A Question for Flat Earth Theorists

A Question for Flat Earth Theorists

08/31/2015 129 COMMENTS



In honor of Rob Skiba’s “having your cake and eating it too” position of being a “questioning globalist” while maintaining a website The Flat Earth Theory dedicated to popularizing intellectually bankrupt flat earth theories, I would like ask him a new question. In fact, the question is directed to all who question the spherical shape of the earth.





How can an airplane like the Rutan Model 76 Voyager fly without refueling or stopping, in straight course and end up right where it started, if the earth is not a sphere? It’s been done many times now.  That is the challenge, please use diagrams and mathematics to show how this is possible given your flat earth model. see


Voyager: The World Flight (The Official Log, Flight Analysis and Narrative Explanation in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum Records)

Correction: the course was not perfectly straight, rather the navigated around mountains and whatnot but the heading was still relatively straight. Here is the exact course (which still falsifies a flat earth):





Guess what? It had already been done back in 1949, traveling straight without landing once, but they refueled in the air. The flight instrumentation is very precise and the pilots navigated a straight course around the globe, how so given a flat earth?

Quote :

The first non-stop flight around the world was made by, again, a team of the US Air Force flyers in 1949. Taking off from Carswell Air Force base in Fort Worth, Texas on 26 February, Captain James Gallagher and a crew of 14 headed east in a B-50 Superfortress, called Lucky Lady II. They were refuelled four times in air by KB-29 tanker planes of the 43rd Air Refuelling Squadron, over the Azores, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines and Hawaii. The circumnavigation was completed on 2 March, having traveled 94 hours and 1 minute, covering 37 743 km (23,452 miles) at an average 398 km/h (249 mph).   http://www.didyouknow.cd/aroundtheworld/flight.htm

Stems From Bad Biblical Interpretation

What makes this all the worse, is that proponents of flat earth belief attempt to use the Bible to support the false belief.  I agree that some passages imply a flat earth with a dome over it. But teaching earth science was not the purpose of those passages. God used ancient human authors and ancient human language to convey a moral/theological message. The original authors had a lot of backward superstitious beliefs but God still used them because he was not teaching a scientific message to modern people. To rip scripture out of its ancient context in order to answer a modern scientific concern–that would have not even occurred to the original author–is an abuse.


The Bible is a collection of 66 books by over 40 authors over a period spanning 1400 BC to 90 AD. The meaning of scripture is what the original author intended for the original reader and it is our job as moderns to learn what that was.It was not written to 21st century people, it was written to ancient people in ancient Hebrew and Greek, so it is writtenfor us but not to us. It was written to the ancient folks, so we must endeavor to understand it in its ancient context not impose our own. Using the Bible to determine a scientific question like the shape of the earth is abusing the Bible the same way skeptics do in order to dismiss its moral authority. It’s about theology and morality, not science. 
 

Bad Science and Math

The earth was proven to be a sphere in around 170- 180 BC by Eratosthenes, a





Eratosthenes


Greek scholar that lived in 275-194 B.C. in Alexandria, Egypt. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology still used today. Please follow the links to learn about the incredible power of mathematics. God created a mathematically discernible reality that we can describe in equations. The rational intelligibility of the universe is one of the strongest evidences for intelligent design — creation was designed by a logical mathematical mind. Indeed, math is the language of creation, it is God’s language. If your beliefs do not agree with the math, you’re probably in error.


You can use high school level math and geometry prove the earth is a sphere for yourself. It’s not at all controversial. 

i would also ask...why is everything else we look at in space a sphere? Do they think of God as a trickster? Everything out there is round except earth?   ha!

so this rutan voyager was funded by nasa, thats not curious...

i haven't made up my mind yet because the flat earthers ask some interesting questions that ought to be answered. Like, with high-power magnification, why can we still see a boat on the horizon (so they say) when it should have gone over the curvature of the earth? Gravity is just a theory and water always seeks level. When airplanes fly in a straight line, why don't they end up in space since they don't adjust for the curvature? Why do all the flights going to Australia take such a pecular path? If there was a direct way to get there why isn't anyone doing it?


If a helicopter hovered above the earth for a few hours, would it end up in a different city? Wonder if anyone has tried that.

someone's awake...

If a helicopter hovered above the earth for a few hours, would it end up in a different city? Wonder if anyone has tried that.

