Flight path - Sydney (SYD) to Santiago (SCL) on Latam or Quantas

Stop spamming BS and address the issue.
I stated the fact that countless people take these flights.
You then demanded a manifest showing loads of civilians on orbital flights.

Either admit you dishonestly deflected to pure BS, intentionally trying to deceive everyone; or that you are so stupid you think this flight is orbital.

Until you can demonstrate your honesty with that, anything else from you is pointless.

I stated the fact that countless people take these flights. You then demanded a manifest showing loads of civilians on orbital flights.

 Jack, your "countless people" is a Statistical Mirage. A handful of billionaires taking sub-orbital joyrides to the Karman Line is not a civilian manifest for a globe. You are using high-altitude "parabolic" flights to distract from the fact that no civilian has ever completed a verified, non-composite, single-shot 360-degree orbit of a physical ball. You call it a "flight," I call it a High-Altitude PR Stunt. Where are the thousands of commercial orbital flights? Where is the transit data? Data Audit: Failed.


 

Either admit you dishonestly deflected to pure BS... or that you are so stupid you think this flight is orbital.

 

• The Orbital Trap: I know the difference between your "orbital" fairy tales and "sub-orbital" reality, Jack. My point stands: if these flights were truly occurring on a globe with a 3,959-mile radius, those "civilians" would see the Horizon Drop significantly below eye level. Instead, even at peak altitude, the horizon remains a flat, circular line at the Observer's Eye Level. Whether it's 10km or 100km, the geometry doesn't change for a stationary plane. You are obsessing over the label of the flight to avoid the physics of the horizon. Inquiry Failure: Confirmed.

 

Until you can demonstrate your honesty with that, anything else from you is pointless.

 

• The Honesty Audit: You want to talk about honesty? Honesty is admitting that every "high-altitude" photo from these flights uses a Fish-Eye Lens to pre-program a curve into the viewer's mind. Honesty is admitting that Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic are just pressurized canisters reaching the ceiling of the firmament before falling back down due to Density and Buoyancy, not "orbital mechanics." You are the one being dishonest by pretending a vertical pop-up is proof of a spinning ball. Dishonesty: Exposed.

 Jack, you are clinging to a "definition" because you’ve lost the Physical Evidence. You can call a flight "orbital," "galactic," or "interdimensional"—it doesn't change the fact that the water below it is Stationary and Level.

Actually, it’s quite simple: if they were in "orbit," they’d stay up. They don't. They fall back to the Stationary Plane because you can't orbit a ceiling.

Stop the Name-Calling and address why the horizon doesn't drop at 100km, Jack.

Jack, your "countless people" is a Statistical Mirage. A handful of billionaires taking sub-orbital joyrides

My countless people is a fact.
Your pathetic appeal to rocket flights, yet again deflecting from the issue at hand show how utterly pathetic you are.



Once more, we are talking about the flight between Sydney and Santiago.
Something that makes absolutely no sense in your pathetic, delusional fantasy.
But because you can't defend your defend your fantasy, you deflect to this pathetic, dishonest BS.

Again either admit you dishonestly deflected to pure BS... or that you are so stupid you think this flight is orbital.
Until you can do one of these, you are just further demonstrating your dishonesty.
So pick one.

Once more, we are talking about the flight between Sydney and Santiago. Something that makes absolutely no sense in your pathetic, delusional fantasy. But because you can't defend your defend your fantasy, you deflect to this pathetic, dishonest BS.

The reason the Sydney to Santiago flight is brought up so often is because it’s a manufactured centerpiece of your narrative, yet it’s built on a foundation of data manipulation. These "direct" flights are the ultimate mirage; in reality, the vast majority of Southern Hemisphere travel relies on connections through Northern hubs or follows routes that mysteriously "go dark" on flight tracking software as soon as they hit the vast expanses of the southern oceans. You are pointing at a flight schedule and calling it a physical proof of a globe, while ignoring that the distances and travel times only work if you accept the skewed GPS data provided by the very organizations that profit from the globe model. On a level, stationary plane, the distance between these points is far greater than your spherical model claims, which is exactly why "direct" flights are so rare, frequently canceled, or rerouted with convenient excuses about "weather" or "jet streams."

Your aggressive demand for me to "pick one" is nothing more than a distraction from the fact that you cannot verify these flight paths yourself. You trust a screen and a digital map over the observable reality of a level horizon. If these flights were truly traversing the "bottom" of a ball, the navigational mechanics and the required constant downward pitch of the aircraft would be undeniable—yet they don't exist. You are defending a flight path that is a statistical anomaly at best and a complete fabrication at worst. Instead of shouting about "dishonesty," try explaining why these flights conveniently avoid the very paths that would easily prove your curvature if they were actually possible. You’re not holding a "killing blow"; you’re holding a fraudulent ticket to a destination your model can't even map correctly.

wise, explain why flights from Buenos Aires to Santiago take about the same time (ca 2.5 h) as flights from Atlanta to Dallas, when the former distance is about twice as far as the latter on your Flat Earth map.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/ARG1282
https://www.flightaware.com/live/findflight/KATL/KDFW

wise, explain why flights from Buenos Aires to Santiago take about the same time (ca 2.5 h) as flights from Atlanta to Dallas, when the former distance is about twice as far as the latter on your Flat Earth map.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/ARG1282
https://www.flightaware.com/live/findflight/KATL/KDFW

This is not in the context here. Open a new thread to ask this.