Flight due south over south pole

  • 56 Replies
  • 12161 Views
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #30 on: October 31, 2019, 01:43:48 PM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.
If that is your understanding know wonder you are lost.
Know wonder.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #31 on: October 31, 2019, 01:52:27 PM »
For once, I have to agree with John Davis.

The general definition (not just mathematical) of a straight line is a line that has no curvature; the shortest distance between two points.

You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong.
Yes, it is "fine in context" in context.

A straight line in the non-Euclidean 2-D space of a spherical surface is otherwise known as a Great Circle.

It probably should have called a geodesic but John Davis and others always call them straight lines.

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #32 on: November 01, 2019, 12:45:01 AM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.

Traveling in straight line means following the great circle.
Maintaining altitude means keeping the vertical distance from the datum.

Strictly mathematical representation of straight line is something else.

For once, I have to agree with John Davis.

The general definition (not just mathematical) of a straight line is a line that has no curvature; the shortest distance between two points.

You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong.

You may agree all you want, "traveling in straight line" means making no left or right turns.
How many of "me and the others" would use the "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" as a "coloquial" term?
Just a few?
Or virtually everyone?

If you "traveled in straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" I don't believe anyone
would think of you diving through the ocean and the Earth's crust.
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.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #33 on: November 01, 2019, 04:15:20 AM »
Circumnavigation of the South Pole has been achieved, and that is passing over the south pole continuing out the other side, you can google search and find a number of flights.
Truth and reality, does not care, what website it is on.
Flat Earth, is a false reality.
To believe in such, reality is the conspiracy.
Not one verified flight has ever flown directly over the South Pole.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #34 on: November 01, 2019, 05:19:23 AM »
Circumnavigation of the South Pole has been achieved, and that is passing over the south pole continuing out the other side, you can google search and find a number of flights.
Truth and reality, does not care, what website it is on.
Flat Earth, is a false reality.
To believe in such, reality is the conspiracy.
Not one verified flight has ever flown directly over the South Pole.
Really? On what basis do you make a claim like "Not one verified flight has ever flown directly over the South Pole"? Do have any evidence for such a claim.

I would claim that there have been numerous flights across the South Pole with some landing at the Pole but record attempts overflying it.
Would the "FAI GENERAL AVIATION COMMISSION (GAC)" hand out GAC CIRCUMNAVIGATION OVER THE POLES DIPLOMAs to these people if they had not flown "verified flights . . .  directly over the South Pole"?
Quote from: FAI GENERAL AVIATION COMMISSION (GAC)

First Name  Family Name         Year

Joshua D        Marvil                2017
Wendell J.      Long                 2017
Sebastian       Diaz-Peña          2019
Patricio          Diaz-Quiroga     2019
Dierk             Reuter               2019
Sebastian      Diaz-Santelices   2019

And the latest:
Quote from: Ulrich Beinert
“One More Orbit” breaks Pole to Pole Circumnavigation Speed Record, 2019-07-11
With “One More Orbit”, the pole to pole world circumnavigation speed record for any aircraft has just been broken by an impressive margin! In 46 hours, 39 minutes and 38 seconds, Hamish Harding, chairman of Action Aviation and Gulfstream G650 captain, supported by NASA astronaut Terry Virts and an amazing multinational team in the air and on the ground, managed to beat the previous record, set in 2008 by a Global Express, in a Gulfstream G650ER by 3 hours and 19 minutes! Over a distance of 25,000 miles (40,000 km), the team averaged a speed of 534.97 mph (860.95 km/h) including the refuel stops.

