Geography question

So far the score is:

Me - Kicking ass

Flat Earth people - Zero.

How can that be?  Everthing you have said so far has been wrong.

Quote from: "GeoGuy"

Right, and we consistently back up our claims with verifiable evidence.

 You point me in the direction of just ONE noted scientist, organization, media source, or any source besides you prize winning geniuses, and then I'll entertain the thought.

Just one?  Ok, here is Einstein's   Equivalence Principle.

You're welcome.

How can that be? Everthing you have said so far has been wrong.

It's wrong, yet no one can explain why without nitpicking little details ("It's South West not South East! Haw haw haw!") automatic denial without anything to back it up (ala all of Geo Guy's comments when he can't come up with an explanation,) or flase claims ("We consistently back up our claims with verifiable evidence," yet none of the rediculous theories on this site has anything close to evidence.)

Let's not forget cheating, like when Geo Guy drew his course on the Flat Earth map with a visible turn on it, then said it was a straight line. Lying about something that's like two pages back in the same thread. Nice try.

The end-all catch-all seems to be if you can't explain it, then it's the fault of "teh conspiracy." Yeah, ok. How about some math? How about some detail maps and charts with measurements? Since you can't get any pics of the Earth from orbit becasue of evil NASA, how about one of you find one of these really tall radio towers thats supposed to be there instead of sattilites? Show me a pic of one of those, if they exist as you say then they must be all over the place. What, they got guards around all of those things too?

Such Bullshit... arrrghhh.

Until then:

Me: Stomping the crap out of the Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Losers: Zero.

Let's not forget cheating, like when Geo Guy drew his course on the Flat Earth map with a visible turn on it, then said it was a straight line. Lying about something that's like two pages back in the same thread. Nice try.

I never once said it was a straight line. I said that 'east and west in the FE model are both curved, following a compass heading of east or west will take you in a curved path. So it is entirely irrelevant whether or not the path I plotted was curved, as following it required use of a compass in the first place.

The end-all catch-all seems to be if you can't explain it, then it's the fault of "teh conspiracy."

Nothing in this thread has been explained using the conspiracy.

Also, I should point out that having imaginary contests with yourself over who's 'winning' the debate make that much more embarrassing if it turns out that you're wrong (you are).

I never once said it was a straight line. I said that 'east and west in the FE model are both curved, following a compass heading of east or west will take you in a curved path. So it is entirely irrelevant whether or not the path I plotted was curved, as following it required use of a compass in the first place.

Hmmm... in the begining of the thread, on the very first post, I said chart a course, in a straight line, like I have on the RE map. You tell me the reason you cannot do this is becasue East and West are curves on a Flat Earth.

If I lived on a Flat Earth, would I not be capable of traveling in a straight line?

What you're doing to using semantics to explain away the weakness of your arguement. Since on a Flat Earth, the directions "East" and "West" are curves along the disc, then in order to follow the same course I drew in the RE map you must go along a curve. But this is only becasue of your understanding of East and West as curves. In real life if we lived on a flat Earth we should still be able to depart from South America in a SW direction and collide with the Ice wall as in the picture.

You know, forget about East and West for the moment. Just tell me if you can follow the course in the FE pic and hit the Ice wall. I assume you can?

Now, if we lived on a Round Earth, you could follow the same course and end up where I said you would?

Now, explain how in real life you can do this, but on a flat earth you would hit the Ice wall?

No cheating.

If I lived on a Flat Earth, would I not be capable of traveling in a straight line?

Obviously. Just so long as you were not following a compass heading of east or west.

What you're doing to using semantics to explain away the weakness of your arguement. Since on a Flat Earth, the directions "East" and "West" are curves along the disc, then in order to follow the same course I drew in the RE map you must go along a curve. But this is only becasue of your understanding of East and West as curves. In real life if we lived on a flat Earth we should still be able to depart from South America in a SW direction and collide with the Ice wall as in the picture.

Of course you would. Just so long as you were following a compass heading of south-west. Without, as your illustration showed, ever changing your course to north-east.

You know, forget about East and West for the moment. Just tell me if you can follow the course in the FE pic and hit the Ice wall. I assume you can?

Obviously. However, this fact is entirely irrelevant, as the course you plotted on the FE map is completely different from the one you plotted on the RE map. As my illustration showed.

