I am in utter disbelief that this 'Flat-Earth' nonsense has gained some attention

a reply to: DOCHOLIDAZE1

the point of this conversation between has been to be provided evidence that we can cross directly and there has been no evidence provided.

So you think that woman is lying? The others too?
In that case the only way for you to prove it to yourself is to do it yourself. See ya!

originally posted by: DOCHOLIDAZE1
a reply to: M4nWithNoN4me

why are we not allowed to fly over the south pole?

You are allowed. They do it all the time. Book a tour.

And just to kill part of the argument, you would not have to actually fly directly over it, going AROUND it would be enough, as in FE theory Antarctica is actually circling the whole globe. So if you start from the West, you would have to go South/SE and then East, and then North/NE.

In actually if you start at the West you will go N/NE, E, then S/SE .. the exact opposite of what FE theory requires. Case closed.

Qantas Sydney- Santiago direct
LAN Sydney-Auckland-Santiago
Aerolineas Argentinas Sydney-Buenos Aires

Well I seem to have found what I was looking for, case closed for me. lol

If the world was flat, a trip from Sydney to Santiago would have to fly by Japan and West Coast America. It would take close to 30 hours I would guess non stop.

It does not go anywhere near any of those places, and takes 18 hours. The time alone makes FE an impossibility.


Deviating from the quickest route to keep all land from being visible mid flight would add even more time. It's quite simply an impossible trip in FE theory.

a reply to: DOCHOLIDAZE1

You can book a ski trip to the South Pole.

The very fact that such a thing is offered is proof enough, don't you think?

Palmer (US) and Rothera (UK) can not be reached by Australia on the FE map, nor can the Ross Ice Shelf. Yet it's a fairly quick trip to reach all three of these locations and day trips to Ross happen all the time.

a reply to: Chadwickus

If my argument falls on deaf ears then he is simply sticking his fingers in them. My evidence is verifiable and can not be explained by FE.

Just get a weather balloon and some oxygen, parachute and a suit that will keep you alive at really cold temp. Strap yourself to it and float up and take a ride on the top of the atmosphere and you can see the curve of the earth and watch it revolve around until you're happy.

Then pop it and pull the ripcord before you hit the ground. Oh yah, aim for somewhere besides the ocean or hostile territory.

Enjoy the ride.

a reply to: M4nWithNoN4me

haven't you ever read The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman? Globalization, mang.



other than that, I have no idea how people could possibly think that the world is flat in any other way. Ignorance, I suppose.

a reply to: DOCHOLIDAZE1

I explained it in the other flat earth topic that came up a few months ago but it takes too long and I don't have the time right now to do it again. Ask a pilot about ETOPs and refuelling regulations over land.

a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

I believe a big reason commercial airlines don't fly direct over it is due to regulations requiring them to have special safety equipment if they do. It's such a slight difference in distance that it's not worth it to them.

You can do day trips from Australia to parts of Antarctica that is by South America on the FE maps. It's impossible for FE to be true.

Were are the f*!$§ edges of the world?!

Ohhh, I have to visualize a complex geometrical transformation to have a flat plane which is infinite, but not curved and boundless but not without boundaries.. Yeah, right. That sounds SO MUCH MORE SIMPLE than the round globe...


Really, flat earth just works for kindergarten. Anybody beyond sheer "I can only understand what I can get my hands on - ouch, heating is hot!" physic-education-level can't even think straight about "flat earth".

It hurts my brain, because there are so many exceptions to their rules, and particular cases and physical wonders and things like local space-time-curvatures and such. What a bunch of far-fetched stuff with no real basic to it!

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
Were are the f*!$§ edges of the world?!

Ohhh, I have to visualize a complex geometrical transformation to have a flat plane which is infinite, but not curved and boundless but not without boundaries.. Yeah, right. That sounds SO MUCH MORE SIMPLE than the round globe...

They say Antarctica does not exist as a continent, it surrounds the flat earth, that's why you can't go there. I posted a FE map a few posts ago.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

And a sunrise or sunset???

I've heard it's really just far in the distance so it looks like it comes over the horizon and then passes over our heads. Is that sounding about right??? Something like that???

a reply to: mOjOm

Yes. The response to that is why can I not see both at the same time using a telescope? No answer. FE model says you must be able to see both, at all times. You will notice only half the "north pole" is ever in sunlight at any one time, which we can clearly verify is untrue. It is 100% in sunlight and 100% in darkness very often. It also lasts for 6 months, not the 1 day required in the FE model.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

See both what?? The sun and the moon???

Here's one for the spherical Earth skeptics.

a reply to: mOjOm

Yes. In flat Earth model the Sun and Moon are just high up in the sky, they move far enough away that they become too small to see, there is no horizon for them to go over. Which means you can take out a telescope and see both, at any time, as it's merely a question of distance.

Since we can verify that in fact is wrong (and you can see it's wrong because the moon is very large when it disappears "in the distance") we can verify FE is wrong.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

further that outpouring of idiocy does not permit daytime observation of the moon - ir eclipses for that matter

where the hell did you find that graphic ???? - its creator needs beating to death wih his own legs