To qualify as an official FAI record, the flight needed to fulfil several criteria. Beginning at a point X (in this case, the Shuttle Landing Facility at Kennedy Space Center in Florida), it was to fly to one of the Earth’s poles, then to the other pole and back to point X. In addition, the equator crossings were required to be separated by 120…180 degrees of latitude and neither the flight crew nor the route were allowed to be changed once the route was declared to the record authorities.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
From the island in the Indian Ocean, the team began the toughest leg from the flight planning perspective: With its very long distance, no diversion possibilities over Antarctica and marginal weather in Chile, it required perfect planning and high vigilance. The jet flew due south, soon seeing the last of the Sun for the next 20 hours as it passed through the polar night. At 75°S latitude, the crew crossed the decision point changing the emergency diversion plan from a direct return to Port Elizabeth (South Africa) to an immediate right turn, abandoning the polar crossing and proceeding directly to a Chilean diversion airfield. Fortunately, all systems continued to operate normally, allowing the flight to continue as planned.
Flying right at the edge of the G650’s environmental envelope, the crew needed to descend prior to reaching the south pole to maintain a static air temperature not lower than -80°C. Meanwhile, thanks to the G650’s heated fuel return system, the fuel in the tanks stayed at a comfortable -27°C, well above the freezing point of -40°C for Jet A and -47°C for Jet A1. At 82°S latitude, magnetic headings were lost as expected, the flight continuing with the G650’s advanced avionics on true headings. Crossing the south pole at 20:40 GMT on July 10th, the team probably also set the new north to south pole world speed record!

The FAI were satisfied that their flight path crossed both poles and that their equator crossings were "separated by 120…180 degrees of latitude".

But the are plenty more such polar circumnavigations, including:
Quote from: Guiness Book of Records
First Circumnavigation via both Poles by Aircraft, Guiness Book of Records
Captain Elgen M. Long achieved the first circum-polar flight in a twin-engined Piper PA-31 Navajo from 5 November to 3 December 1971. He covered 62,597 km (38,896 miles) in 215 flying hours.
More details in The 2004 'Crystal Eagle' Award Winner, Elgen M. Long.

Here are Dick Smith's flight paths in Antarctica during his trans-polar circumnavigation of the Globe (He did a lot of "visiting"):

From "Our Fantastic Planet" by Dick Smith, page 20
With reference to that flight, this might be interesting: Flat earth claims on Dick’s vertical pole-to-pole flight 2018.

That whole book, "Our Fantastic Planet", describes Dick Smith's pole-to-pole flight 2018.

And the site, Flatearth.ws: Polar Circumnavigation lists a number more polar circumnavigations, with many by air.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2019, 05:35:41 AM »
Not one verified flight has ever flown directly over the South Pole.
Define directly.
Do you mean with a picometer?

Or do you mean in a more general sense, where you typically wouldn't use the word directly, as the poster didn't, where you just get quite close, say within 10 km of the south pole?

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2019, 07:27:41 AM »
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Yeah, no kidding. You know perfectly well what he meant, but since he was not totally precise, you troll the conversation off course.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #37 on: November 01, 2019, 10:18:28 AM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.

Traveling in straight line means following the great circle.
Maintaining altitude means keeping the vertical distance from the datum.

Strictly mathematical representation of straight line is something else.

For once, I have to agree with John Davis.

The general definition (not just mathematical) of a straight line is a line that has no curvature; the shortest distance between two points.

You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong.

You may agree all you want, "traveling in straight line" means making no left or right turns.
How many of "me and the others" would use the "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" as a "coloquial" term?
Just a few?
Or virtually everyone?

If you "traveled in straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" I don't believe anyone
would think of you diving through the ocean and the Earth's crust.

I don't know of anyone who uses "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska".

You may use it in the context of air travel, but as I said "You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong."

Neutrinos have no problem with it.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #38 on: November 01, 2019, 11:57:43 AM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.

Traveling in straight line means following the great circle.
Maintaining altitude means keeping the vertical distance from the datum.

Strictly mathematical representation of straight line is something else.

For once, I have to agree with John Davis.

The general definition (not just mathematical) of a straight line is a line that has no curvature; the shortest distance between two points.

You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong.

You may agree all you want, "traveling in straight line" means making no left or right turns.
How many of "me and the others" would use the "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" as a "coloquial" term?
Just a few?
Or virtually everyone?

If you "traveled in straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" I don't believe anyone
would think of you diving through the ocean and the Earth's crust.

I don't know of anyone who uses "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska".

You may use it in the context of air travel, but as I said "You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong."

Neutrinos have no problem with it.
A bit of nitpicking, I see: a straight line being the shortest distance between two points; being on a globe that is a great circle,a line across the surface of the globe.
How else can I say?
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #39 on: November 01, 2019, 03:37:39 PM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.

Traveling in straight line means following the great circle.
Maintaining altitude means keeping the vertical distance from the datum.

Strictly mathematical representation of straight line is something else.

For once, I have to agree with John Davis.

