Little bit confused

  • 44 Replies
  • 1784 Views
Little bit confused
« on: February 05, 2020, 10:46:34 PM »
Ok so I'm a new poster and quite new to flat earth theory in general so bare with me.
I've looked at the maps and models of the flat earth standpoint and yet it doesn't seem to match my actual experience.
According to the FE maps, as you go south the circumference at increasing latitude should get larger and larger.

But I'm a yachtsman from southern Australia who has participated in several journeys from Tasmania to South Africa and on to South America and the distance and time spent travelling is less the further you go south!
This can only mean the distance is less as you go south not more as the FE maps suggest.

What am i not understanding as the two concepts are mutually exclusive.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22036
  • Member of the Brotherhood of the Dome
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2020, 10:52:02 PM »
your detections are wrong. Distance is more than 20,000kms between south america and new zealand. if you try this you will die, just like this globalist: newzealander

Trust the wise and live more.

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2020, 10:55:26 PM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2020, 11:25:31 PM »
your detections are wrong. Distance is more than 20,000kms between south america and new zealand. if you try this you will die, just like this globalist: newzealander
Wise, don't you think that a "yachtsman from southern Australia" who has sailed from "Tasmania to South Africa and on to South America" would know a lot more about those distances than you would?
But I'm a yachtsman from southern Australia who has participated in several journeys from Tasmania to South Africa and on to South America and the distance and time spent travelling is less the further you go south!
This can only mean the distance is less as you go south not more as the FE maps suggest.
The thing you show in newzealander is not a map of anything!
It's just something you worked by neglecting all evidence that went against your preconceived ideas.

Show how you worked out these distances:
  • Johannesburg to Perth,
  • Johannesburg to Sydney,
  • Sydney to Santiago and
  • Aukland to Santiago.
If you can't do that we'll know that your map is incorrect.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 11:35:41 PM by rabinoz »

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2020, 12:00:33 AM »
Quote
Distance is more than 20,000kms between south america and new zealand

How do you come to that conclusion?... explain your method please.  Because at the moment that is just a figure that could have been plucked out of thin air.

I have just used Google maps to measure the distance between the western point tip of Southern Argentina and New Zealand and the figure quoted is 7600km approx.  Bit of a difference!  I have heard of margins of error, but an unqualified figure which is nearly three times the actual value is more than just a 'margin' of error!
« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 01:04:25 AM by Solarwind »

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22036
  • Member of the Brotherhood of the Dome
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2020, 02:45:55 AM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2020, 04:23:22 AM »
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.
How do you know?
You have never travelled by sailing boat from South Africa to South America then to New Zealand.

Present your evidence or admit that you are just making up stories to fit your flat-Earth!

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2020, 06:54:31 PM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.
You're either misinformed or just plain delusional.
Dozens of yachts make this journey each and every year, most without incident.
What are you basing your conclusion on except pure denial?
I'm not here to discuss things with people who wont or cant explain their reasoning.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22036
  • Member of the Brotherhood of the Dome
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2020, 08:23:19 PM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.
You're either misinformed or just plain delusional.
Dozens of yachts make this journey each and every year, most without incident.
What are you basing your conclusion on except pure denial?
I'm not here to discuss things with people who wont or cant explain their reasoning.
No, I have examined, measured and well informed.

If you are not here to discuss, so you are here to get the view of FE'rs. So you get it. If you are not here to discuss, so why are you discussing?

You are not the only one here know sailors. We also have friends are sailors. A yacht can move with an average speed. I did not heard a sailor sailed between these lands less than a flat earth distance.

You are not here to discuss, you have been well informed now. Hence, nice to meet you, good bye.

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2020, 08:41:31 PM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.
You're either misinformed or just plain delusional.
Dozens of yachts make this journey each and every year, most without incident.
What are you basing your conclusion on except pure denial?
I'm not here to discuss things with people who wont or cant explain their reasoning.
No, I have examined, measured and well informed.
Wise, it is obvious that you know nothing about the Southern Hemisphere.
You have never been to the Southern Hemisphere so you could not have measured anything here!

