The Bipolar model

It always strikes me as inconsistent  when FE’s quote scientists of renown (Newton, Einstein, Schrodinger, Clerk Maxwell et-al) as if just by mentioning them it somehow validates this nonsense, we even have a world that apparently collapses like a quantum wave observation to try and smoke and mirror a reason for none of their maps making sense, completely forgetting the scale at which quantum physics works.

All these great minds, not one of them mentions the flat earth as a proposition.
You imagine yourselves in the “standing on the shoulders of giants” mold, but it seems more like minute parasites hanging on for dear life to their coattails.

Is that an accusation of cherry picking?

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:

I would say a just as inaccurate version.
You still can't explain flights from Sydney to North America without adding on loads of nonsense which solely serves to try to save this model.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM

The aether

Or we can take the sane approach of discarded a completely unneeded aether and instead have Earth be round.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.

The issue isn't just circumnavigation, but also just simple point to point distances.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM

the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.

No, the globe was based upon reality, where measurements and simple calculations directly give the diameter without any need to appeal to a flat Earth fantasy.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM

The dense aether barrier

Also performs more unneeded magic.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 16, 2024, 02:07:09 AM

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

No, they apply equally to all FE models.

And your attempts to save the bipolar also work equally for all FE models.

You need to have aether perform so many feats of magic that you could have it do so for any FE model, even the cat model, and just claim it works.
You have no evidence for all this magic, nor can you quantify it.

Meanwhile, the RE doesn't need any of that magic, and can give numerical predictions which match reality.

*Facts are not nonsense.

*Aether is indispensable. Everything depends on aether. General relativity itself actually describes aether.
There are no mechanisms capable of explaining the curvature of space without aether. The curvature of space occurs when a celestial body absorbs aether.

"According to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there would not only be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense"
- Albert Einstein, “Geometry and Experience,” in Sidelights on Relativity, 1983, p. 30

"…in 1905 I was of the opinion that it was no longer allowed to speak about the ether in physics. This opinion, however, was too radical, as we will see later when we discuss the general theory of relativity. It does remain allowed, as always, to introduce a medium filling all space and to assume that the electromagnetic fields (and matter as well) are its states…once again “empty” space appears as endowed with physical properties, i.e., no longer as physically empty, as seemed to be the case according to special relativity. One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity….Since in the new theory, metric facts can no longer be separated from “true” physical facts, the concepts of “space” and “ether” merge together."
- Albert Einstein, “Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitätstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung dargestellt,” Morgan Manuscript, EA 2070, as cited in Ludwik Kostro, Einstein and the Ether, 2000, p. 2.

*Making vague statements about distances without specifying them will not turn the Earth into a crazy ball.

*The globe is based on errors and distortions of reality. Eratosthenes' method does not take aether into account.

Evapotranspiration and precipitation demonstrate that the Earth is flat and that the diameter of the Earth is ≈ 20000 kilometers.
Calculation of the annual evapotranspiration of the Earth based on the Thornthwaite method.
The method uses this set of equations:
ETp = 16 × (10 × Tm ÷ I)^A
I = Σ (0,2 × Tm)^1,514
A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × I) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × I^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × I^3)

ETp = evapotranspiration.
I = annual heat index.
A = exponent calculated based on I.

I take into account that the average temperature of the Earth is ≈ 14º C.

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 510100000 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp = 352825968 cubic meters
ETp = 352825,968 cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 510100000
Precipitation = 485902948717 mm
Precipitation = 485902 km


In other words: if the Earth's diameter were 40000 km, this would mean that annual precipitation is greater than evapotranspiration, which is impossible. Initially, I attributed this discrepancy to the chambers of rain, hail, snow, frost, and dew connected to the first firmament described in the Book of Enoch. Now that I realize that navigations indicate that the Earth's diameter is ≈ 20000 km, we can better explain the discrepancies.
Repeating the calculation and taking into account a diameter of 20000 km, the results are consistent:

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 314159265,35898 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp =  217297680663,5 cubic meters
ETp 217297681 = cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 314159265,35898
Precipitation = 299255549810 mm
Precipitation = 299255,55 km

*The south celestial pole is clearly not a problem for the Bi-Polar map.

*Aether's behavior doesn't solve the problems of the other maps, and aether is evidence-based, not magic.

*Facts are not nonsense.

 Ok?  Long post of nothing to try and change the subject.  Classic FE bait a switch to get away from the simple evidence that kills flat earth.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond

You are not answering the questions.

And you are ignoring   the constellation southern cross is an aid to find the stationary south celestial pole that is relative south for all points south of the hemisphere unless you are directly under the celestial South Pole.