The general definition (not just mathematical) of a straight line is a line that has no curvature; the shortest distance between two points.

You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong.

You may agree all you want, "traveling in straight line" means making no left or right turns.
How many of "me and the others" would use the "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" as a "coloquial" term?
Just a few?
Or virtually everyone?

If you "traveled in straight line from Hawaii to Alaska" I don't believe anyone
would think of you diving through the ocean and the Earth's crust.

I don't know of anyone who uses "traveling in a straight line from Hawaii to Alaska".

You may use it in the context of air travel, but as I said "You (and others) may colloquially use the term to refer to arcs on a great circle, and that may be fine in context, but universally declaring that traveling in a straight line "means" that is simply wrong."

Neutrinos have no problem with it.

Neutrinos don't travel on private yachts, fishing boats, whaling ships, charter flights, private jets, ... :)

EDIT: Follow this link: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/ocean-path-will-take-you-longest-straight-line-journey-earth
« Last Edit: November 01, 2019, 03:48:56 PM by Macarios »
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.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #40 on: December 09, 2019, 12:25:20 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #41 on: December 09, 2019, 05:36:40 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #42 on: December 09, 2019, 05:47:08 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.

The difference is that the word "straight" here means "no left or right turns" or "within the vertical plane".
It is not the "Euclidean straight".
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.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #43 on: December 09, 2019, 06:05:22 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.

In order to get out of this semantics quagmire how about we replace "straight line" with "as the crow flies"? Something like this:

Go south as the crow flies to the South Pole. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north.

*

EvolvedMantisShrimp

  • 928
  • Physical Comedian
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #44 on: December 09, 2019, 08:00:30 PM »
If you would understand some basics about navigation you will understand how a gyro will work over the north or south pole. Anyways . Forget about heading .You just follow the meridian. You start from South Africa. And you follow the same meridian's line towards the south pole. After you see the South Pole at your 12 o'clock you continue straight ahead. No turning. Where will you reach? The question can't be clearer than that
On a globe earth, you reach outer space.
Really?
When flying "continuing straight ahead" would imply maintaining the same altitude would it not?

So "On a globe earth, you" do not reach outer space but having passed the South Pole fly due north.

Flying south from, say, Cape Town could be flying south along the 18.6°E meridian and on passing the South would be flying north on the 161.4°W meridian.
Why would flying straight imply maintaining altitude?
Your have been flying the same altitude for hours, why would you change altitude?
Traveling in a straight line and maintaining altitude are for the most part mutually exclusive on a globe.

By that logic, traveling in a straight line and maintaining a Due East heading would also be mutually exclusive on a flat Earth.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 08:03:10 PM by EvolvedMantisShrimp »
Nullius in Verba

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #45 on: December 09, 2019, 11:35:02 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.
You know what I mean, not turning left or right.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #46 on: December 09, 2019, 11:40:34 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.
You know what I mean, not turning left or right.

Exactly C&C, lighten up on the semantics.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #47 on: December 11, 2019, 11:13:51 AM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.
No, it doesn't. It implies the aircraft is flying in a straight line at a constant altitude. Go ask any pilot, its no secret.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #48 on: December 11, 2019, 11:27:46 AM »
No, it doesn't. It implies the aircraft is flying in a straight line at a constant altitude. Go ask any pilot, its no secret.
What about a rocket scientist?

Based upon the literal definition of straight, flying straight on a RE would result in going to space.

A key point which FEers seem to struggle with is that straight/flat and level are different things.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2019, 08:06:24 AM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.
No, it doesn't. It implies the aircraft is flying in a straight line at a constant altitude. Go ask any pilot, its no secret.

Bit of trouble with the definition of a straight line, eh?

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #50 on: December 12, 2019, 08:07:53 AM »
No, it doesn't. It implies the aircraft is flying in a straight line at a constant altitude. Go ask any pilot, its no secret.
What about a rocket scientist?

Based upon the literal definition of straight, flying straight on a RE would result in going to space.

A key point which FEers seem to struggle with is that straight/flat and level are different things.

Apparently so do some REers. (See above.)

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #51 on: December 12, 2019, 11:37:42 AM »
A bit of nitpicking, I see: a straight line being the shortest distance between two points; being on a globe that is a great circle,a line across the surface of the globe.
How else can I say?

