What is common to both Flat and Globe model?

  • 148 Replies
  • 16441 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #90 on: July 02, 2019, 03:07:23 AM »
Nope. They are same.
Stop lying.
It wont help you.
If you want to assert they are the same, go make a map with the distances provided. You will find it is impossible.

So go do it.
Show a map, with those 4 cities, with the distances between each pair clearly shown.
See if those distances match a RE.
Note: Just having some match doesn't count.

Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #91 on: July 02, 2019, 03:07:58 AM »
Again, again and again, some of these cities aren't in my map.
Again and again, YOUR MAP DOESN'T MATTER!
It is physically impossible to place these locations on a flat map and have the same distances as for a RE.

As such, FE and RE doesn't agree, even for Europe.

Nope. They are same. Because the globularist fake map is flat in Europe. All distances are flat. For example, if you draw a rectangle has four cities at each corners, so you'll find the distance of real hypotenuse as globularist hypotenuse. I made it somewhere here. If you want, so I can do it again. But if I do it so you should accept the earth's being flat then. So, give up childish appeals, grow up and accept the earth's being flat and you were defending a BS with fake, childish, null arguments.
WGS-84 model proves you wrong.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #92 on: July 02, 2019, 03:18:53 AM »
Again, again and again, some of these cities aren't in my map.
Again and again, YOUR MAP DOESN'T MATTER!
It is physically impossible to place these locations on a flat map and have the same distances as for a RE.

As such, FE and RE doesn't agree, even for Europe.

Nope. They are same. Because the globularist fake map is flat in Europe. All distances are flat. For example, if you draw a rectangle has four cities at each corners, so you'll find the distance of real hypotenuse as globularist hypotenuse. I made it somewhere here. If you want, so I can do it again. But if I do it so you should accept the earth's being flat then. So, give up childish appeals, grow up and accept the earth's being flat and you were defending a BS with fake, childish, null arguments.
WGS-84 model proves you wrong.

A model name does not magically proves anything, just proves how you are ignorant hope success with a name. Grow up and learn real science.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #93 on: July 02, 2019, 03:20:01 AM »
Nope. They are same.
Stop lying.
It wont help you.
If you want to assert they are the same, go make a map with the distances provided. You will find it is impossible.

So go do it.
Show a map, with those 4 cities, with the distances between each pair clearly shown.
See if those distances match a RE.
Note: Just having some match doesn't count.

Nope. I am not lying and it would helps me. Mark cities on my map where do you wonder the distance, or otherwise you are just blabbing like everytime you do.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #94 on: July 02, 2019, 03:29:01 AM »
Nope. I am not lying
You are lying.
Distances on a RE map are fundamentally incompatible with a FE.
Sure, you can get some distances correct, but not all. And that even applies across Europe.

I have shown clearly that with those 4 cities, you CANNOT place them on a flat map and get the distances the same as for RE.
If you wish to disagree, take those 4 cities, and those 6 distances and make a flat map with them.

I don't give a damn about your useless map. It has no bearing on this discussion, other than as the fact that you have already shown that the distances aren't correct.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #95 on: July 02, 2019, 05:30:46 AM »
WGS-84 model proves you wrong.
A model name does not magically proves anything, just proves how you are ignorant hope success with a name. Grow up and learn real science.
[/quote]
You don't even know what WGS-84 means so stop being silly and post something sensible and YOU don't seem to know and " real science"!

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #96 on: July 02, 2019, 06:01:34 AM »
Shut up and ask cities you claim do not overlap in my map. Otherwise you have agreed the maps in Europa is same, google maps is a deception and the earth is flat.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

sokarul

  • 19301
  • Extra Racist
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #97 on: July 02, 2019, 06:13:33 AM »
And I thought it was bad that denver was north of London. He has all of Europe wrong.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #98 on: July 02, 2019, 06:14:49 AM »
And I thought it was bad that denver was north of London. He has all of Europe wrong.

Denver and London is on same parallel. But since Denver is in America so google maps does not overlap with flat map, but it is not in the issue. Grow up and chose cities in Europe or you ignorant angry globularists have agreed you are just manipulating the issue.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

sokarul

  • 19301
  • Extra Racist
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #99 on: July 02, 2019, 06:17:06 AM »
They are around 13 degrees apart. Not even close to level.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #100 on: July 02, 2019, 06:23:59 AM »
They are around 13 degrees apart. Not even close to level.

But they have close annual yearly temperature.