That only works for a spherical earth.

And you didn’t actually address the real criticism of your map.

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed. 

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

This map would get you lost at sea and maybe even get you killed.  You understand this is a useless map.  Right. 

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 18, 2024, 07:37:40 AM

*Facts are not nonsense.

 Ok?  Long post of nothing to try and change the subject.  Classic FE bait a switch to get away from the simple evidence that kills flat earth.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh link=topic=92936.msg2436458#ms

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond

You are not answering the questions.

And you are ignoring   the constellation southern cross is an aid to find the stationary south celestial pole that is relative south for all points south of the hemisphere unless you are directly under the celestial South Pole.

That only works for a spherical earth.

And you didn’t actually address the real criticism of your map.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 16, 2024, 02:07:09 AM

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

I have already answered your questions:

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on December 16, 2024, 04:25:53 AM

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 16, 2024, 02:07:09 AM

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

The midnight Sun at both poles is associated with the moons Eos, but this fact still needs to be further researched before it can be fully understood.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090404141630/https://www.science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm

And putting the cardinal points in the wrong position will not save the crazy ball Earth.

And putting the cardinal points in the wrong position will not save the crazy ball Earth.

What are you babbling about.

It’s pretty simple.

If you travel straight east out of the Carolina’s you end up North Africa / Spain.  Following the sun straight east at sun rise and correcting its position for the time of year will get you there. Especially on the summer equinox when the sun raises straight east for most of the people on earth.  Any 90 degree turn right perpendicular from east will change your direction to relative due south. Especially on the summer equinox if using the sun.  Eventually where you can end up under the celestial South Pole.




Now, your map.



If you travel relative east out of the Carolina’s you never make it to Spain / North Africa.  While traveling east on your map. Turning right 90 degrees will take you to the east coast of South America to travel west across the continent.  Not due south. The orbit of the known sun as a navigation aid is useless.  The sun would have to travel north / south over India.  The celestial South Pole which is different than the magnet South Pole becomes useless.  And there is no explanation how the sun goes from orbiting the north celestial pole to orbiting the south celestial pole for a 24 hour sun in Antarctica at this time.  Spherical earth explains it very well, and is the reason why traveling due south relative to the celestial South Pole will always take you due south.

This..



Where people have to be on the east coast of South America looking east to the celestial South Pole.  And the people in Australia have to be on the west coast looking west to the celestial South Pole is not the same as reality.


  Where in reality if you are on the southern tip of South America or Africa, or the southern coast of Australia you have to look due south to see the celestial South Pole.  They are not in Southern America facing east to Africa.  They are not in Australia looking west towards Africa. 



And not this..





Again.  AnneFrothingslosh.  The relative directions and distances on your map are totally wrong for actual reality.  Your map would get people lost at sea and even killed. 

aether is evidence-based

Show the evidence.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 18, 2024, 07:37:40 AM

aether is evidence-based

Show the evidence.

Evident to a flat earther believer is their word salad. 

Newtonian Physics isn't nearly identical to Relativity Physics. They are incredibly different and contradictory. As mentioned in another thread, in Relativity gravity on earth is the upwards acceleration of the earth's surface through spacetime. That is vastly different to the view of gravity in Newtonian Physics.

Not sure why you're making such a big deal about the different versions of gravity when neither is compatible with a flat earth.

Explain this, anyone.

From Quito, Equador

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quito

the sun is seen setting in the west in the evening on march 22. At the same exact time, the sun is already risen in the east as seen from Buna, New Guinea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buna,_Papua_New_Guinea

On the bipolar FE, this clearly puts the sun in two different places at the same time.

This problem does not arise  on the rim earth, which proves the two models are incompatible.

Bet nobody else has examined this

Evapotranspiration and precipitation demonstrate that the Earth is flat and that the diameter of the Earth is ≈ 20000 kilometers.
Calculation of the annual evapotranspiration of the Earth based on the Thornthwaite method.
The method uses this set of equations:
ETp = 16 × (10 × Tm ÷ I)^A
I = Σ (0,2 × Tm)^1,514
A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × I) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × I^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × I^3)

ETp = evapotranspiration.
I = annual heat index.
A = exponent calculated based on I.

I take into account that the average temperature of the Earth is ≈ 14º C.