Okay...that's cool!  We need an aeronautic physicist to drop by. Or at least a pilot.
A baggage handler?  Anybody?

One of the things that gets me is the math.  It all comes crashing down. All those kids in Universities might as well go sit on a stump.

Quote :

with high-power magnification, why can we still see a boat on the horizon (so they say) when it should have gone over the curvature of the earth?

 
Well given that why not look over the Atlantic (if you are east coast) and see Big Ben in London with a powerful scope? Same argument applies for the west coast. Since I’m west coast I swear I can almost see all the way to Beijing, China sometimes.
 
 

Quote :

When airplanes fly in a straight line, why don't they end up in space since they don't adjust for the curvature?

 
For the same reason our satellites don’t go flying off into outer space . . . BOTH are constantly being pulled downward by – GASP – gravity. They are both constantly falling.
 
 

Quote :

If a helicopter hovered above the earth for a few hours, would it end up in a different city?

 
If you jump up in the air do you end up in a different place when you land? Of course not! The earth is spinning under your feet and you are spinning along at the same rate just like it spins under a helicopter spinning at the same rate so the same physics apply to both. An object in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside source. Newtons third law of motion.

 
I can’t believe we are actually having this conversation in the 21^st century. The fluoride is working way to well.

so if you go to lake erie in canada,eh? and look across the water, eh? you can see the skyline of detroit some 60 mi. away, according to calc. of curvature, detroit should have dropped 2400 ft. but there it is.

air polution is why you cant see da chiner or big ben, but you can see lady liberty from 50 mi. away again with curvature the drop is 1666 ft. hmmm...

This doesn't feel like a 'fair fight', so to speak.  Rounders aren't allowed to use scientific discovery after the year 342 BC.  And can't use observable knowledge from above the atmosphere because it's all 'nasa lies'.  So, we're back to 343 BC and the observable, known world is perceived indeed, for all intent and purpose, flat. 

So we're beyond my pay grade, but a 1666 ft. drop over 50 miles can't be.  But, careful researching...I just saw a critique that google page 1 and 2 also show wrong information.  Those pages show a foot drop of 8 inches per mile.

And I think we still think light bends, (or say goodbye to Einstein) whether by gravitational force pulling, or atmospheric pressure pushing, or magnetic fields, or a combo.  Then there's light refraction/reflection due to the water.
Lots to put into the equation. 

I've been on the Atlantic for 47 years. (good grief) and watched ships head out to open ocean.
The bottom disappears first. The very top is the last to chug out of view.  It's an argument the rounders use and I've seen it too many times to blame it on waves.

history of round earth discovery   Interesting read.

www.smarterthanthat.com/astronomy/top-10-ways-to-know-the-earth-is-not-flat

The 8 inches per mile is incorrect. Video explains why. Link goes to an accurate horizon calculator. Just plug your height into the converter, push 'calculate' and voila - the answer in feet or meters.

Distance to the Horizon Calculator
http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a9wxl6FQbY


Video below explains seeing Detroit, or in this case Chicago, from 60 miles away across the water. Mirage of Chicago skyline seen from Michigan shoreline. This video from a flat earther. Not withstanding the foolish idiot and his BS messages, the science presented by the meteorologist in his video is real enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLlNKy5j_O8


Here's a goodie sample photo for y'all to ponder. Taken from the link below. More photos at link.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2130598/False-wall-water-created-Fata-Morgana-mirage-hidden-iceberg-Titanic-late.html

Interesting.

Here's something from the video that murray leslie posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0qFb4Zi1bo

A flight from Johannesburg to Perth should take 11 hours,



but you can’t get a direct flight, so ...
Johannesburg to Dubai to Perth, or
Johannesburg to Hong Kong to Perth, or
Johannesburg to Malaysia to Perth - 18+ hours.

   


A flight from Sydney to Santiago should take 15 hours.



but you can’t get a direct flight, so ...
Sydney to Los Angeles to Santiago - 27 hours.

  

i'm just saying, there's something odd about these and other anomalies.

so i calc. curvature using "earth curve calculator" @ 60 mi across erie to detroit= 2166 hidden ft.

