26 Oct 15
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI understand now. Thanks.
I assume he meant a disc. In most flat Earth descriptions there is a boundary.
He's seems to be making some arguments which indicate he is arguing for a flat Earth, and other arguments that seem to accept that the Earth is spherical, but disagrees with the path that planes should take on a spherical Earth.
As odd as both these discussions are, it would obviously be better to debate them one at a time. Proof of a spherical Earth is of course not limited to flight paths and shipping lanes.
26 Oct 15
Originally posted by wolfgang59Um, yeah.
Take a look at this shortest flight path between San Francisco and Dubai.
http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAE225
San Francisco latitude [b]37.8 deg North
Dubai latitude 25.2 deg North
Yet they fly via latitude 90 !!!
How can that be Freaky?🙄[/b]
wolfgang, you might want to look into the answer to that one before seeing it as a challenge.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadI did challenge it in my very first response to the post, and I have since pointed out that I challenged it.
Huh? I don't understand.
[b]What was asked of you, however, was this: if you knew the 19 hours was wrong, why didn't you challenge it?
I did challenge it in my very first response to the post, and I have since pointed out that I challenged it.
We were discussing the travel path of leaving TPE toward LAX.
But you knew that, and--- inexplicab ...[text shortened]... it is still unclear what you think you are demonstrating other than your own ignorance of maps).
No.
You did not.
I said your claim that Guam would be close was incorrect.
Perhaps.
But your "said" was wrong.
Wrong. Guam is over 800 miles south of the path due east of TPE.
Where could you possibly be getting your information?
Take TPE to LAX.
Move the marker for LAX to the point that it is only 3000 miles east of TPE.
You are now approximately 175 miles due south and east of Guam.
Give it another whack.
You appear to know nothing about mapping yet think you can demonstrate something about maps (yet it is still unclear what you think you are demonstrating other than your own ignorance of maps).
What appears to you as one thing is entirely different in reality.
Don't let that bother you in the least.
Continue flailing forward, full force.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by PatNovakI don't know what you trying to say, because there is no such thing as a round plane. A plane is a flat 2D surface extending indefinitely. There is nothing round about a plane.
I don't know what you trying to say, because there is no such thing as a round plane. A plane is a flat 2D surface extending indefinitely. There is nothing round about a plane.
[b]What you haven't addressed is why an airplane would follow such a wildly divergent path to its destination other than the shortest distance, i.e., a straight line.
...[text shortened]... uth of the same.[/b]
I second DeepThought's question. Are you arguing that the Earth is flat?[/b]
Wonder how you would describe a plate?
Example?
Any two points on the earth.
There's my example.
Go to the website I offered and observe the difference stated for miles in contrast to nautical miles.
Really?
You seriously don't know this?
Are you sure you've even looked into it--- even a little bit?
Sometimes national boundaries may interfere, but they [b]do follow the same type of trajectory, and being over land vs water has nothing to do with it.[/b]
What on God's green earth are you trying to say here?
Try answering the question, but this time insert common sense.
I have indeed answered this. It is because the flight path is roughly a Great Circle. Latitude lines are not the shortest path between East-West points, so it makes no sense to stay on the same latitude when traveling east-west.
I see what you did there.
You said the exact same thing without showing your work.
I think it's pretty clear you do not know the thing you are otherwise insisting makes sense.
If I'm walking from Boston to Seattle, you're logic has me arcing my path out... where, exactly?
I second DeepThought's question. Are you arguing that the Earth is flat?
We can get to that in due time.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou are good at posing questions.
[b]I don't know what you trying to say, because there is no such thing as a round plane. A plane is a flat 2D surface extending indefinitely. There is nothing round about a plane.
Wonder how you would describe a plate?
Example?
Any two points on the earth.
There's my example.
Go to the website I offered and observe the difference stated f ...[text shortened]... Thought's question. Are you arguing that the Earth is flat?[/b]
We can get to that in due time.[/b]
Would you mind answering mine as your answer may shed some light on this debate.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHMiles in contrast to nautical miles. If you are playing on the difference between nautical miles and statute miles I am never going to take any post you make seriously ever again. Otherwise you had better make it clear what your point is because if you aren't trying to prove to all us scientists that we don't know our science as well as we think we do it's a rather weak point. In my field I reign supreme, as do the others, most of us don't know that much about evolutionary science and we discuss stuff outside our fields and outside the language of our fields here. Confusion about technical details outside our specialized fields is not the same as poor metaphysics. Don't confuse the two things.