Run off and try to deceive someone else.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 01:29:42 AM by rabinoz »

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2020, 01:21:05 AM »
I'm still waiting for Wise to explain how you get a distance of over 20,000km between S America and New Zealand.  The real value of about a third of that.

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2020, 01:30:53 AM »
I'm still waiting for Wise to explain how you get a distance of over 20,000km between S America and New Zealand.  The real value of about a third of that.
Person he's taken my suggestion seriously and has "Run off . . . . to deceive someone else".
No, I have examined, measured and well informed.
Wise, it is obvious that you know nothing about the Southern Hemisphere.
You have never been to the Southern Hemisphere so you could not have measured anything here!

Run off and try to deceive someone else.

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2020, 01:40:39 AM »
It's a bit rich for you guys to complain about maps when you guys still have ludicrous looking maps yourself

I present you with this


Look at Greenland vs Australia. WTF? Plus I could have sworn China should be bigger than that... Seems on par with Australia

This map is globe earthers doing an 'own goal'  ::)


Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2020, 02:16:54 AM »
It's a bit rich for you guys to complain about maps when you guys still have ludicrous looking maps yourself

I present you with this


Look at Greenland vs Australia. WTF? Plus I could have sworn China should be bigger than that... Seems on par with Australia

This map is globe earthers doing an 'own goal'  ::)
Rubbish it's a specific projection of the Globe with known advantages and known distortions.

Quote
The Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection presented by the Flemish geographer and cartographer Gerardus Mercator in 1569. It became the standard map projection for navigation because of its unique property of representing any course of constant bearing as a straight segment.

Would you care to show a map of whole the Globe on a flat surface without serious distortion of sort.

But, in case you hadn't noticed, the point under discussion is distances in the Southern Hemisphere.
There is no flat map that can show all distances accurately.
But there is one projection that does show shortest distances (great circles) from a single point to anywhere on the Globe.
That projection is the Azimuthal Equidistant Projection and there's one that shows the distances and shortest air routes from Sydney to any other location.

Though, rather than scaling that map, it's a lot more accurate to use an on-line distance calculator.

The shapes of countries near the centre of the AEP are not distorted much but countries get grossly distorted near the edge.

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2020, 02:28:40 AM »
No, I have examined, measured and well informed.
You mean by comparing flights and ignoring the ones which show Earth isn't flat?
That isn't examining the distance nor measuring it nor does it make you well informed.


If you are not here to discuss, so you are here to get the view of FE'rs.
That isn't what he said.
He said he didn't say he wasn't here to discuss in general, just not with people who will not explain their reasoning (or can't).
So unless you are claiming that FEers can't or wont explain their reasoning that does not apply.

So can you explain how you obtained your value of 20 000 km?
Especially when there is plenty of evidence to indicate otherwise.

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2020, 06:39:55 AM »
It's a bit rich for you guys to complain about maps when you guys still have ludicrous looking maps yourself

I present you with this


Look at Greenland vs Australia. WTF? Plus I could have sworn China should be bigger than that... Seems on par with Australia

This map is globe earthers doing an 'own goal'  ::)
That map is simply a confirmation of what I have stated many times: It is impossible to have a map on a flat sheet of paper that is both accurate and has a fixed scale because the earth is not flat!

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2020, 06:45:04 AM »
It's a bit rich for you guys to complain about maps when you guys still have ludicrous looking maps yourself

I present you with this


Look at Greenland vs Australia. WTF? Plus I could have sworn China should be bigger than that... Seems on par with Australia

This map is globe earthers doing an 'own goal'  ::)
That map is simply a confirmation of what I have stated many times: It is impossible to have a map on a flat sheet of paper that is both accurate and has a fixed scale because the earth is not flat!

Or the globe map is simply nonsense


Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2020, 06:47:19 AM »
Quote
Or the globe map is simply nonsense.

But you question everything remember so why would you assert that the globe map is simply nonsense?

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2020, 06:51:02 AM »
Quote
Or the globe map is simply nonsense.

But you question everything remember so why would you assert that the globe map is simply nonsense?

