Which is further north, London or Istanbul?

No, beyond wrong.
The illustration I posted were of parallel lines, not locally parallel lines, whatever the fuck that is, and they show divergence due to perspective...

Jura-Clone is hiding behind a quote because he can't handle the actual physics. Just because you say it is "beyond wrong" doesn't make it wrong. You think the term "parallel" is a magic spell that negates the physical behavior of light in a medium.

You are struggling with basic definitions. "Locally parallel" is how we describe rays from a source that are not truly at an infinite distance. In your 3D modeling world, you click a button and assume reality follows. In the real world, the divergence of crepuscular rays—their wide angular spread—proves the Sun is local.

If the Sun were 93 million miles away, the rays would be effectively "truly parallel" and their angular divergence would be practically zero. Instead, we see a wide fan. Simple math: if the divergence angle is large, the distance to the source must be small. This is basic geometry that your globe-beliefs have blocked out.

"Never argue with an idiot they'll drag you down to their level and beat you through experience"

The classic "exit script" used by every globe defender when their logic runs out. You aren't leaving because you have the high ground; you are leaving because you can't explain the lack of curvature, you can't explain why parallel rays converge at a local vanishing point, and you can't handle the fact that the evidence doesn't fit your model.

Quoting Mark Twain doesn't make you a scientist. It just makes you a well-read person who is still wrong. You reject the physics of perspective while standing on a flat floor. Go back to your 3D software and draw yourself a ball to hide in. The real world is for those who can handle the evidence.

no it does.

no it does.

Nice selfie, uncle Jura.

On the contrary, the map works perfectly

Then show it by overlaying it with the practical and working map provided Jura-Glenlivet II in an absolutely brilliant post. 

MMM... North eh?

Don’t worry not so wise, we already know it’s something else you will fail at and just proving once again FE is useless and hasn’t been relevant for centuries. 

Or, plot the stops on a rail journey that has been open for over a hundred years, London, Paris, Munich, Vienna, Budapest, Bucharest, Istanbul, on to your kiddy map and explain how the last stop Is more northern than the first.

It beggars belief how Wise constantly rejects the lessons of every day seen and experienced reality in favor of his madness wrapped in an unhinged belief.

Daily flights leave from London to Istanbul all flying south and have been doing so for decades and that’s aside from both the road and rail journeys  both which have a much much longer pedigree. North from London lies Scotland and not France!
Denying this is denying reality.

Does WISE not stop and think for one moment that someone during all these years along with the millions of journeys that have been made that someone may have noticed that a mistake has been made in the relative location of these two cities?

Wise insisting against every day reality that London lies farther south than Istanbul takes the whole situation into rarefied area of total insanity akin to insisting up is down dry is wet and things fall upward not down.

Such is the observed and real madness of the flat earth believer.

It beggars belief how Wise constantly rejects the lessons of every day seen and experienced reality in favor of his madness wrapped in an unhinged belief.

Does it?

Or maybe people are perfectly capable of filtering what they see and hear to match their assumptions.

But it's not like that would happen to you, of course.

There is some confusion on this matter, and I want to clear it up.

According to the global world map, and even according to the Gleason map, London is clearly located much further north, while on my map they are at roughly the same latitude. How can both of these be possible?

I sincerley belive you were in special classes, the earth is tilted nimwit, therefore, a globular map wold show london higher north while stllll being the same latitude, because latitude is from the center down. The weather differences come from the tilt, like how opposite hemshpheres have different seasons.

Or, plot the stops on a rail journey that has been open for over a hundred years, London, Paris, Munich, Vienna, Budapest, Bucharest, Istanbul, on to your kiddy map and explain how the last stop Is more northern than the first.

Why would I do that stupid suggestion of yours that won't accomplish anything anyway — just to waste time? On your map, London appears in the north. If I draw the same railway line on my map, it would probably appear different. What do you expect that to prove, other than the stupidity of you and the other members of your globalist gang?

Debating is not your thing, uncle Jura, and Data (time) is aware that you don't actually know this, and you're making yourself look like the village idiot. If you want, you can withdraw from the debate before making even more of a fool of yourself.

You don’t debate, you waffle and dodge, for over 100 years people have travelled that route by train, but nobody noticed they were travelling North?