Now, if we lived on a Round Earth, you could follow the same course and end up where I said you would?

Of course. But not without changing your compass heading at some point. (starting to see a trend here?)

Now, explain how in real life you can do this, but on a flat earth you would hit the Ice wall?

You would not hit the ice wall in the FE model. As my illustration showed, plotting a course south-west, then changing your heading to north-west would take you toward Australia. The fact that this course is curved on the FE is not relevant because following it requires the use of a compass.

Look at the two images, Monkey.



Notice how in the RE image you made, the path charted would eventually go from south-west to north-west?

Now notice that in the FE map, the path you plotted only goes south-west?

All you did was plot two different routes for each image. If you take the RE route and change it to only run south-west it will hit the "ice wall" as well.

Of course you would. Just so long as you were following a compass heading of south-east. Without, as your illustration showed, ever changing your course to north-east

No, the course in my illustration only changes compass heading becasue of the curvature of the Earth. As you pass the South Pole, Sw becomes NE. The line I drew is completely straight.

(plus 1 for me)

Obviously. However, this fact is entirely irrelevant, as the course you plotted on the FE map is completely different from the one you plotted on the RE map. As my illustration showed.

No, the course I drew on both maps is exactly the same, departing from South America in the exact same angle. One of them hits the Ice wall and the other one doesn't.

(plus another for me)

Of course. But not without changing your compass heading at some point. (starting to see a trend here?)

You're doing it again, using semantics to cover up a weak arguement. It's called "Begging the question," when you focus on something that doesn't matter to make it look like you're right. Compass heading doesn't matter, they were only labels to describe the chart course verbally. You did however admit that if we lived on a round Earth my course is feasible. Which means:  

(plus one for me!)

You would not hit the ice wall in the FE model. As my illustration showed, plotting a course south-west, then changing your heading to north-west would take you toward Australia. The fact that this course is curved on the FE is not relevant because following it requires the use of a compass.

Once again, begging the question. Since East and West are curved lines on a Flat Earth, then according to you the course must be curved. Yet you also admit a course that is a straight line is possible on a Flat Earth. Now Draw a couse, that does not curve, departing from South America and ending up SE of Austrillia on a Flat Earth.

Notice how in the RE image you made, the path charted would eventually go from south-west to north-west?

Now notice that in the FE map, the path you plotted only goes south-west?

All you did was plot two different routes for each image. If you take the RE route and change it to only run south-west it will hit the "ice wall" as well.

No, the courses I drew are both exactly the same. Once again, the course on the RE only changes heading from SW to NE because of the curvature of the Earth, not becasue the actual course changes direction. The course itself is a straight line. Like I said, forget about the cardinal directions, simply draw a straight line heading in the same way as the one I drew on the RE map does that does not hit the Ice wall and instead ends up in the area South East of Australlia.



On the Flat Earth map, which direction is the course heading from out of South America? Looks like South West to me.

On the Round Earth map, which direction is it heading from out of South America? Looks like South West to me there also. It doesn't "become" Noth west until it passes the South Pole, and when it does so it does not change direction, only heading.

(plus another one for me)

Tell me, Monkey, how exactly can you tell when your course on the RE map has changed from south to north-west?

Monkey, you charted a course in two different directions and claim they are the same.  Please tell me you are really not this dense.

Tell me, Monkey, how exactly can you tell when your course on the RE map has changed from south to north-west?

To answer this, I will quote myself:

It doesn't "become" Noth west until it passes the South Pole, and when it does so it does not change direction, only heading.

What part of that exactly do you not understand?

Monkey, you charted a course in two different directions and claim they are the same. Please tell me you are really not this dense.

Let's see, I'm looking at the two maps, which are on this very page. Both of them are the exact same angle orignating at the exact same place. Tell me how, or better yet, draw little pointers on the maps and show me how, exactly, the two courses are different.

I know what the engeneer means, if u follow the compass, u will end up at the same place, either in RE or FE, but i believe we were talking about a very expirienced captain, and he knows hes going in a straight line, and hes not turning. Cuz i think the captain would notice if the ship suddenly had to be turned into another direction, but he has to follow one straight line.

Cuz i think the captain would notice if the ship suddenly had to be turned into another direction, but he has to follow one straight line.