11 degrees vs 12 degrees. even london is more north, it is one degree warmer than denver. Whatever statistics you look at, denver and london are on the same parallel. google maps is just a BS.

get it sokarul? They are similar cities, can't be 13 degrees paralel difference. If it would so London had to more and more colder than Denver according to annual yeraly temperature. But they are same, or close.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

sokarul

  • 19301
  • Extra Racist
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #101 on: July 02, 2019, 06:26:04 AM »
Lrn to altitude.

Now compare sun rise and sun set times.

Well that was easy.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #102 on: July 02, 2019, 06:29:51 AM »
Lrn to altitude.

Now compare sun rise and sun set times.

Well that was easy.

Sun rise and sun set times include wrong datas depend on not measurement but estimations. I've many times said this. Temperature statistics depend on some recorded data either from an airport or an station, but sun rise and set times depend on estimation. I've told that the sun rising time on theoric is wrong so much so that it almost claims midnight as morning in Istanbul nowadays. Stop childish objections.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #103 on: July 02, 2019, 06:49:21 AM »
but sun rise and set times depend on estimation.
No, they require people to observe them.  No estimation required.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #104 on: July 02, 2019, 06:51:31 AM »
but sun rise and set times depend on estimation.
No, they require people to observe them.  No estimation required.
Nope. I have observed, still observing it every morning, it is wrong. In the midnight web sites say its being sun rising time. It is no relevance with observation here. Stop to manipulation and support your crime partners. You are here because they have lost and you are here to manipulation. So I have won this. Your partners have lost, hence you are here to support them, right? Since rabinoz and jackblack are insuffucient to reply me so you have decided to help them. How pathetic help try.  :)
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #105 on: July 02, 2019, 07:27:03 AM »
Lrn to altitude.

Now compare sun rise and sun set times.

Well that was easy.

Sun rise and sun set times include wrong datas depend on not measurement but estimations. I've many times said this. Temperature statistics depend on some recorded data either from an airport or an station, but sun rise and set times depend on estimation. I've told that the sun rising time on theoric is wrong so much so that it almost claims midnight as morning in Istanbul nowadays. Stop childish objections.

Sun near and sun far.

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #106 on: July 02, 2019, 09:42:52 AM »
It does not make the Europe map different. because the globularist map in center is completely wrong. They are already closer to center of the earth than shown in globularist hoax. This is not relevant with it.

In short, your objection is null because the center of the earth isn't in Europe.

Polaris was selected to be Polaris for the one and the only reason.
North Pole is directly under it.


If North Pole was somewhere else, then some other star would be selected to be polaris.
In that case North pole would still be directly under that other polaris.

Right now it is not.

By the way, during Equinoxes the Sun is circulating around North Pole, not around some other point.
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #107 on: July 02, 2019, 12:59:56 PM »
It does not make the Europe map different. because the globularist map in center is completely wrong. They are already closer to center of the earth than shown in globularist hoax. This is not relevant with it.

In short, your objection is null because the center of the earth isn't in Europe.

Polaris was selected to be Polaris for the one and the only reason.
North Pole is directly under it.


If North Pole was somewhere else, then some other star would be selected to be polaris.
In that case North pole would still be directly under that other polaris.

Right now it is not.

By the way, during Equinoxes the Sun is circulating around North Pole, not around some other point.

We are not talking about reliablity of North Pole. Your map isn't centering the Polaris. because globe earther hoax has something is known as magnetic declination. So you have three pole. Magnetic pole, geographical pole, geomagnetic pole. Inother say, you are becoming comics when you talk about Polaris's being pole. Flat earth maps including mine gets Polaris/magnetic center as center. But your map isn't taking neither Polaris nor magnetic pole as center. And this creates difference. Your pole is a random point randomly selected as a top of your map. It is clear that pole of flat earth map is real pole and yours nothing but BS.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #108 on: July 02, 2019, 03:02:10 PM »
Shut up and ask cities you claim do not overlap in my map.
NO!
Shut up and provide an image showing the provided locations on a flat map.
This is not an objection to your specific pile of garbage that you call a map.
This is an objection to FE in general.
It is impossible for the distances to match.

Unless you can provide a flat map showing all 6 distances to be the same, I will conclude that FE and RE does not agree on distances, even for Europe.

Again, this clearly shows it cannot work:



You can get 5 of the 6 distances correct.
But when you try to put in the 6th, it fails.

If you wish to assert that you can have the same distance for a FE and RE for Europe, you need to address this.
Stop just hiding behind your crappy map.

But if you really need 4 from your crappy map:
Lisbon, London, Moscow and Aleppo.
Make sure you provide distances accurate to 1 km.
If you can't, your map is useless for a comparison and what you would really be saying is that FE distances have so much error that they can agree with a wide variety of shapes.

