Sorry , I can't understand what you are saying - where are you going with this ? You seem to want to see an FE map based on a sequence of maps all offering differing viewpoints of a globe model which is derived from geodesy - the application of spherical geometry to flat survey.
Flat Earth
- Thread starter grav
- Start date
A
Apollonius
Guest
I'm saying there is no such thing as a Flat Earth map.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2022
- Messages
- 87
- Reaction score
- 110
Personally, I stopped looking for a flat earth map when I realized it's far simpler to consider that Earth has just been inverted. This is the very nature of the reality we live in every day, and it's all around us.
Inverted Earth. Some folks call it "Concave" I call it Inverted because it is what it is. That is the logic of the situation. This topic is like FE in the way that the more you invest into studying it, the more interesting it gets.
Only it actually works in reality, unlike every/any flat earth map.
Also, I don't know who told you that Geodesy that was mapping over a sphere... because that's not in any definition I've seen.
Geodesy- Definition
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2020
- Messages
- 2,005
- Reaction score
- 8,103
If you want to participate in this thread, please be aware of the guidelines, especially:
Repeatedly posting images without explanation is considered low effort, and doesn't add much value. Attacking others over their opinions, instead of focusing on the argument, is against the guidelines as well.
I am surprised that there are many here who seem to believe they have the right and duty to convince others of their opinions, and can't accept that not everyone shares their beliefs.
I also suggest that members who prefer the concave earth model (@Apollonius, @GandalfTheGreen) go to the concave earth thread instead. It's good to have different perspectives, but this doesn't help when the discussions devolve into "Here is why I am right and you are wrong". There are enough places on the web where people argue for the sake of it. Share you knowledge in an appropriate thread so that others can profit from your knowledge, instead of attacking people with different beliefs.
- This is a research forum with the clear purpose of sharing knowledge, not a group chat. The signal-to-noise ratio should be as high as possible. Noise is everything that doesn't add information value to the discussion, or derails it.
- Be polite, and respectful. We all can sense when things go in the wrong direction. Diffuse the situation instead of provoking your fellow debater.
- Ignore trolls. Report questionable posts to moderators.
Repeatedly posting images without explanation is considered low effort, and doesn't add much value. Attacking others over their opinions, instead of focusing on the argument, is against the guidelines as well.
I am surprised that there are many here who seem to believe they have the right and duty to convince others of their opinions, and can't accept that not everyone shares their beliefs.
I also suggest that members who prefer the concave earth model (@Apollonius, @GandalfTheGreen) go to the concave earth thread instead. It's good to have different perspectives, but this doesn't help when the discussions devolve into "Here is why I am right and you are wrong". There are enough places on the web where people argue for the sake of it. Share you knowledge in an appropriate thread so that others can profit from your knowledge, instead of attacking people with different beliefs.
Your describes geodesy as a branch of applied maths. Let's look at the application.
From "Elementary Surveying" by A.L. Higgins D.Sc. 3d edition 1946.
Introduction includes the following :
"Surveying is divided primarily into (1) Geodetical Surveying and (2) Plane Surveying . In geodesy the earth is considered a sphere , and in plane surveying a plane , the approximation being within the permissible limits of error for areas up to about 100 square miles. The former
involves a knowledge of spherical trigonometry, and the latter of plane trigonometry."
Plane language from a qualified surveyor telling us that geodesy requires that spherical geometry be applied to plane survey in order that the earth may be considered a sphere .
Also if no curvature ,convex or concave , is found over 100 square miles then it's a fair conclusion that the earth is a flat plane.
There's less bs in those old books
I have been asked to repost some images with more explanation as apparently the point was not clear. There are two very different ideas in play with this topic. In one scenario, planes fly around a sphere as depicted by google Earth, and in the other, planes are flying over something very close to Gleason's 1892 masterpiece.
The point of these images is to show that pilots never use a globe for their routes; they use something very close to Gleason's 1892 masterpiece.