Because it is passed off as correct and true. Can you be sure there really are 3 dimensions? If there are only 2 the map is wrong. If there are 4 spatial dimensions or more the map is hopelessly inadequate


Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2020, 10:18:24 AM »
Quote
Can you be sure there really are 3 dimensions?

In so far as I can move forward and backward, left and right and upwards then yes I can be pretty sure there are three spatial dimensions. I wouldn't call time a spatial dimension.

You must surely question the map of the Earth as shown as a flat plane then as well.  Remember you question everything.. That's what you said. 

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2020, 10:23:32 AM »
Quote
Can you be sure there really are 3 dimensions?

In so far as I can move forward and backward, left and right and upwards then yes I can be pretty sure there are three spatial dimensions. I wouldn't call time a spatial dimension.

You must surely question the map of the Earth as shown as a flat plane then as well.  Remember you question everything.. That's what you said.

Indeed I question everything. That's healthy to do. If you wish to be content in your ignorance then your knowledge will never expand. How do you think we have come as far as we have? By questioning.


Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0

*

magellanclavichord

  • 897
  • Cheerful Globularist
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #21 on: February 07, 2020, 12:15:17 PM »
I might be new to FE but I'm not new to offshore yachting.
You wont die at all , the weather forecasting now days is awesome.
Most traffic however usually goes the other way, from the cape to NZ or up the coast to Chile.
Its just easier with the predominant winds and currents.
Nobody can do it under the limits of estimated times. Nobody ie as alive. It is just a phantasia, never happened.
You're either misinformed or just plain delusional.
Dozens of yachts make this journey each and every year, most without incident.
What are you basing your conclusion on except pure denial?
I'm not here to discuss things with people who wont or cant explain their reasoning.

Mbogo: You're new here, so it might help to explain FET (Flat-Earth Theory). FET begins with the proposition that the Earth is flat. Accepting this on faith is, as it were, the Prime Directive. The object is not to investigate whether the proposition is true or false, but rather to create arguments in favor of it. There are many different FET systems, but within each, facts are only valid if they confirm the proposition. Anything that contradicts the proposition is by definition wrong. As arguments are built and details are constructed to fit the proposition, anything that contradicts these elements of the theory is also wrong by definition.

An FET need not necessarily be centered on the North Pole. It could be centered anywhere, but the North Pole Center is a popular variant. A flat Earth centered at the North Pole must have distances increasing as you go south (toward the edge) and therefore anybody who has actually travelled along one of these routes and observed distances other than those predicted by FET must be rejected.

It is not necessary to provide evidence or reasons for such rejection. The rejection is required by FET. It is not necessary to have actual observations, because "observing" the map is sufficient. The proposition is absolute and must not be questioned; the map follows from the proposition, therefore the map is absolute and contradictory observation must be rejected.

One can present reasoned arguments against all of this, or just enjoy the fun. If you persist in citing your sailing experience, they will call you a liar, but you will be in good company because they call Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin and Gus Grissom and Uri Gagarin liars also. They also claim that rockets can't fly in space, though I've never been able to figure out why that would follow from a flat Earth. Some of them, but not all (I did mention that there are differing FETs) deny that space even exists.

It helps if you enjoy silliness. It can be frustrating if you take any of it seriously.

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #22 on: February 07, 2020, 12:49:39 PM »

That map is simply a confirmation of what I have stated many times: It is impossible to have a map on a flat sheet of paper that is both accurate and has a fixed scale because the earth is not flat!

Or the globe map is simply nonsense
If that is so then YOU show a flat Earth map with correct distances between major cities.
Then show a flat Earth model that shows the observed paths of the Sun and the moon.
And then . . . . . there's plenty more to follow.

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #23 on: February 07, 2020, 01:00:34 PM »

That map is simply a confirmation of what I have stated many times: It is impossible to have a map on a flat sheet of paper that is both accurate and has a fixed scale because the earth is not flat!

Or the globe map is simply nonsense
If that is so then YOU show a flat Earth map with correct distances between major cities.
Then show a flat Earth model that shows the observed paths of the Sun and the moon.
And then . . . . . there's plenty more to follow.

