how he utterly roasted you back then in the antarctica thread.  :-\
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible."

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #21 on: October 01, 2017, 02:12:24 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
Actually I don't think it would be that difficult to make a rough map that would be good enough for demonstration purposes.
For instance, pick a scale, grab images of the continents at that scale.
Then lay them out in such a way as to match known distances and travel times.
That information is easily available.
Obviously this would not be detailed enough to navigate with but it should prove a flat earth is possible, if you can make it match the distances.
Maybe I'm wrong about this, if so could one of you point out my error?

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #22 on: October 01, 2017, 02:20:18 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
Actually I don't think it would be that difficult to make a rough map that would be good enough for demonstration purposes.
So you're saying it wouldn't be difficult to create an inaccurate map? One that REers would have a field day attacking, perhaps?
quod erat demonstrandum

Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #23 on: October 01, 2017, 02:26:10 PM »
I'm pretty sure Jane explained it best when she said the "flat Earth map" discussion is ridiculous. It is not reasonable to ask FEers to develop a map, because doing so is impractical.
Actually I don't think it would be that difficult to make a rough map that would be good enough for demonstration purposes.
So you're saying it wouldn't be difficult to create an inaccurate map? One that REers would have a field day attacking, perhaps?
It would be accurate enough if it matched known distances between continents.  Like a simple grade school globe.  Not accurate enough to navigate with but it gives the basic information.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #24 on: October 01, 2017, 02:29:54 PM »
Actually I don't think it would be that difficult to make a rough map that would be good enough for demonstration purposes.
For instance, pick a scale, grab images of the continents at that scale.
Then lay them out in such a way as to match known distances and travel times.
That information is easily available.
Obviously this would not be detailed enough to navigate with but it should prove a flat earth is possible, if you can make it match the distances.
Maybe I'm wrong about this, if so could one of you point out my error?
I would say the big issue is how you try to lay them out.

At best you need some kind of reference, and a simple one for that is the sun.

That is why I think my method is better, measuring the time the sun is due north/south and measuring the angle of elevation at that time, preferably on the equinox, and/or measuring the angle of elevation to the NCP or the SCP.
This way you don't need to try and stitch continents together with some unknown distance.
You can directly map various locations.

However, you could combine the 2.
Map 2 (or a few locations) my way on one section of land, and use that to scale and place a map of that location.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #25 on: October 01, 2017, 02:30:55 PM »
So you're saying it wouldn't be difficult to create an inaccurate map? One that REers would have a field day attacking, perhaps?
Meanwhile, I'm saying it wouldn't be difficult to create a fairly accurate map.
3 in fact, 3 mutually contradictory FE maps to show that the FE doesn't work.
And as a bonus, a globe, to show that the RE does work.

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #26 on: October 01, 2017, 02:42:39 PM »
Meanwhile, I'm saying it wouldn't be difficult to create a fairly accurate map.
How many maps have you created? I don't think you've considered the logistics of such an effort.
quod erat demonstrandum

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2017, 02:43:44 PM »
It would be accurate enough if it matched known distances between continents.
Um, isn't the entire point of creating a map to determine distances??
quod erat demonstrandum

*

Logick

  • 299
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #28 on: October 01, 2017, 02:56:30 PM »
And no, "the notion of 'bent and bendable' space" in not "popular in academia". That would by curved spacetime, a bit different.
rabbi, I'm trying to give you a chance here, but you're just not cutting it. If you wanna talk to me, speak English. That is the language I speak.

Yes, Einstein''s General Relativity does have spacetime curvature,
but that is quite different from the massive curvature of space demanded by John Davis's non-Euclidean Earth Theory.
Curved spacetime is a metaphysical, not scientific belief. I get the feeling that no one here has studied philosophy.
quod erat demonstrandum

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Flat Earth Map
« Reply #29 on: October 01, 2017, 03:30:48 PM »
How many maps have you created? I don't think you've considered the logistics of such an effort.
I have considered the logistics, it is not hard at all.
I have explained how to do it.
You take a few simple measurements, do some simple math and you get an x and y position (or a latitude and longitude).

I have also found my position on maps by doing the reverse.

Have you made any maps?
If not, how do you know the logistics of such an effort, or what the variety of efforts could be?