But they have close annual yearly temperature.
Who cares?
Latitude isn't the only factor influencing weather.
As such, using it is quite useless.
Go and actually measure the latitude.
A much more valid test is how long the sun is up, just like we did before and you had to run away from.

So using time and date, lets look at the December solstice and June solstice.
Remember, during the June solstice, the further north you are the longer the day. During the December solstice the further south you are the longer the day.
So for the June solstice we have Denver, with a day length of 14:59:14, compared to London's 16:38:20.
That sure makes it seem like London is further north, but just to check, what about the December solstice?
Well now we have 9:21:16 for Denver compared to 7:49:44 for London.
Yep, London is definitely north of Denver.
No doubt about it.

If your map shows otherwise, it is wrong.

Sun rise and sun set times include wrong datas
So what you are saying is that you reject the data which shows you are wrong while happily accepting data with the same amount of validity just because you can pretend it shows you are right.

it almost claims midnight as morning in Istanbul nowadays. Stop childish objections.
You have repeatedly asserted that, but been unable to back it up with any evidence.

Weather is useless for accurately determining latitude, even for relative latitude when close. Sunrise and Sunset times are not.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2019, 03:11:06 PM by JackBlack »

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #109 on: July 02, 2019, 08:22:43 PM »
It does not make the Europe map different. because the globularist map in center is completely wrong. They are already closer to center of the earth than shown in globularist hoax. This is not relevant with it.

In short, your objection is null because the center of the earth isn't in Europe.

Polaris was selected to be Polaris for the one and the only reason.
North Pole is directly under it.


If North Pole was somewhere else, then some other star would be selected to be polaris.
In that case North pole would still be directly under that other polaris.

Right now it is not.

By the way, during Equinoxes the Sun is circulating around North Pole, not around some other point.

We are not talking about reliablity of North Pole. Your map isn't centering the Polaris. because globe earther hoax has something is known as magnetic declination. So you have three pole. Magnetic pole, geographical pole, geomagnetic pole. Inother say, you are becoming comics when you talk about Polaris's being pole. Flat earth maps including mine gets Polaris/magnetic center as center. But your map isn't taking neither Polaris nor magnetic pole as center. And this creates difference. Your pole is a random point randomly selected as a top of your map. It is clear that pole of flat earth map is real pole and yours nothing but BS.

Three poles?

North Pole is one.
South Pole is two.
North Magnetic Pole is three.
South Magnetic Pole is four.
...

Geographic maps use geographic poles as reference.
Magnetic poles are marked as any other point of interest.

Polaris is above geographic pole. :)
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #110 on: July 03, 2019, 12:41:23 AM »
It does not make the Europe map different. because the globularist map in center is completely wrong. They are already closer to center of the earth than shown in globularist hoax. This is not relevant with it.

In short, your objection is null because the center of the earth isn't in Europe.

Polaris was selected to be Polaris for the one and the only reason.
North Pole is directly under it.


If North Pole was somewhere else, then some other star would be selected to be polaris.
In that case North pole would still be directly under that other polaris.

Right now it is not.

By the way, during Equinoxes the Sun is circulating around North Pole, not around some other point.

We are not talking about reliablity of North Pole. Your map isn't centering the Polaris. because globe earther hoax has something is known as magnetic declination. So you have three pole. Magnetic pole, geographical pole, geomagnetic pole. Inother say, you are becoming comics when you talk about Polaris's being pole. Flat earth maps including mine gets Polaris/magnetic center as center. But your map isn't taking neither Polaris nor magnetic pole as center. And this creates difference. Your pole is a random point randomly selected as a top of your map. It is clear that pole of flat earth map is real pole and yours nothing but BS.

Three poles?

North Pole is one.
South Pole is two.
North Magnetic Pole is three.
South Magnetic Pole is four.
...

Geographic maps use geographic poles as reference.
Magnetic poles are marked as any other point of interest.

Polaris is above geographic pole. :)

Nope. You are wrong. Polaris is above magnetic pole, because whenever you use compass shows polaris.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #111 on: July 03, 2019, 12:51:18 AM »
Nope. You are wrong. Polaris is above magnetic pole, because whenever you use compass shows polaris.
No it isn't.
In some places it will coincidentally be there.
But in most places, Polaris is not in the direction of magnetic north.
In half the world, Polaris isn't even visible.

