Anchorage to Stockholm via Seattle??? Goodbye Globe, Goodbye Conventional FE

Flights from Alaska to Scandinavia go through Seattle in the south?
Good idea, for, going north for shortcut would make the plane hit the dome. Going north has zero history.
Globe as well as Conventional FE got disqualification.
Phew rules~

To be honest Danang who gives a flying **** about any of your flight/train/reindeer flight times? If you think any of this actually proves what you want it to prove in the slightest way then you are very much mistaken. All it proves is that you are a fantasist.

Instead why don't you try and explain something to me that I am actually interested in. Such as how lunar eclipses could happen according to your 'phew' reality.

Flights from Alaska to Scandinavia go through Seattle in the south?

Care to provide an example of such a flight?
And by that I mean a direct, non-stop flight.
If you can't, then your argument is garbage and doesn't disqualify anything.

Without showing a nonstop flight (and we all know you won't) then we have to assume it stops in Seattle. Gee, how DARE they stop at a hub to exchange passengers! Or are you really that naive to think there is enough interest in a direct flight between Anchorage and Stockholm?  Go troll somewhere else.

Only such a short distance of 6,570 km but no direct flight so far? And passengers are forced to suffer 22 hours of flight for a much shorter distance???
Didn't you question it why???

You cannot cross the center of north pole, because it doesn't exist. It's a huge rim.

Straight flights from west to east vice a versa will make you gradually shift the latitude approaching the north rim. Because the earth is phew~

You cannot cross the center of north pole, because it doesn't exist. It's a huge rim.

Sure you can.  Flights cross the center of the North Pole by going through the NP Vortex wormhole.  Everybody knows that.

Only such a short distance of 6,570 km but no direct flight so far?

And how many people want to take such a flight?

You have been provided plenty of examples of flights that go north. For example, New York to Stolkholm; such as that flown as Finnair AY 30.

Being able to find particular cities where there are not direct flights doesn't the RE model is wrong.
You would need to show there is a demand for such a flight.

Only such a short distance of 6,570 km but no direct flight so far? And passengers are forced to suffer 22 hours of flight for a much shorter distance???
Didn't you question it why???

I'm sure the reality and economics of hub and spoke traffic has something to do with it. How much demand is there for Anchorage to Stockholm anyway? But, of course, as we predicted, you can't show that it is a direct flight. So you're complaining about a stop over, ie nothing.

You cannot cross the center of north pole, because it doesn't exist. It's a huge rim.

Really...?  How do you know this because this is the first I've heard of it. If that were really the case then I'm sure that someone would have mentioned this apart from you. So how do you know? What is your evidence?

What lies inside this huge rim?

What lies inside this huge rim?

In his model? The entire Earth. His model is just the reverse of the monopole map with the North Pole at the center, so his South Pole is at the center and the North Pole is smeared out around the rim.

Interesting. I wonder what evidence or data he bases that model on.

I'm sorry, but Europe to West coast flights don't fly over south america.
And the bering straight isn't a massive ocean.
This "model" screws up distances in the northern hemisphere, just like the regular flat earth one screws up distances in the southern hemisphere.

I still don't fully understand what this 'Phew' thing which Danang keeps droning on about actually is. Some people have said it refers to a different value of pi (12?) but when pi is simply the value of the ratio between the diameter of a circle and its circumference I'm not sure how you can vary that from the standard value of 3.14. Unless Danang has come up with his very own version of what a circle is then changing the value of a mathematical constant while keeping all other aspects of geometry the same is very, very clever.

Danang himself has never clearly explained it other than declaring his love for whatever 'it' is.  So I'm a little confused! I can't believe in or accept something when I don't know what I'm supposed to be believing or accepting. So while I'm sure that in his mind, 'Phew' does indeed rule... I'm not actually sure what 'Phew' is or means.

In deciding what is true or not I go by evidence alone and so far no evidence has been presented which gives me reason to think I should change my mind about which side I'm on.

I still don't fully understand what this 'Phew' thing which Danang keeps droning on about actually is. Some people have said it refers to a different value of pi (12?) but when pi is simply the value of the ratio between the diameter of a circle and its circumference I'm not sure how you can vary that from the standard value of 3.14. Unless Danang has come up with his very own version of what a circle is then changing the value of a mathematical constant while keeping all other aspects of geometry the same is very, very clever.

Danang himself has never clearly explained it other than declaring his love for whatever 'it' is.  So I'm a little confused! I can't believe in or accept something when I don't know what I'm supposed to be believing or accepting. So while I'm sure that in his mind, 'Phew' does indeed rule... I'm not actually sure what 'Phew' is or means.

In deciding what is true or not I go by evidence alone and so far no evidence has been presented which gives me reason to think I should change my mind about which side I'm on.

Danang is just some weird troll and 'phew' (whatever the F that is) is just his shtick. Pay no mind to it

Well it is obviously something that he is very proud of with all the various emojis that he likes to add to his self-complimenting one line remarks about it.

So perhaps the man himself could explain in clear and precise terms what he means by it. At the same time perhaps he could also come up with the smallest grain of actual evidence that will make the entire scientific community suddenly sit up and listen to him. Please hurry Danang because I've been holding my breath for too long already...

I can't find any other references to 'phew' other than from your own posts and for one person to come up with an entirely new and revolutionary theory of the world... well that is pretty much unprecedented in human history I would say.

Well it is obviously something that he is very proud of with all the various emojis that he likes to add to his self-complimenting one line remarks about it.

So perhaps the man himself could explain in clear and precise terms what he means by it. At the same time perhaps he could also come up with the smallest grain of actual evidence that will make the entire scientific community suddenly sit up and listen to him. Please hurry Danang because I've been holding my breath for too long already...