What we limited to observe and what is reality are very different. It would be like asking a hypothetical flatlander in a 2D flat land to draw a hypercube. It's not going to happen


Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #24 on: February 07, 2020, 01:48:29 PM »
Or the globe map is simply nonsense
Why?
Can you point out anything wrong with it?
Something which takes into consideration the FACT that it is a map of a curved surface which does not have a uniform scale?

Your initial objection seemed to completely overlook that fact.

Can you be sure there really are 3 dimensions? If there are only 2 the map is wrong. If there are 4 spatial dimensions or more the map is hopelessly inadequate
Pure nonsense.
If you bother noticing, the map has 2 spatial dimensions, not 3.

But we can be certain that 3 dimensions exist in some way, given the fact that we can move about in them.
Now you can say that these are just a construct and in reality there is some lower dimensional thing representing that, but not only does that not work at all (as you would need to replace the third spatial dimension by something equivalent to it), it doesn't negate the fact that we perceive these 3 dimensions.
Having more than 3 doesn't make the map hopelessly inadequate, and the dimensions being spatial or not have no bearing on that.
You may as well complain that it is inadequate because it doesn't show Mars.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 02:05:41 PM by JackBlack »

*

rabinoz

  • 26337
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2020, 01:55:39 PM »

If that is so then YOU show a flat Earth map with correct distances between major cities.
Then show a flat Earth model that shows the observed paths of the Sun and the moon.
And then . . . . . there's plenty more to follow.
What we limited to observe and what is reality are very different.
Rubbish!
You must have done well in your indoctrination course! How are "we limited to observe and what is reality are very different"?
The Earth is just a big material object that can and has been measured so how can you trot out any inability to observe?

Quote from: Shifter
It would be like asking a hypothetical flatlander in a 2D flat land to draw a hypercube. It's not going to happen
No, it's like asking a flat Earther to present a map of the Earth that matches what we observe and experience - don't try to twist things with irrelevant crap!

Now explain this on your favourite FE map:
Quote
Prokerala: Flight time from Beijing to Los Angeles
Distance from Beijing to Los Angeles is approximately 10,040 kilometers.
Airline & Journey     Duration
Air China PEK ➝ LAX 12 hrs
And
Quote
Prokerala: Flight time from Sydney to Santiago
Distance Between Sydney, Australia & Santiago, Chile is 11,350 kilometers
Airline & Journey            Duration
Qantas         SYD ➝ SCL 12 hours 30 minutes
LAN Airlines SYD ➝ SCL 12 hours 30 minutes
And when you're done with that I can give you plenty more.



Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2020, 02:47:48 PM »
Quote
If you wish to be content in your ignorance then your knowledge will never expand.

O I wouldn't say that. If I compare what I know now against when I was younger I can appreciate how much my knowledge has expanded. 10 years ago for example I didn't have the knowledge about certain topics to get a degree in astronomy.  Now I have.

But then knowledge is a strange thing because according to you we don't 'know' anything. At least not with 100% certainty. So I would say if anyone is being ignorant it is you and with that approach your knowledge will never expand. What in your opinion is the difference between knowing something and believing something?  Belief is surely a matter of choice (you can choose whether to believe the Earth is flat or not) while knowledge is a matter of fact.  Afterall you cannot alter what is true can you but you can change your beliefs... the main mechanism being expanded knowledge.

It comes down to a simple decision.  Have we gathered enough evidence not necessarily to be 100% certain about something but to be certain enough to put it beyond reasonable doubt? That is something you can only decide for yourself and seems to be something that you cannot do.  To make progress we have to reach a point of acceptance that something is true or known and then move on from there. Otherwise you will enter an eternal loop of uncertainty which will get you nowhere. RE is a model that has been developed over a (long) time and is entirely based on our best interpretation of observations over time.

RE can now explain those observations easily and logically while it is my opinion that FE struggles. Why does it struggle?  Because it is based on an fundamental assertion which is wrong. FE can make claims but struggles to explain the mechanisms behind those claims.  That is not to say RE can explain everything.  Of course it can't. But then that is the purpose of science is it not... to turn the unknown into the known.