Polaris is close to being above the geographic pole.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #112 on: July 03, 2019, 12:52:22 AM »
Nope. You are wrong. Polaris is above magnetic pole, because whenever you use compass shows polaris.
No it isn't.
In some places it will coincidentally be there.
Yes it is. Whenever I use compass shows polaris. You claim otherwise, so prove it is not.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #113 on: July 03, 2019, 12:55:42 AM »
You claim otherwise, so prove it is not.
Again, not how the burden of proof works.
You want to claim that Polaris is above the magnetic north pole (which by the way is not necessarily in the direction of your compass pointing north). The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.
You want to claim that Polaris is in the direction that a compass points, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.

I don't see Polaris at all where I am.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #114 on: July 03, 2019, 01:00:28 AM »
You claim otherwise, so prove it is not.
Again, not how the burden of proof works.
You want to claim that Polaris is above the magnetic north pole (which by the way is not necessarily in the direction of your compass pointing north). The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.
You want to claim that Polaris is in the direction that a compass points, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.

I don't see Polaris at all where I am.

If you don't see Polaris at all so don't talk about it depends on imagination and estimation. Everybody in northern hemiplane knows that compass always show polaris. Now, grow up and don't talk something you have no idea. You do not have to interfene every issue you need to talk. This is not chattering forum. Grow up.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."


Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #115 on: July 03, 2019, 01:07:18 AM »
Sunrise, sunset,moonrise and moonset times are not estimates as someone on this thread has claimed. All such daily occurrences have been accurately calculated and can be confirmed by simple observations. The photographers ephemeris, used by landscape photographers around the globe for example, uses this data to show graphically all such daily phenomena for any point on the globe.

https://app.photoephemeris.com/?ll=16.768800,-3.007300&dt=20190703075200%2B0000

I find using aircraft flight times to produces a map is just laughable. Not only do flight times vary wildly due to weather, airport congestion and other random unknown factors but all flight routes bar none use satellite navigation systems in the first instance. In addition there is no such thing as a flat earth map nor will there ever be one, its simply impossible. Anyone who claims to have produced one is simply delusional.



Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #116 on: July 03, 2019, 01:15:21 AM »
You claim otherwise, so prove it is not.
Again, not how the burden of proof works.
You want to claim that Polaris is above the magnetic north pole (which by the way is not necessarily in the direction of your compass pointing north). The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.
You want to claim that Polaris is in the direction that a compass points, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that.

I don't see Polaris at all where I am.

If you don't see Polaris at all so don't talk about it depends on imagination and estimation. Everybody in northern hemiplane knows that compass always show polaris. Now, grow up and don't talk something you have no idea. You do not have to interfene every issue you need to talk. This is not chattering forum. Grow up.

To be perfectly accurate, Polaris can only be viewed by an observer in the northern hemisphere. If you were standing on a point on the equator, Polaris would be in line with the horizon. If you were in the Southern Hemisphere, say in Australia, Polaris would not be visible. That is an undeniable fact.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #117 on: July 03, 2019, 01:35:49 AM »
Everybody in northern hemiplane knows that compass always show polaris.
NO!
At present the Magnetic North Pole is located at 175.346E 86.448N and so is some distance from the Geographic North Pole.
The magnetic declination in Istanbul, Turkey is +5.60 and so your magnetic compass would point about 5.60 east of where Polaris is over!

*

JackBlack

  • 20587
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #118 on: July 03, 2019, 01:54:38 AM »
Everybody in northern hemiplane knows that compass always show polaris.
And that is another baseless claim of yours.
Got anything to back it up?
Perhaps even a simple time-lapse photo showing the northern sky and a compass?

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25329
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: What is common to both Flat and Globe model?
« Reply #119 on: July 03, 2019, 04:00:45 AM »
Everybody in northern hemiplane knows that compass always show polaris.
NO!
At present the Magnetic North Pole is located at 175.346E 86.448N and so is some distance from the Geographic North Pole.
The magnetic declination in Istanbul, Turkey is +5.60 and so your magnetic compass would point about 5.60 east of where Polaris is over!

You are talking about theoric but I am talking about practical. Your magnetic declination is nothing but hoax. Hence my compass always shows the Polaris, other than your imagination. Your imaginatin isn't an evidence. Your globularist lies can not affect me. Grow up, and come to Turkey and see the magnetic declination is a lie but there is only one magnetic center and its place is constant. Magnetic declination means your so called globularist map is located 5 degrees mistaken. That's all.

They are deceiving you by this way. Inother say you are deceiving Australians by this way. Where compass shows north it is real north, magnetic declination is a lie, you know. Stop to do dishonesty and admit the truth.
They hate me cause they can't control me.

"The greatest sacrifice is not what you do for others, but what you give up to do for yourself."