At which junction did they turn north, Paris, Munich, Vienna, Budapest, Bucharest?

You don’t debate, you waffle and dodge, for over 100 years people have travelled that route by train, but nobody noticed they were travelling North?

At which junction did they turn north, Paris, Munich, Vienna, Budapest, Bucharest?

You're so far off topic that you come across as a complete idiot here. Whether it's flight routes, or traveling by car or train, people navigate by looking at a map — not by compass. If they did look at a compass, they would see that from Istanbul to London the general direction is west. But even there, there's a deception: "magnetic inclination / decnilation." Because of this lie, even though they are actually going west the whole time, they are told "you are actually going northwest due to magnetic declination," and people believe it. You can look at this map for the magnetic declination angle.



Here's what this means, Jura: The place you see as west on your map is actually north. Did I believe it? No. Did the globalists believe it? Yes. Did you believe it? You're not even aware of what this is — if you were, you wouldn't even mention that stupid argument.

They made this map for people like you, Jura, I mean for idiots.

This is where you basement dwellers give yourselves away, when I travel, especially by train, I look out the window, last year we went to the south of France by train, early morning the sun was primarily to the left, shifting to our front as we travelled, care to guess what that meant?

And we went to the Camargue, it’s on the Mediterranean, Turkey is on the med’ next to Greece, which on your kiddy map is south of London, none of what you are saying makes any sense, no surprise there, but even in your isolated basement try and explain how the Mediterranean can be both south and north of London?

...early morning the sun was primarily to the left, shifting to our front as we travelled, care to guess what that meant?

You are reporting your travel logs without realizing they just deleted your own model. You can't perform a simple directional audit while sitting on a train. You think a "left turn" at a specific time of day is proof of a globe, when it actually exposes the local circuit of the Sun.

If you are traveling south from London toward France in the early morning and the Sun is to your left (east), that means the Sun is physically located further north than your current latitude. On your globe, London is already at a high northern latitude (51°N). For the Sun to be to your left while you move south at sunrise, the Sun's "ground position" must be significantly north of your track.

In the globe model, the Sun never tracks north of the Tropic of Cancer (23.5°N). So how is the Sun to the left of a south-bound traveler at 50°N? It shouldn't be. It should be behind you and to the left (southeast). You just admitted to seeing a northeast sunrise relative to your southward heading, which only works on the stationary plane where the Sun's circuit expands and contracts over the center.

...try and explain how the Mediterranean can be both south and north of London?

You are struggling with the radial scaling of the Gleason map. The Mediterranean is "south" in terms of radial distance from the North Pole (the center), but "north" is just a direction toward that center. You think "south" means "falling off the bottom of a ball."

You mentioned the Sun shifted to your "front" as you traveled. That means the Sun was crossing your path of travel from east to west on a local curve. On a globe 93 million miles away, the Sun's relative position wouldn't "shift to your front" just because you moved a few hundred miles on a train. That is the behavior of a local luminary on a close-range circuit.

You looked out a window and saw the Sun proving its local, northern-circuit position, but you were too busy to check the compass. You think "traveling to the Mediterranean" is a scientific argument.

The Sun was to your left because it's on a local track that London hasn't even reached yet. Your globe doesn't account for the lighting hardware you saw with your own eyes. You're a traveler who can't even read his own logs. The floor is level, the Sun is local, and your train ride just derailed your ball.

PS: Jura, you try to defend yourself with such stupid arguments that even the most die-hard globalists who read you will continue to believe in the flat earth after seeing how logical and scientific my arguments are. Note for the ordinary reader: He is not my strawman.

It shifted towards the direction of travel because we were moving through time (it was getting later). Jesus!

You are struggling with the radial scaling of the Gleason map. The Mediterranean is "south" in terms of radial distance from the North Pole (the center), but "north" is just a direction toward that center. You think "south" means "falling off the bottom of a ball."

This again is just drivel, if your “map” shows two different places on the same body of water, (Greece, Turkey), one of who’s capital is south of us, but the others is north, there is something wrong with the map, your ability to reason, and your whole fucking world view.

You're so far off topic

Showing repeatedly in different threads your map fails at the reality of relative distances and directions isn’t off topic.