Would not the shortest distance involve tunnelling through a globe? It's a wonder more cities are not connected via giant underground rail and thoroughfares.

I often imagine the earth is a globe when on a long constitutional. It helps to think in whimsy that one might actually be walking downhill the whole way.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2019, 11:59:27 AM »
Would not the shortest distance involve tunnelling through a globe? It's a wonder more cities are not connected via giant underground rail and thoroughfares.

HYPERLOOP!
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2019, 12:23:32 PM »
It's a simple question. Fly south in a straight line to the South Pole at a constant altitude. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north. If you disagree please explain where you go.

Flying in a straight line at a constant altitude implies a flat earth.

In order to get out of this semantics quagmire how about we replace "straight line" with "as the crow flies"? Something like this:

Go south as the crow flies to the South Pole. After you have crossed the South Pole you are heading north.

Crows don’t fly that far south.

Sorry, I’ll get my coat.

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #54 on: December 13, 2019, 03:38:57 AM »
A bit of nitpicking, I see: a straight line being the shortest distance between two points; being on a globe that is a great circle,a line across the surface of the globe.
How else can I say?

Would not the shortest distance involve tunnelling through a globe? It's a wonder more cities are not connected via giant underground rail and thoroughfares.

I often imagine the earth is a globe when on a long constitutional. It helps to think in whimsy that one might actually be walking downhill the whole way.

Considering what you were saying before about frames of reference, you would be one of the best candidates to understand what is "non-euclidean straight" line. :)
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.

Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #55 on: December 14, 2019, 11:50:04 AM »
The OP basically asked "if you pick one direction and fly in that direction without changing course, where do you end up when you get to the edge of your flat earth and continue to fly in the same direction?" Its a simple question which you flat earthers have not anwered, but have instead gone way off topic discussing what is a straight line and talking about altitudes and all kinds of other shit that does not matter, just to avoid answering the question. Forget about straight lines and etc, focus one SAME DIRECTION. Fly straight south, nonstop, continue flying in that direction until you see the edge of your world then continue flying towards it and over all the ice and everything....just keep going. So where would you end up in your flat earth model? Where?  Its a simpe thing to do because many people have done it and continue to do it in our global world everyday. So why can't a single flat earher answer that question? Why? Can flat earhers not get on a plane? Can flat earthers not get their own plane and do this themselves? What is stopping you? Global NASA conspiracy at the edge of the earth preventing you from flying there? Did any of you get your own plane and try to do this to see if anyone will stop you? Have you taken any pictures of armies or military bases patrolling the thousands of miles of borders at edge of world? Lol.

Please answer where you will end up if you travel in one DIRECTION only. Don't give me some BS about "oh you will have to turn around when you get to the edge just because we said so", but actually explain with proof or physics or mathematics or science or photos why you have to turn around when you get to the edge. Why? Do you hit a glass wall or dome? Show it to me. Do you fly into space? Prove it to me. Do you fall off a huge waterfall? Take a picture and stream it live while doing that.

Stop trying to change the topic and asnwer the OPs original question. I know you guys perfectly understand the question, but since you can't answer, you go off on tangents about conspiracy theories. Lets forget that. Lets pretend that NASA gave you guys a free pass to do what you want and go where you want (since you believe NASA is guarding the edges of earth), and now you don't have to turn around at the edge of the earth but keep flying in that same direction, what happens? If not one flat earther can answer this most basic question that even a preschooler can answer, what basis do you have for any other flat earth theory?

Again, DO NOT give us a "because it is so" answer. Show real proof with photos, scientific trials and experiments, mathematical equations, published articles that have been peer reviewed and tested by other scientist, or anything in that manner. Us "globeheads" can explain all that in details with tons of proof on our end. We are just waiting for your proof now. So tell us...PLEASE.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Flight due south over south pole
« Reply #56 on: December 15, 2019, 11:30:52 AM »
Quote from: NH
Forget about straight lines and etc, focus one SAME DIRECTION. Fly straight south, nonstop, continue flying in that direction until you see the edge of your world then continue flying towards it and over all the ice and everything....just keep going. So where would you end up in your flat earth model? Where?  Its a simpe thing to do because many people have done it and continue to do it in our global world everyday.

Well, by what method are we determining "same direction"?  If one tries following "south" by compass near the "south pole", he certainly won't be traveling a straight line by any definition, for example.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."