Most people would agree that the Sun looks yellow for example but is that just a human perception or is a fact of nature? I could write a whole essay on that one.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 03:07:47 PM by Solarwind »

*

magellanclavichord

  • 897
  • Cheerful Globularist
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2020, 03:09:19 PM »
... Afterall you cannot alter what is true can you but you can change your beliefs...

Maybe some folks can, but I've tried and have never managed it. I would really like to believe that there's a magic man in the sky who will welcome me into paradise with angels and clouds and harps (... well, maybe not harps...) when I die, but no matter how hard I try, I still believe there's no magic man and no angels (or devils either) and no heaven or hell. Just, poof! lights out when you die.

So maybe that one is a bit much, but I've also tried to believe that my house cat was a tiger. It would be cool to have a tiger. And my kitty had the stripes, so it should have been easy. I could pretend that I believed he was a tiger. Even easier, I could pretend that he believed he was a tiger. But I couldn't get to actual belief. He was really just a house cat. (He was the best cat. But still not a tiger.)

I'm not sure any of us has any control over our beliefs.

On the subject of maps, and especially Mercator's map, I love this snippet from Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark. At the start of this snippet it's talking about the ship's captain:

Quote

He had bought a large map representing the sea, without the least vestige of land.
And the crew were much pleased when they found it to be a map they could well understand.
"What's the good of Mercator's north poles and equators, tropics, zones, and meridian lines?"
So the captain would sigh, and the crew would reply, "They are merely conventional signs.
Other maps are such shapes, with their islands and capes! But we've got our brave captain to thank,"
(so the crew would protest) "that he's bought us the best: A perfect and absolute blank!"

Take that, Mercator!

Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2020, 03:45:00 PM »
Quote
I've also tried to believe that my house cat was a tiger.

I have a house cat as well. For home security it would be useful if he was a tiger but can you imagine the vets reaction when I take him for his jabs every year!

*

Shifter

  • 14230
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Little bit confused
« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2020, 04:12:33 PM »
Quote
If you wish to be content in your ignorance then your knowledge will never expand.

O I wouldn't say that. If I compare what I know now against when I was younger I can appreciate how much my knowledge has expanded. 10 years ago for example I didn't have the knowledge about certain topics to get a degree in astronomy.  Now I have.

But then knowledge is a strange thing because according to you we don't 'know' anything. At least not with 100% certainty. So I would say if anyone is being ignorant it is you and with that approach your knowledge will never expand. What in your opinion is the difference between knowing something and believing something?  Belief is surely a matter of choice (you can choose whether to believe the Earth is flat or not) while knowledge is a matter of fact.  Afterall you cannot alter what is true can you but you can change your beliefs... the main mechanism being expanded knowledge.

It comes down to a simple decision.  Have we gathered enough evidence not necessarily to be 100% certain about something but to be certain enough to put it beyond reasonable doubt? That is something you can only decide for yourself and seems to be something that you cannot do.  To make progress we have to reach a point of acceptance that something is true or known and then move on from there. Otherwise you will enter an eternal loop of uncertainty which will get you nowhere. RE is a model that has been developed over a (long) time and is entirely based on our best interpretation of observations over time.

RE can now explain those observations easily and logically while it is my opinion that FE struggles. Why does it struggle?  Because it is based on an fundamental assertion which is wrong. FE can make claims but struggles to explain the mechanisms behind those claims.  That is not to say RE can explain everything.  Of course it can't. But then that is the purpose of science is it not... to turn the unknown into the known.

Most people would agree that the Sun looks yellow for example but is that just a human perception or is a fact of nature? I could write a whole essay on that one.

Well first up, the sun is certainly not yellow. It is white. If it really were yellow, snow would look like it was pissed on. I can assert this with a very high degree of confidence

Also, you can read all the books you want. If the information was wrong, what have you really learned? Are you smarter?



Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

Werenasa XXII - Register here https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86459.0