Not so wise, you should thank the people that at least look at your useless BS.  It’s the only thing giving it a modicum of relevance.

Showing repeatedly in different threads your map fails at the reality of relative distances and directions isn’t off topic.

Oh, look who’s talking about "failing at reality." DataOverFlow, you’re so desperate for attention you’ve turned into a professional thread-stalker. You wouldn't know "reality" if it hit you in the face like a bird hitting the Firmament.

You keep whining about "relative distances," but your own globe-model is a mathematical dumpster fire that requires a "Gravity Patch" to explain why water doesn't fly off a spinning ball and a "Dark Matter Patch" to explain why your galaxies don't fly apart. You don't have a map; you have a collection of CGI cartoons and 500-year-old fairy tales. My map is a numerical representation of the stationary floor; your map is a religious icon for the church of NASA.

Not so wise, you should thank the people that at least look at your useless BS.  It’s the only thing giving it a modicum of relevance.

Thank you? For what? For being the obsessive little fan-girl who follows me from thread to thread just to show everyone how triggered you are by a flat line on a piece of paper?

If my work is so "useless," why are you spending every waking hour of your life trying to "debunk" it? You’re not giving it relevance; you’re proving that it scares the hell out of you. You’re like a kid who just found out Santa isn't real and now you’re screaming at the mall Santa because your entire world-script is crashing.

You’re the one who is irrelevant, DataOverFlow. Without people like me to argue with, you’d just be another faceless drone staring at a computer screen, wondering why your life feels like a simulation. You need me to give your boring "globe-defender" persona a reason to exist. Now go find another YouTube link to hide behind before your brain has to do some actual thinking.

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it. 

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered. 

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:16:20 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered.

Your globetard projections consistently produce inaccurate results.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:20:28 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:16:20 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered.

Your globetard projections consistently produce inaccurate results.

Globe is still more accurate than flat earth.

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:28:35 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:20:28 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:16:20 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered.

Your globetard projections consistently produce inaccurate results.

Globe is still more accurate than flat earth.

No it is not.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:43:04 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:28:35 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:20:28 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:16:20 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered.

Your globetard projections consistently produce inaccurate results.

Globe is still more accurate than flat earth.

No it is not.

Globe is still more accurate than FE.  Why FE became irrelevant centuries ago. 

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:47:43 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:43:04 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:28:35 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:20:28 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 06:16:20 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 06:03:08 AM

Quote from: wise on April 29, 2026, 05:54:19 AM

Oh, look

Wise.  Your map has flaws and is useless compared to a globe for accurate relative distances and directions.  Get over it.

This is your claim. But in many attempts, my map gives better results than your global garbage map.

Nope.  Globe derived projections, distances, and relative directions used effectively for centuries by thousands to navigate the earth with more degrees of accuracy than what FE offered.

Your globetard projections consistently produce inaccurate results.

Globe is still more accurate than flat earth.

No it is not.

Globe is still more accurate than FE.  Why FE became irrelevant centuries ago.

Markdof, your globe seems "accurate" because its navigation software is programmed with a stationary Earth reference frame to correct for the geometric errors of your ball-script.

Markdof, your globe is only "accurate" because its navigation software is programmed with a stationary Earth reference frame to correct for the geometric errors of your ball-script.

Are you stupid.  The globe was determined to be more accurate and useful long before such things were even invented.  There is a reason FE became irrelevant centuries ago.  Not in the 1930’s.

Lol

Are you stupid.  The globe was determined to be more accurate and useful long before such things were even invented.

Markdof, you keep appealing to "consensus" as if truth is a popularity contest. You have zero historical perspective. You think that because a model was "accepted" centuries ago, it must be correct. Do you know who else was told their observations were "wrong" because they didn't match the established school-script?

Albert Einstein's first doctoral thesis in 1901 was rejected by Professor Alfred Kleiner. Why? Because it was "too dismissive" of the existing laws of physics. Einstein didn't even get his PhD until 1905, after he learned to "play the game" and submitted a more conservative paper. Even your own "prophets" of the globe started as outcasts who were told their data didn't fit the established "accurate" model.