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 510100000 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp = 352825968 cubic meters
ETp = 352825,968 cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 510100000
Precipitation = 485902948717 mm
Precipitation = 485902 km


In other words: if the Earth's diameter were 40000 km, this would mean that annual precipitation is greater than evapotranspiration, which is impossible. Initially, I attributed this discrepancy to the chambers of rain, hail, snow, frost, and dew connected to the first firmament described in the Book of Enoch. Now that I realize that navigations indicate that the Earth's diameter is ≈ 20000 km, we can better explain the discrepancies.
Repeating the calculation and taking into account a diameter of 20000 km, the results are consistent:

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 314159265,35898 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp =  217297680663,5 cubic meters
ETp 217297681 = cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 314159265,35898
Precipitation = 299255549810 mm
Precipitation = 299255,55 km

just a point, among many others

ETp =  217297680663,5 cubic meters
ETp 217297681 = cubic kilometers

Anne, you wouldn't pass an exam for 6th-graders

1 km = 1000 m

But

1 cubic km = 1000^3 cubic meters = 1 BILLION cubic meters

There are many others mistakes of the same kind, but they are NOT the main point

The main point is:

You found, for the globe, "that annual precipitation is greater than evapotranspiration [ETp]", by about 37%

ETp = 352825,968 cubic kilometers
Precipitation = 485902 km

(I suppose that the 2nd figure is in cubic km too)

But ALSO your calculations for a flat Earth show the SAME ratio between ETp and Precipitation

ETp 217297681 = cubic kilometers
Precipitation = 299255,55 km

Here, too, Precipitation is greater than ETp by 37%

Of course! The only datum you changed was the area of Earth's surface! All other data were the same!

So, how is the flat Earth model more accurate than the globe?

Bet nobody else has examined this

Couldn’t be bothered to go in much detail on this back of a fag packet attempt to calculate the size of the earth with the water cycle.

I did notice at a quick glance that  evapotranspiration is “calculated” for the whole surface of the earth, while the total precipitation comes from adding up annual numbers for countries.  Last I checked, it can also rain at sea, so not a great start.

A quick look on Google reveals that the equation cited is for POTENTIAL evapotranspiration, not actual.  You won’t be getting anywhere near that number in deserts where there’s sod all water and vegetation.  It’s also supposed to used at a given location, and probably doesn’t work averaged out for the whole planet.

Didn’t see much point getting further into it when the very basics of the methodology is already a train wreck. 

But there’s numbers, so it must be science!

Looks like Bulma is too stupid to understand the 24 hour sun in December in Antarctica is reality.

Btw there is a term for the activity of presenting a lot of information and idea with insufficient context and coherence, in an attempt to appear knowledgeable.

It's called "handwaving", and these pages do contain an inordinate amount of handwaving.

Just out of curiosity, how does the bi-polar map explain the 12 hour sun on the days of the equinox?  You know, how can all but the most extreme latitudes see sun rise almost exactly due east and the sun very nearly 12 hours late set almost exactly due west?

Or, for that matter, how about the 12 hour sun seen pretty much every day at the equator?

Newtonian Physics isn't nearly identical to Relativity Physics.

The results you get out of it are. And that is what is important.
Conversely, your monopole and bipolar model give completely different results.

In Newtonian physics, gravity is a field, in relativity, curved spacetime is that field, and you get the same results.

Just like how in fact most of the time you don't use either and go for an even simpler method, where for example, F=g*m, and dE=g*m*dh.

But if you take that, and the Newtonian model and the relativity model, and do the calculation, and note your uncertainty for each, you end up with the values all agreeing.
And that is what is important.
So the simpler equations are used to get the same result.

Compare that to your garbage.
What is the direction from the east coast of Australia to the west coast of the US?
In the monopole model, it is north east.
In the bipolar model, it can be west or even south west. They are completely different directions.

That is why such a model would be replaced, because of just how wrong it is.
And these drastically different results is why this situation is nothing like Newtonian physics vs relativity.

I dated a bipolar model for a while.  It didn't work out. She just made no sense.

*Facts are not nonsense.

And you aren't using facts. You are using pure nonsense where you only justification is because the FE doesn't work without it.

Aether is indispensable. Everything depends on aether. General relativity itself actually describes aether.

No, it doesn't.
Curved spacetime is not aether. It does not have the properties you are trying to make it have.
And if you want to appeal to that, then your FE is dead.

The curvature of space occurs when a celestial body absorbs aether.

Or when a body has mass.
You appear to just be saying whatever nonsense sandy has said. And do you know what he entirely failed to do? Explain how any of that would work.

- Albert Einstein, “Geometry and Experience,” in Sidelights on Relativity, 1983, p. 30

Do you notice a problem with this BS of yours?
You are attributing a quote to Einstein after he died.

Regardless, appealing to what he said doesn't change anything. It doesn't make aether real.