This can be seen with many regular flights, but emergency landings, when life is in danger, tells the truest story. In the following example, you will see that the pilot was forced to land over 1000 miles from what should have been his route if we lived on the google Earth model, but was directly in line with the map that Alex Gleason left us in 1892.
Background
On March 1st, of 2016, Russia's Tass reported that:
Lufhansa’s aircraft en route from Shanghai to Munich made an emergency landing at Russia's Krasnoyark airport due to the need of emergency medical care for a 9-year-old girl
https://tass.com/society/859847?utm...m_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com
Let's look at what this actually means by comparing the routes over the globe and also over Gleason's.
I think it is obvious that no pilot would fly so far off course when a 9-year-old girl's life is in danger. And I also think it is clear that he didn't.
I hope that was clear. And I apologize for any confusion.
The point of these images is to show that pilots never use a globe for their routes; they use something very close to Gleason's 1892 masterpiece.
This can be seen with many regular flights, but emergency landings, when life is in danger, tells the truest story. In the following example, you will see that the pilot was forced to land over 1000 miles from what should have been his route if we lived on the google Earth model, but was directly in line with the map that Alex Gleason left us in 1892.
Background
On March 1st, of 2016, Russia's Tass reported that:
Lufhansa’s aircraft en route from Shanghai to Munich made an emergency landing at Russia's Krasnoyark airport due to the need of emergency medical care for a 9-year-old girl
https://tass.com/society/859847?utm...m_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com
Let's look at what this actually means by comparing the routes over the globe and also over Gleason's.
I think it is obvious that no pilot would fly so far off course when a 9-year-old girl's life is in danger. And I also think it is clear that he didn't.
I hope that was clear. And I apologize for any confusion.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2021
- Messages
- 22
- Reaction score
- 99
Something I've been thinking about lately is satellites. Do we have any serious evidence that they orbit? Are they just objects/relays suspended by weather balloons? Maybe there just isn't anything up there.
Interested in this board's thoughts on satellites. It's a big piece of the puzzle I don't see mentioned much.
Interested in this board's thoughts on satellites. It's a big piece of the puzzle I don't see mentioned much.
Here you go. Search results for query: Satellites
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2021
- Messages
- 22
- Reaction score
- 75
DavidMalcolmCurrie
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2022
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 15
I began researching this subject at "200 proofs the earth is not a spinning ball", that's what got me started researching this about five years ago, and I've done hundreds of hours of research since then, mostly watching videos on the subject. I believe in the Holy Bible AS IT WAS WRITTEN (although interpretations can vary), and that includes Hebrew cosmology. I would ask those who think they live on a spinning ball to watch the "200 proofs" video, and tell me where he was wrong...?
Last edited:
I posted this previously. It's funny you quoted that.
Constellations in our night sky certainly do NOT help your (the globes) case!
--Ursa Majo (near Polaris) can be seen from 90 degrees North out to 30 degrees South latitude.
--Vulpecula can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude out to 55 degrees South.
--Taurus, Pisces and Leo can be seen from 90 degrees North out to 65 degrees South.
--Aquarius and Libra can be seen from 65 degrees North out to 90 degrees South.
--Virgo is visible from 80 degrees North out to 80 degrees South.
--Orion can be seen from 85 degrees North out to 75 degrees South.
Regardless of any tilt or inclination, this cannot happen on a ball, true?
And then we have:
^^^^^The above pic of the star trails around Polaris was taken from 7.9425° S, 112.9530° E!
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2020
- Messages
- 509
- Reaction score
- 1,209
Constellations are clear proofs, or should be, of that big thing in the sky which has not changed appreciably over 6000 alleged years. Average earthlings pay no attention to such things, but astronomers and science teachers who preach heliocentrism are all liars, every last one. They are agents of the Control System that keeps us vaxxed, vexed, and vastly ignorant.
Here are more science "facts" -- and a personal observation about local vs global authorities.
