Is the Earth Flat? - Some Evidence Presented

[JohnMartin]

Given that JM is Australian you think he would already know this point

Flying direct from Auckland, New Zealand (using my country rather than his) it is a 10,324km flight to Buenos Aires*. Flying direct to Los Angeles it is a 10,498 km flight*. Using John's model in the OP the Los Angeles flight should be significantly shorter. AND the quickest route would take us over the North Pole rather than across the Pacific Ocean.
Once again, John's model has been proven false.




* source for flight data: http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/sched...NZ&language=EN

I recently checked some other flights from Sydney to Buenos Aires on http://www.skyscanner.com.au/

Jetstar
JQ515
13:40 SYD Sydney Kingsford Smith 1h 35
15:15 MEL Melbourne Tullamarine

Connect in airport
Long wait 12h 15
Emirates
EK409
03:30(+1) MEL Melbourne Tullamarine 16h 25
12:55 DXB Dubai

Connect in airport
Long wait 18h 15
Emirates
EK247
07:10(+1) DXB Dubai 19h 35
19:45 EZE Buenos Aires Ministro Pistarini
Arrives: Saturday, 20 Feb 2016Journey duration: 68h 05

Apparently such a flight fits the flat earth model quite well. The flight on a global earth goes from the southern hemisphere to the northern, then back to the southern again. Very odd flight path for a globe, which seems to make more sense for a flat earth model.

Another flight says

OUTBOUND - Thursday, 18 Feb 2016
Qantas
QF149
18:40 SYD Sydney Kingsford Smith 3h 10
23:50 AKL Auckland International

Connect in airport
Long wait 18h 45
LAN Airlines
LA800
18:35(+1) AKL Auckland International 11h 20
13:55 SCL Santiago Arturo Merino Benitez

Connect in airport
1h 10
LAN Airlines
LA445
15:05 SCL Santiago Arturo Merino Benitez 1h 55
17:00 EZE Buenos Aires Ministro Pistarini
Arrives: Friday, 19 Feb 2016Journey duration: 36h 20

The 18 hour wait over in Auckland may be a fraudulent claim, although not an impossible claim, to cover over an excessive flight duration to South America.

My current understanding is the FEer's have some disagreement over the map location of the continents to account for flight paths. Maybe its difficult to determine what flights are real and what are fake. Then use the real ones to construct a map.

JM

[Roy]

How can a space pod travel through this? Wouldn't the temp fry everything? Seems so.

How can a space pod travel through this? Easily.

From wikipedia:

[Yttrium]

So now no pressure in the cabin, which means the astronauts breathed from what? Nothing in the pod, nothing in the PLSS units, for they were being thrown out. How? What a load of crap.

How did they pressurize the cabin and where did the air come from?

Look at a schematic of the spacecraft sometime. It had large oxygen tanks. Before you dive into incredulity, it would help if you took a few minutes to research the topic.

[Roy]

You can check the flat earth claims by climbing a mountain and noting the horizon rising to your eye level as you climb. If the earth was a globe, the higher you climbed, the lower you would have to look down to see the horizon.

Have you ever actually been outside?

[Roy]

You have also ignored the fact that objects such as Reunion island can be seen from Mauritius Island, which is about 230km away. At this distance the curvature would predict one island lower than the other by about 8x142x142x0.3014/12 = 4,051m

Since the Piton de la Fournaise volcano on Reunion is 7km high, that still leaves 3km of mountain visible above the horizon.

Should I add "mountains" to the cluelessness list? You seem to think they are flat.

[JonF]

I was close -



How can a space pod travel through this? Wouldn't the temp fry everything? Seems so.

JM

Big difference between temperature and heat capacity. Not that you could understand.

[Sparko]

"The 18 hour wait over in Auckland may be a fraudulent claim, although not an impossible claim, to cover over an excessive flight duration to South America."

Yeah because people won't know the difference between sitting on a plane for 18 hours verses sitting in an airport for 18 hours.


Another problem with flat earth: Constellations.

John, you have never seen the big dipper from Australia because it is only visible in the Northern hemisphere. And we in the North have never seen the southern cross because it is only visible in the southern hemisphere. That would not be true on a flat earth. And your dumbass "perspective" excuse doesn't work here because the stars are a lot further away than the sun, even in your idiotic universe. So they would not be behind some imaginary flatearth horizon.

Also Orion appears 180 degrees turned around in the southern hemisphere than in the Northern. That can only happen if you are on a sphere.




Not only that, but the moon appears upside down in the southern hemisphere compared to the northern. Again, only on a sphere.

3787227_08d1a222ee.jpg

[HMS_Beagle]

I recently checked some other flights from Sydney to Buenos Aires on http://www.skyscanner.com.au/

Apparently such a flight fits the flat earth model quite well. The flight on a global earth goes from the southern hemisphere to the northern, then back to the southern again. Very odd flight path for a globe, which seems to make more sense for a flat earth model.

Another flight says

The 18 hour wait over in Auckland may be a fraudulent claim, although not an impossible claim, to cover over an excessive flight duration to South America.

Unless the airline is flying the route to pick up more passengers and increase their profits. Unless they are connecting flights operated by different airlines that operate on different schedules.

You've never flown on a commercial jet plane, have you?

[Sparko]

Also, on a flat earth you could never have a lunar eclipse, where the earth is between the sun and the moon and casts a shadow on the moon. Impossible since the earth never comes between the earth and moon on a flat earth.

[rogue06]

---

00000000000fefc.jpg

[HMS_Beagle]

---

[ATTACH=CONFIG]13116[/ATTACH]

Busted!

drama.jpg

[Roy]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]13116[/ATTACH]

Who's arguing? I'm just laughing at his ineptitude.

[Sparko]

I think I will hold out for a 2D universe. Every video on nasa's website is 2D, therefore the universe is 2D. Prove me wrong.

People keep telling me to just look around and I will know the world is 3D, but I just don't see it.

148287844.jpg

[rogue06]

Who's arguing? I'm just laughing at his ineptitude.

So am I. But the difference is like sitting back and watching the antics of the village idiot and engaging with the village idiot.

[HMS_Beagle]

I think I will hold out for a 2D universe. Every video on nasa's website is 2D, therefore the universe is 2D. Prove me wrong.

People keep telling me to just look around and I will know the world is 3D, but I just don't see it.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]13127[/ATTACH]

I think we should go with the camouflaged reptilian space aliens living among us.