The globe is based on errors and distortions of reality. Eratosthenes' method does not take aether into account.

There is no magic aether to take into account. And you are yet to present anything which demonstrates the aether exists nor how it explains what is observed.

Evapotranspiration and precipitation demonstrate that the Earth is flat and that the diameter of the Earth is ≈ 20000 kilometers.

No, it doesn't. Not even close.
You aren't even applying the method correctly.
You can't treat the entire Earth as one homogenous area.
You can't just entirely ignore the number of daylight hours.
And this gives a potential. The water needs to be there to have it happen.

Likewise, you can't just take the rainfall for countries and average them. Different countries have different areas and would get different contributions. And that entirely ignores rain over the ocean.

But look at how you end up, you get evapotranspiration in mm and rainfall in mm.
The area is entirely irrelevant.
But instead of getting that and realising it, you for some reason multiplied the rainfall in mm by an area in square km to claim to get rainfall in mm.

And you repeated all the same "calculations" for no reason at all.

Ultimately, your calculations boil down to this:
Evapotranspiration: 691.68 mm
Precipitation: 952.56 mm

Adding in the area wont change anything.

So all this has proven is that you are willing to spout whatever BS you can think of (or find elsewhere) to pretend your model is true, either due to a complete lack of understanding what it is actually showing, or you just not caring about it being true.

The south celestial pole is clearly not a problem for the Bi-Polar map.

No, you have pushed it elsewhere, specifically the pacific ocean.

You still have no way to have the north and south celestial pole always exist 180 degrees apart.
Just like the monopole model, you have no explanation for the equinox.
But a problem unique for this model, the direction from Australia to the US, which you can't explain, and likewise, how the sun circling Antarctica so it is below Antarctica in your image is not visible in Africa or Europe but is in parts of North America/Russia which are further away.
You need pure magic to make the light magically go just where it needs to go.

Aether's behavior doesn't solve the problems of the other maps, and aether is evidence-based, not magic.

You have no evidence. You appeal to pure magic to pretend your model works.
If you had evidence you would provide it.
And because it is just undefined magic, it can do anything.
The same magic to solve the problems above can solve the equivalent problems for other FE models.

Frothy, with regards to your ridiculous map, a good friend of mine on his retirement took an around the world cruise, albeit on a cargo ship (to save money, and dodge the crowds and cabarets).

He left Southampton (UK), went across the Atlantic stopping at some of the Caribbean Islands, through the Panama canal, across to Easter Island, past French Polynesia to Tonga, Fiji, Brisbane (AUS), Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Bali, to Chennai India, past the Maldives to Mombasa, were escorted by a French warship to the gulf of Aden, up through the Red sea and the Suez canal to Port Said, on to Tunis and Gibraltar, final stop at Lisbon before arriving back in the UK just shy of 100 days later.
What he didn’t do, was go round the southern tip of South America or past Alaska, indeed apart from the final bit to England he didn’t feel cold the whole trip, how is that? did he lie to me?

What he didn’t do, was go round the southern tip of South America or past Alaska, indeed apart from the final bit to England he didn’t feel cold the whole trip, how is that? did he lie to me?

He was paid by NASA to assassinate the president with an earthquake, also lie.

Quote from: Jura-Glenlivet II on December 23, 2024, 07:23:38 AM

What he didn’t do, was go round the southern tip of South America or past Alaska, indeed apart from the final bit to England he didn’t feel cold the whole trip, how is that? did he lie to me?

He was paid by NASA to assassinate the president with an earthquake, also lie.

NASA doesn't pay people to carry out assassinations, but I can't say the same about the CIA, Kremlin and other agencies.
As for using earthquakes for assassination, it isn't yet feasible.

NASA doesn't pay people to carry out assassinations, but I can't say the same about the CIA, Kremlin and other agencies.
As for using earthquakes for assassination, it isn't yet feasible.

Hell, you're behind in your studies, grasshopper.

did he lie to me?

To believe in a flat earth is to believe that a lot of people lie a lot of the time so, in their world, yes he must have lied to you. 

The earth is flat, his observations were not in keeping with that fact therefore he lied. 

When InfoWars doesn't buy your conspiracy theory, you may want to rethink it.

When InfoWars doesn't buy your conspiracy theory, you may want to rethink it.

Ouch!

That doesn't leave many hideouts.

"FE is a psyop" the man said.

This is what happens when FE runs into professionals in conspiracy theory.

There's a lot of avoidance of FE there by Whitsit, he prefers to talk about the solar system. That comports with the hypothesis that FEers are retreating from FE into geocentrism.