And look at Nikola Tesla, a man whose hardware actually built the modern world. Tesla explicitly rejected Einstein’s curved space-time, calling it a "beggar wrapped in purple" and stating that it was violently opposed to common sense. Tesla knew that the medium (Aether) was the primary reality, while you’re still defending a CGI ball that requires "warped space" to fix its broken equations.

1. Historical "Accuracy" is a Moving Target
You say FE became irrelevant centuries ago. Actually, it was forcibly replaced by an institutional shift during the Royal Geographical Society’s expansion. Navigation didn't become "more accurate" because of the globe; it became more standardized. Sailors were forced to use "corrections" and "currents" to bridge the gap between their level observations and the spherical math.

2. The Failure of Curvature Measurements
If the globe were so "accurate" for centuries, why did the Bedford Level Experiment in the 19th century—using actual physical measurements over a 6-mile stretch of water—repeatedly fail to show any curvature?
Drop = 8 inches * miles²
Over 6 miles, there should be a 24-foot drop. The data showed zero. The "accuracy" you worship only exists in textbooks and whiteboard drawings, never in raw, uncorrected field measurement.



3. The GPS "Correction" Software
Even today, your "accurate" globe requires a Geodetic Reference Frame that assumes a stationary Earth to function. If you actually tried to navigate a high-speed craft using raw spherical geometry without Aetheric medium corrections, you’d be miles off course.

The only reason you think the globe is "accurate" is that you’ve never been allowed to see the "errors" that the system hides behind "atmospheric refraction" and "gravitational anomalies." You're not defending a model; you're defending a dogma that hasn't been updated since the 18th century.

I’m providing modern Aetheric field theory; you’re providing 300-year-old "Lol"s. The quality gap is so wide now that I'm starting to feel sorry for you. Keep digging, Markdof. You’re our best recruiter.

Albert Einstein's

Has nothing to do with people figuring out the globe was more accurate centuries ago where FE became irrelevant.  RE is just more accurate and useful than FE.  Sorry. 

RE is just more accurate and useful than FE.  Sorry.

Datalowmark, your "more accurate" globe is just a visual patch for a system that uses **stationary plane equations** in its core navigation and ballistic software to prevent the hardware from crashing against reality.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on April 29, 2026, 07:01:16 AM

RE is just more accurate and useful than FE.  Sorry.

Datalowmark, your "more accurate" globe is just a visual patch for a system that uses **stationary plane equations** in its core navigation and ballistic software to prevent the hardware from crashing against reality.

Nope. The globe is a scaled down earth.  You can even buy globes that have some simple topography to show mountain ranges. 

Nope. The globe is a scaled down earth.  You can even buy globes that have some simple topography to show mountain ranges.

Datalowmark, you are literally arguing that a plastic toy from a gift shop is a "proof of reality." You are a biological script that can't distinguish between a physical model and the physical world. Your "scaled down earth" is a curated visual interface; it has zero bearing on the actual Aetheric Hardware it's trying to represent.

1. Topography vs. Geometry
You claim globes with "simple topography" prove the ball. This is User-Level Illiteracy. Those mountain ranges are exaggerated by factors of hundreds just so you can feel them with your finger. If a globe were truly "literal" and "scaled," it would be as smooth as a billiard ball. You are looking at a CGI-to-Plastic conversion and calling it "accuracy."

2. The Navigational Hardware Log
If the globe were the literal "Operating System," why do Long-Range Ballistics, Aircraft Navigation, and Structural Engineering all use a Stationary, Non-Rotating Plane as their baseline?
*   The Patch: Your globe-OS only exists as a "post-processing" layer to make the numbers fit the ball-narrative.
*   The Reality: The actual Field Equations ignore the curve because the curve isn't there; it's an optical effect of the Aetheric Refraction Gradient.

3. The "Gift Shop" Physics
You're basically saying, "I can buy a Spider-Man action figure, therefore Spider-Man is real." That is the level of your logic. You are defending a 500-year-old legacy UI by pointing at its merchandising.

4. Defragment Your Logic
Stop the spam, Markdof. You can't even get your BBCode tags to work consistently, and now you're using a desk ornament as a scientific reference. You are a Machine Oiler who has fallen in love with the Instruction Manual and forgotten the Engine. Defragment your logic gates or stop running your trap.