50 mi to lady liberty=1473 hidden ft  what is that statue ht. 300 ft??

ive never seen a mirage with lights on the top floors

this should clinch it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7vX_Js07mY#t=250

For Lovisa...re the flight patterns.  Are they embarking/disembarking passengers or freight on any of these mid-route touchdowns?  And are they taking on fuel?  Apologies for not looking into it myself, but these are logical explanations.  (I do have experience in International air transport, export-import logistics, laws, and routing.)
It's most probably all about the money.  It's amazingly expensive and complicated to put a big bird in the air.
A secondary reason may be International air space rights, government and military restrictions, adverse recurring weather conditions, etc.

Dove, i have no idea about any of that. i got it from the video linked. They probably refueled though. Nevertheless, it seems odd to me to fly such a distance north when your destination is south. By the way, i'm not a flat-earther. i just thought that video brought up some pertinent questions deserving of answers.

About that helicopter question from earlier, if i run across a merry-go-round i might try jumping up in the air to see what happens.

i ran across this last night. If you can get through the first 33 seconds, i’d recommend to watching until 8:20 (not the whole video). There is an interesting nautical map that was made in 1892, printed in New York. It looks like they were just beginning to map out Antartica at that time. Especially interesting are the lines of longitude, which are wider at the bottom than at the center.

I found some aeronautical engineers with info on flight paths. Whoop!  It's an easy non-technical read.  I don't know how I missed the safety aspect till after I went to bed.
And on the money thing, not every airline flies every path, so they make connections.  Part of the pie is better than none, and lets them still compete in the global market. 

https://www.quora.com/How-are-flight-paths-determined

~~~~~~~
On the video...it takes great compassion to listen to someone who doesn't even recognize the word 'college' and can't pronounce 'solstice'. lol.  You did well to persevere.
At 4 minutes in he shows a side graph on the map of a blob of ice extending from the arctic circle to Antarctica, and mumbles something about it's being freezing cold at the winter solstice in Antarctica.   Actually that's summer in the southern hemisphere.  The mean temperature in Sydney in the month of December is 26C=78.8F.
I can't make it for a whole eight minutes.  heehee.

I actually have a better vid on the same map, sent to me this morning, but I think I'll try to go after the map maker instead and report back.

That little snippet of the panel discussion is highly suspicious, but I couldn't tell what group they were.  For all we know in the next second they all burst into laughter.

The globe spread out on a flat plane allows us to reference it in print.  Nothing more. 
And Schrödinger's cat has nothing to do with it!

But I agree, you've brought up some interesting questions that I'd like
to understand too.  I think if we jumped on a merry go round, we'd land in a slightly different spot.  BUT, in relation to our position on the earth??....hmm.
That sounds like Relativity.  At least it's getting fun.

Dove wrote:

I think if we jumped on a merry go round, we'd land in a slightly different spot.

You would be correct. You would want to continue in the direction you were going, that being essentially STRAIGHT at any given point in the rotation. Centrifugal force wants to take you in a straight line over the edge while friction wants to keep you fixed in place. When you jump the centrifugal force trying to push you towards the edge wins the battle and "STRAIGHT" off you go. It's called linear motion. See the video.

Isn't science cool?

Jump to 6min 55sec - linear motion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grMWAI1RdVs

Interesting vid, Researcher. Science is fun!  But, I couldn't quite relate to it for our merry-go-round question. 
With no formula at hand, just in layman's terms, I think that:
1) the merry go round is first of all, mechanical motion. 
2) as long as I'm passively standing on it I am subject to that same motion.
3)if I jump straight up into the air, I break my connection to the mechanical motion.
4) It continues on without me, 
5) I stay stationary in space while it moves on. Notwithstanding the gravity inertia which affects both the carousel and me.
6) when I make contact again, it's moved forward,
7)I've stayed in one place,
8)and I land in a different spot from where I first jumped up because the floor beneath me has moved.
So that is mechanical motion separate from gravity, atmospheric pressure, etc.

Now the helicopter.  You had the explanation, right?  This is a different equation, altogether.  Even though the helicopter is mechanical, it's stationary, using only lift.  So, in this case the same rotational spin that applies to the earth, applies to the helicopter.  That's correct, right?  And why is that again? I forget.
~~~~~~~~
This is some stuff I found a little while ago:

No reason why we can't learn things on the hunt.  Here's Deception Island, listed as an active volcano, with a water-filled caldera big enough to enter with a ship.
From a distance it looked like your basic island.  Hence the (no woo-woo) deception.  It's not all island, after all.