You have obviously never tried to pilot a boat or a plane.

OK, the assertion that once passing the South Pole you change direction is FALSE.

You change direction BEFORE that. Notice how you are going Southwest, then West, then Northwest.

Therefore, anything you said about changing direction only once is false. In fact, you are continuously changing direction.
SW -> WSW -> W -> WNW -> NW
Therefore, it only makes sense that we change direction.

The lack of "verifiable evidence" posted by the FE's makes one wonder...


A Change of heading != a change of direction

Arguing with a flat earther is like banging your head up a brick wall. Just give up while you still have your sanity.

OK, the assertion that once passing the South Pole you change direction is FALSE.

You change direction BEFORE that. Notice how you are going Southwest, then West, then Northwest.

Therefore, anything you said about changing direction only once is false. In fact, you are continuously changing direction.
SW -> WSW -> W -> WNW -> NW
Therefore, it only makes sense that we change direction.

On the RE map, is the course I drew a straight line? Yes or no? Where exactly does it "curve?" Show me where becasue I don't see it.

Also, allow me to quote myself again, because apparently you didn't read this part:

You know, forget about East and West for the moment. Just tell me if you can follow the course in the FE pic and hit the Ice wall. I assume you can?

Now, if we lived on a Round Earth, you could follow the same course and end up where I said you would?

Now, explain how in real life you can do this, but on a flat earth you would hit the Ice wall?

The fact nobody's ever hit or even seen this ice wall might say something about its existence.

Quote from: "Sanirius"

Cuz i think the captain would notice if the ship suddenly had to be turned into another direction, but he has to follow one straight line.

You have obviously never tried to pilot a boat or a plane.

right.... so u have to keep turning to keep it going west or east.... hmm... BULLSHIT

Quote from: "TheEngineer"

Quote from: "Sanirius"

Cuz i think the captain would notice if the ship suddenly had to be turned into another direction, but he has to follow one straight line.

You have obviously never tried to pilot a boat or a plane.

right.... so u have to keep turning to keep it going west or east.... hmm... BULLSHIT

In the southern hemidisk the captain would be following his navigational equipment, calibrated to magnetic north. When the captain heads “west” he will be traveling in a slight arc around the disk. This arc is so slight that the captain does not notice that he is turning. Remember, boats and aircrafts are making constant adjustments to their headings to stay on course.

Arguing with a flat earther is like banging your head up a brick wall. Just give up while you still have your sanity.

But I'm having so much fun here  8-)

I am still waiting to receive some facts that can be scientifically verified.  The FE'er fade in and out of "oh, this is just a theory" and "this is a hardcore fact, as our unverifiable claims prove"

As I have said, I want scientific proof of the claims that the FE'ers are making.  If it's just a theory, then say it's just a theory, but several times this theory has been called fact, and I have yet to see any verifiable facts.

Quote from: "dantheman40k"

Arguing with a flat earther is like banging your head up a brick wall. Just give up while you still have your sanity.

But I'm having so much fun here  8-)

I am still waiting to receive some facts that can be scientifically verified.  The FE'er fade in and out of "oh, this is just a theory" and "this is a hardcore fact, as our unverifiable claims prove"

As I have said, I want scientific proof of the claims that the FE'ers are making.  If it's just a theory, then say it's just a theory, but several times this theory has been called fact, and I have yet to see any verifiable facts.

The Flat Earth Society has existed since the 1800's. If you had bothered to do a little research you'd have found that countless experiments have demonstrated the validity of FE.

For a primer, read the book "Earth not a Globe" by Samuel Birley Rowbotham.  http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/index.htm

Okay, since you people keep harping on the whole rediculous notion that a ship must curve when following a straight line, I've decided to create another illustration here for you:



Now you can't say I drew two different courses, becasue they are exactly the same. You cannot say the course changes direction, because they do not. Now, explain why one hits the Ice wall when the other doesn't, and why this course is possible in real life exactly as I have drawn it.

Okay, since you people keep harping on the whole rediculous notion that a ship must curve when following a straight line, I've decided to create another illustration here for you:



Now you can't say I drew two different courses, becasue they are exactly the same. You cannot say the course changes direction, because they do not. Now, explain why one hits the Ice wall when the other doesn't, and why this course is possible in real life exactly as I have drawn it.