[b]I don't know what you trying to say, because there is no such thing as a round plane. A plane is a flat 2D surface extending indefinitely. There is nothing round about a plane.
Wonder how you would describe a plate?
Example?
Any two points on the earth.
There's my example.
Go to the website I offered and observe the difference stated f ...[text shortened]... Thought's question. Are you arguing that the Earth is flat?[/b]
We can get to that in due time.[/b]
Originally posted by DeepThought
Miles in contrast to nautical miles. If you are playing on the difference between nautical miles and statute miles I am never going to take any post you make seriously ever again. Otherwise you had better make it clear what your point is because if you aren't trying to prove to all us scientists that we don't know our science as well as we think we do ...[text shortened]... tside our specialized fields is not the same as poor metaphysics. Don't confuse the two things.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHReality. Not the flat-earther maps you seem to be using.
Where could you possibly be getting your information?
Take TPE to LAX.
Move the marker for LAX to the point that it is only 3000 miles east of TPE.
You are now approximately 175 miles due south and east of Guam.
Give it another whack.
TPE sits at 25 degrees north and LAX at 33.9 degrees North.
Guam sits at 13.5 degrees north. There is no rational way that going due east of TPE will take you south of Guam. Even flat earthers should be able to figure that out.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHStep number one in determining the shortest path between points would be to determine the terrain (i.e. what are the possible paths?). Whether the Earth is flat or spherical would need to be established and agreed upon before even discussing flight paths, etc. Until you tell us whether you believe the Earth is flat or spherical, the discussion should not proceed, because we need to know if we are debating a spherical vs flat Earth or we are debating shortest distances on a spherical Earth. They are mostly unrelated debates, and one debate is dependent on the other.
I second DeepThought's question. Are you arguing that the Earth is flat?
We can get to that in due time.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou're right.
Reality. Not the flat-earther maps you seem to be using.
[b]Take TPE to LAX.
Move the marker for LAX to the point that it is only 3000 miles east of TPE.
You are now approximately 175 miles due south and east of Guam.
Give it another whack.
TPE sits at 25 degrees north and LAX at 33.9 degrees North.
Guam sits at 13.5 degrees north. There is no ...[text shortened]... east of TPE will take you south of Guam. Even flat earthers should be able to figure that out.[/b]
I typed in TPE (international symbol for Taoyuan International Airport) and for whatever reason, the 'from' marker started in Malaysia.
Corrected with the beginning airport typed out, destination LAX, and Guam will be passed--- to the north and east by about 2,000 miles.
But guess what is less than 2000 miles east and just a bit south of that spot?
Hawaii.
Or about the same distance west and north?
Japan.
Either one of those--- on a globe--- would have been much closer than Ted Stevens.
27 Oct 15
Originally posted by PatNovakWhether the Earth is flat or spherical would need to be established and agreed upon before even discussing flight paths, etc.
Step number one in determining the shortest path between points would be to determine the terrain (i.e. what are the possible paths?). Whether the Earth is flat or spherical would need to be established and agreed upon before even discussing flight paths, etc. Until you tell us whether you believe the Earth is flat or spherical, the discussion should not pr ...[text shortened]... a spherical Earth. They are mostly unrelated debates, and one debate is dependent on the other.
Actually, we've been operating under the assumption that we are dealing with a globe.
What is being noted, however, are the inconsistencies which present themselves.
Please answer the question put to you regarding the lack of an arced trajectory for a flight between Boston and Seattle.
Also, respond to the same concept for a person walking the same path--- specifically, why a person can walk that straight path when an airplane allegedly cannot.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHPlease answer the question put to you regarding the lack of an arced trajectory for a flight between Boston and Seattle.
[b]Whether the Earth is flat or spherical would need to be established and agreed upon before even discussing flight paths, etc.
Actually, we've been operating under the assumption that we are dealing with a globe.
What is being noted, however, are the inconsistencies which present themselves.
Please answer the question put to you regarding the la ...[text shortened]... ath--- specifically, why a person can walk that straight path when an airplane allegedly cannot.[/b]
What makes you think flights from Boston to Seattle don't loop North? They do.
See: flights.expedia.com/flights-from-boston-to-seattle-bos-to-sea
Also, respond to the same concept for a person walking the same path--- specifically, why a person can walk that straight path when an airplane allegedly cannot.
A person doesn't walk a straight path because tunneling through the Earth is an extremely inefficient and dangerous way to travel.