This one's bigger.  Gleason's map, according to the FES (Flat Earth Society)
is virtually the same as the Azimuthal equidistant projection.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3356.0

That is credited to Al-Biruni, a Persian Arab, from the 11th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Biruni

Now if you look at the U.N. symbol, and remember what Obama said a short
while ago about the contributions of Arabs to this nation, I could conjure up a more dastardly reason for this FE theory to be re-presented.

We did a study on the laurel wreath a long time ago, but more and more I'm leaning to the U.N., not the Catholic Church or any other country or organization, as being the governing body of the NWO with the a.c. at the head.

Well, forget that.  the U.N. IS already the world's government, according to them.
Now, will "O" take the UN presidency?  Or someone else. (I've been waiting for it to be "O" for a long time.  If it's not, I'll be surprised)
Remember the U.N. Brussels building. Seat number '666' was still vacant last we heard.


But whatever, we must remember how quickly and how thoroughly they are tearing apart everything and replacing it with new information.
There are white, middle class teenagers out there who don't know who Washington D.C. is named after! (We can't blame it on sub-standard 'inner city' education).
Never mind Common Core.  Though isn't that name telling?!
If we took a long, hard look at education today, we'd be mind blown. And we are this era's dinosaurs. Neanderthals in their eyes. From their perspective, we don't know dip.

What if the 'final battle' really is on horseback......who needs a round earth then?

Dove wrote:

and I land in a different spot from where I first jumped up because the floor beneath me has moved.

Correct, and you will land in a new spot nearer to the outer edge due to linear motion. And if you jump again and again you'll eventually land on the ground outside of the merry-go round. Linear motion in action.

Dove wrote:

On the video...it takes great compassion to listen to someone who doesn't even recognize the word 'college' and can't pronounce 'solstice'. lol.  You did well to persevere.

He he! He might need glasses.

Dove wrote:

At 4 minutes in he shows a side graph on the map of a blob of ice extending from the arctic circle to Antarctica, and mumbles something about it's being freezing cold at the winter solstice in Antarctica.   Actually that's summer in the southern hemisphere.  The mean temperature in Sydney in the month of December is 26C=78.8F.

i took a look at that and the blob of ice is probably the path of the sun, which is interesting. Here's some really bad pictures:

Winter:



Summer:



Seeing as just about everything else out in space is round, it would make sense that Earth followed the same pattern. But here's a question, what if it's larger than we previously thought? Kind of like The Truman show. Just asking.

we all b truman, we find the outside edge, soon...

Hey, even looking out the window of a jet flying at 35,000 feet I've seen the curvature of the earth. It's subtle but it's there and unmistakable. Marveled at being able to see it so clearly myself back then (multiple times in the 1970's thru 2006) so Felix at 128,000 feet really got a good clear eye full. Thanks for the video, rawblues.

Final data analysis of Baumgartner's jump:

http://www.redbullstratos.com/science/scientific-data-review/

Delusional? 


Flat Earth (AE) Map = Southern Flights No Longer a Problem?


Published on Mar 23, 2016

OK. Don't shoot me, but I've been reconsidering the Gleason's Standard Map, aka the Azimuthal Equidistant (Flat Earth) Map. Could it really be scientifically and practically accurate "As It Is?" Could it hold the key to solving the problem of the flights in the so called southern hemisphere? Could this be the piece TigerDan was missing when he set out to make his map? I am beginning to think so. I just threw this video together real quick, so please pardon any mistakes and the poor audio. Unfortunately, I didn't have my headset mic selected for audio on Google Hangout, so it grabbed the audio from my cheap webcam. 

Here is the link to the Gleason's Standard Map: 
http://maps.bpl.org/id/15442

hebrews11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

we all come from a "scientific point of view" but there is growing evidence our science falsely so called is bull crap... just last nite i saw the full moon rise but the sun gone down already, the moon, i've heard has its own light source,

gen1:14 ¶And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: *
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

i dont have all the answers, but my curiosity is piqued...remember the god of this world is also the father of lies...

Quote :

we all come from a "scientific point of view" but there is growing evidence our science falsely so called is bull crap... just last nite i saw the full moon rise but the sun gone down already, the moon, i've heard has its own light source,

Scientific point of view???

I can't believe that I actually read this (ref. area in red)! Someone needs a remedial class in basic astronomy.

What happened to a couple balls and a flashlight lesson?
Can't believe this subject is still going.

Thanks Colonel (and Rob Skiba)! That explained a lot. Also i was going to say that the solstice markings seem to allude to a spherical earth as well.