I can't find any other references to 'phew' other than from your own posts and for one person to come up with an entirely new and revolutionary theory of the world... well that is pretty much unprecedented in human history I would say.

Thank you thank you...

Maths Phew has failed.
Now, Physic Phew = the right Physics that can make you say "phew"
Anything physics that comes from reality based on logic, not here say as happening at schools.
1. South Polar Centered FE
2. Downwards Universal Deceleration AKA reverse UA
3. Domes make stars at celestial northern hemiplane become unreal, only reflection of the real stars
4. go to https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=1463513 or https://twitter.com/search?q=%40DanangTiyasworo%20%23FlatEarth&src=typed_query&f=live
6. etc.

Quote from: TomThumb on January 06, 2022, 12:04:05 PM

What lies inside this huge rim?

In his model? The entire Earth. His model is just the reverse of the monopole map with the North Pole at the center, so his South Pole is at the center and the North Pole is smeared out around the rim.

I wanted to say so before. you've been ahead of me ~

this is basic, before you go far to other subjects

So according to you then the south pole is at the centre of the Earth and the north 'pole' is the circumference?  Does it occur to you that that goes against just about everything that we experience in real life?  For instance how is it that there are two clearly visible celestial poles around which the stars rotate, separated by 180 degrees on the sky?

What you are saying or claiming simply doesn't match what we observe.  However much you might think it does or want it to, it doesn't.

Yep OK a very nice photo of the Moon showing atmospheric refraction. I've seen hundreds of those. If you think of the Earth as a sphere rotating around a N/S axis that matches exactly with what we observe.

So according to you then the south pole is at the centre of the Earth and the north 'pole' is the circumference?  Does it occur to you that that goes against just about everything that we experience in real life?  For instance how is it that there are two clearly visible celestial poles around which the stars rotate, separated by 180 degrees on the sky?

What you are saying or claiming simply doesn't match what we observe.  However much you might think it does or want it to, it doesn't.

It's advance subject that I still research.
But once the earth is proven flat, you cannot believe you eyes only.

But once the earth is proven flat, you cannot believe you eyes only.

If the Earth is really flat, as you obviously believe then just tell me this.  How is it that equatorial mounts work perfectly the world over?

I feel you have long wait on your hands with that one... because you can't prove something which simply isn't true.

Why would the Earth be flat when we can see that all the other planets are round?

Maths Phew has failed.
Now, Physic Phew

Has also repeatedly failed, with your claims being refuted time and time again; with you unable to offer anything to support your nonsense, and plenty to show your nonsense is wrong.
Can you explain the flight from New York to Stockholm?
A fairly short flight, and a direct one, which leaves and goes north from New York and arrives from the north in Stockholm.

But once the earth is proven flat, you cannot believe you eyes only.

Good thing it hasn't been proven flat.

Quote

But once the earth is proven flat, you cannot believe you eyes only.

If the Earth is really flat, as you obviously believe then just tell me this.  How is it that equatorial mounts work perfectly the world over?

I feel you have long wait on your hands with that one... because you can't prove something which simply isn't true.

the design of the universe is extremely amazing
but equatorial mounts stuff is still under the domain of perspective.
there are variables to consider: dome, physical figuring out on the real earth etc. Go basic first.

whoever has eyes, just see it (after Jesus) 

this is basic, before you go far to other subjects

but equatorial mounts stuff is still under the domain of perspective.
there are variables to consider: dome, physical figuring out on the real earth etc. Go basic first.

What are you talking about?!?  I use equatorial mounts all the time in both hemispheres and they work perfectly. What variables do you need to consider. Dome of perspective?  What does that even mean?

Basic, OK.  Equatorial mounts are aligned so their polar axis lines up with the Earths polar axis. That's what polar alignment means.  You can then track the stars in both hemispheres using just one direction of movement (RA = east to west). That's pretty basic stuff.

This is the basic



to which the rest subjects must be related, otherwise you are seeing illusion.

"Einstein might be wrong" ~ Michio Kaku

Is the modern physics that chaotic so far? 

Has also repeatedly failed, with your claims being refuted time and time again; with you unable to offer anything to support your nonsense, and plenty to show your nonsense is wrong.
Can you explain the flight from New York to Stockholm?
A fairly short flight, and a direct one, which leaves and goes north from New York and arrives from the north in Stockholm.

New York - Vienna - Stockholm
10 hours to 12 hours for +/- 6,319 km, that's still under 800kph.

Try again. Fix the actual distance.

"Einstein might be wrong" ~ Michio Kaku

Is the modern physics that chaotic so far?

"Sensationalist celebrity physicist says sensational-sounding thing to draw attention to himself" ~ Danang, thinking he's being clever.

Einstein was definitely wrong, in that GR is obviously incomplete. Just like QM is incomplete. And Newtonian mechanics was incomplete. The list goes on. Will we have a Theory of Everything one day? Maybe, maybe not. But rest assured, if there is a ToE that's uncovered at some point, your "phew" won't be a part of it.

Quote from: JackBlack on January 08, 2022, 04:05:31 AM

Has also repeatedly failed, with your claims being refuted time and time again; with you unable to offer anything to support your nonsense, and plenty to show your nonsense is wrong.
Can you explain the flight from New York to Stockholm?
A fairly short flight, and a direct one, which leaves and goes north from New York and arrives from the north in Stockholm.

New York - Vienna - Stockholm
10 hours to 12 hours for +/- 6,319 km, that's still under 800kph.

Try again. Fix the actual distance.

I don't know what Vienna has to do with this. But NYC to Stockholm, Finnair:

6,310 KM
6:55
500 KTS