I am not talking about proboblities or possiblities. I am giving you a direct evidence, hence you have to debunk it directly instead of bla bla.
No, you are not giving direct evidence.
You are giving wishy-washy garbage.
You are not showing any problem with a RE.
The flight is still completely possible on a RE.
Prove the sure evidences you are talking about instead of baseless claiming.
Follow your own advice.
Prove the "evidence" you are claiming, instead of repeating the same baseless claims.
Because the atmoplane is going to less when you go above hence the wind affects go to zero when you go above.
Plane need air to fly. They fly at speeds relative to the air. Wind effects them dramatically.
In order for the wind to have no effect (other than no wind), their can't be any air, which would mean the plane can't fly.
however, where maps are wrong, such as China, Russia, and Australia, one plane appears to be moving twice as fast as the other. To explain this, the first is said to move with the jetstream, the other is said to move against the wind. whereas all these distances are consistent and speeds are constant on a flat world map, as in real life.
No, they aren't.
By pretending the planes only fly in a straight line and aren't affected by wind, you need to have the times for both directions of a trip be the same, but that is pretty much never the case.
Look at almost any route and you will see a significant difference in time. For example, London to NY and vice versa.
Flight from London to NY takes roughly 8 hours:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW183/history/20200211/1955Z/EGLL/KJFKBut going back the other way typically takes 6.5 hours:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW182/history/20200212/0420Z/KJFK/EGLLHow do you explain this?
It makes no sense at all with what you claim.
If what you claim is true, the wind should have no effect and the planes should fly a basically direct route and thus take the same amount of time.
So by using your nonsense claims, we arrive at a contradiction and thus show your claims are wrong.
If you wish to disagree, how do you explain the time differences?
Or perhaps even simpler, what is the distance between London and NY, and how did you determine that?
Are you still telling all flight routes perfectly fits with your so-called globe map, shamelesly while you know they actually arent?
Can you provide a single flight where they don't fit?
Not a case of they aren't taking a straight line route, but a flight which is impossible on a globe?
I am yet to see any.
Answer it; if they perfectly overlap so why do you use some excuses like borders, winds, etc so and so. You can, we can, anybody can create endless excuses to support a weak argument. What does it mean? Give up the evilness. Admit it does not overlap, because it has been proven above whether or not you agree.
And how about you do the same for the London<->NY route I provided? Admit they don't overlap and your claims are garbage.
Sydney to Santiago and from Johannesburg to Perth flights are different. There isn't any verified evidence about the route Sydney to Santiago.
Stop lying.
There are mountains of evidence that these flights exist.
You not liking the evidence and deciding to reject it doesn't magically change that.
I have not denied time difference west-east and e-w flights.
But your argument relies upon it.
If there are these differences, there is no basis for your map as you cannot simply say a flight taking x time will be because of a distance of y.