The fallacy in your argument is assuming that boat captains travel in straight lines. They are constantly making adjustments to their vessels based on gps and compasses, calibrated by magnetic north. What the captain would think is a straight line west would actually be a slight arc.

If the captain were to follow the straight line proposed in your diagram he would of course fall off the edge of the earth.

has existed since the 1800's. If you had bothered to do a little research you'd have found that countless experiments have demonstrated the validity of FE.

Yes, let's all take a field trip back to the 1800's so we can be enlightened by their wisdom and maybe get a side of measles, mumps, or the black plague.  Give me current proof, you idiot.  

The 1800's did not have the technology that we have today, so their theories don't count because they have been replaced by scientific fact.  One of the main "proofs" that you claim is that NASA is a government conspiracy.   I live near edwards air force base and have seen the shuttle take off AND land from there.   It is just not possible for the government to pull off a spoof like that.  There is the media not to mention thousands of independent  photographers taking pictures and filming when the shuttle is launched.   That is just logistically impossible...no one could pull that off.  NO ONE.  It is an absolute FACT that we send people into space often and was even done by a civilian to win the X-Prize.   Based on that fact, everything you say is false until you provide verifiable facts to the contrary.

The fallacy in your argument is assuming that boat captains travel in straight lines. They are constantly making adjustments to their vessels based on gps and compasses, calibrated by magnetic north. What the captain would think is a straight line west would actually be a slight arc.

 
Is an experienced boat captain capable of piloting a boat in a straight line, like I have in the drawing? I would assume he is.

Is an experienced ship captain capable of telling when his ship is traveling in a curve, based on whatever equipment he has (compass, sextant, whatever?) Yes or No?

If the captain were to follow the straight line proposed in your diagram he would of course fall off the edge of the earth

Glad to see you admit they would hit the stupid Ice wall. Now explain to me why when this course is followed in real life as it often is with shipping between Austrillia and South America, that no one really hits the Ice Wall.

being a captain myself i would have to point out that whenever i sail a boat, to make sure i keep in a straight line, i always check behind me to check if the boats tailstream imprint on the sea is straight.  if i see it curve i make the necessary adjustments to my bearings and continue on a straight sail.  

it is also just good common sense to check behind you when on a boat incase any gays try to slip you a wet willy.

EDIT: what im tryin to get at is that in all my days of sailing i've never seen the ice wall and i only sail in straight lines.

Quote from: "Tom Bishop"

has existed since the 1800's. If you had bothered to do a little research you'd have found that countless experiments have demonstrated the validity of FE.

Yes, let's all take a field trip back to the 1800's so we can be enlightened by their wisdom and maybe get a side of measles, mumps, or the black plague.  Give me current proof, you idiot.  

The 1800's did not have the technology that we have today, so their theories don't count because they have been replaced by scientific fact.  One of the main "proofs" that you claim is that NASA is a government conspiracy.   I live near edwards air force base and have seen the shuttle take off AND land from there.   It is just not possible for the government to pull off a spoof like that.  There is the media not to mention thousands of independent  photographers taking pictures and filming when the shuttle is launched.   That is just logistically impossible...no one could pull that off.  NO ONE.  It is an absolute FACT that we send people into space often and was even done by a civilian to win the X-Prize.   Based on that fact, everything you say is false until you provide verifiable facts to the contrary.

I don’t see how the launch of an high altitude aeroplane proves that it reached orbit. Thousands of aeroplanes are launched every day. Since the government makes the money, they can launch as many aeroplanes as they want.

FE has been proven time and time again. Just take a look at its vast literature. For instance see William Carpenter's "One hundred proofs that the earth is not a globe."

Glad to see you admit they would hit the stupid Ice wall. Now explain to me why when this course is followed in real life as it often is with shipping between Austrillia and South America, that no one really hits the Ice Wall.

When shipping between Australia and South America the boat captains follow their navigational equipment like dogs to the whistle. They never sail in absolute straight lines. They believe that they are traversing the underside of the globe. Understandably, it’s an easy mistake to make considering it’s what they’ve been told all their life.

They never sail in absolute straight lines.

Really? That's not what Captain Bubblegum says in his post which is exactly above yours. If he really is a Ship captain then I think he has some issue with your statement.

You're begging the question btw.