.....................
Local meteorologists predict windy weather tomorrow for my neck of the woods.
Gusts of 40+ MPH will be blowing stuff around. Bird feeders, chimes, lawn chairs. Arabi (New Orleans) got a tornado last week, an EF3, 136-165 MPH.
But wait! I forgot to factor in the spinning earth's speeds, as presented by global authorities:
earth's speed, as it rotates, revolves around the sun, and moves through the universe in 6 different directions (the following details were copied from
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/0...Earth.html
. 69,361 MPH Spin and Orbit
. 43,200 MPH Towards Lambda Herculis
. 15,624 MPH Perpendicular to Galactic Plane
. 446,400 MPH Orbiting the Galactic Center {or Galactic Spin Rate}
-------------------
whew! thank goodness grabbity holds the air down, and we don't feel all those speeds. because we have to factor in relatibbity.
ooh. Now it all makes sense. Religion, politics, science.
Here are more science "facts" -- and a personal observation about local vs global authorities.
.....................
Local meteorologists predict windy weather tomorrow for my neck of the woods.
Gusts of 40+ MPH will be blowing stuff around. Bird feeders, chimes, lawn chairs. Arabi (New Orleans) got a tornado last week, an EF3, 136-165 MPH.
But wait! I forgot to factor in the spinning earth's speeds, as presented by global authorities:
earth's speed, as it rotates, revolves around the sun, and moves through the universe in 6 different directions (the following details were copied from
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/0...Earth.html
. 69,361 MPH Spin and Orbit
. 43,200 MPH Towards Lambda Herculis
. 15,624 MPH Perpendicular to Galactic Plane
. 446,400 MPH Orbiting the Galactic Center {or Galactic Spin Rate}
-------------------
whew! thank goodness grabbity holds the air down, and we don't feel all those speeds. because we have to factor in relatibbity.
ooh. Now it all makes sense. Religion, politics, science.
And remember, all that is flying towards "the great attractor" at around 1.5 MILLION MPH!
While back here in objective reality:
If you are standing on the surface of a sphere, you can look towards the horizon in any direction and you can also look directly up into the Sky. This photo is exactly what you would expect to see if you were standing on the equator of the globe and looking directly North. What you can't see in this photo is what is happening directly above the camera. That is shown in this video which was posted by another contributor further up the thread.
Watch from 2:20 onwards and you will see what is missing from the photo above; namely, that if you look upwards instead of pointing the camera towards Polaris, you do not see stars moving in circles, they appear to move in straight lines as if on the inside of a cylinder. This information was also posted by someone else further up the thread under the heading 'Startrails at the equator.'
At the start of the video the camera is in the Northern hemisphere looking towards Polaris and you can see the stars rotating anticlockwise. At the end of the video the camera is in the Southern hemisphere and you can see the stars rotating clockwise. This movement of the stars is exactly consistent with the Earth being a spinning ball.
I explained this already. And you do not have to be on the equator to see this. This happens because of the way perspective works and the direction the camera is facing.
There are no star trails around any 'southern' star. And seeing anything even resembling the trails we see around the stationary Polaris in the 'southern hemisphere' is not possible, let alone from Auckland, South Africa and Ushaia simultaneously.
An aspect of the heliocentric psyop that all too often is overlooked, is what it does to our understanding of perspective. As long as you can understand that ALL parallel lines converge at a single point, the idea that the stars move in some opposite and impossible direction is easily understood.
It's all observer perspective:
Also, we know that there's a difference of a few minutes between how long the stars take to return to where they began, and for the sun to do the same. And we know this proves that they cannot attribute both, the star trails around Polaris, and also the sun's rising and setting to the same phenomenon (imagined axial rotation).
Food for thought.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2020
- Messages
- 509
- Reaction score
- 1,209
But the sheeple have lost what minuscule critical thinking skills they once had. if any.
The globe spins 1000 mph, yet the starry night sky appears motionless?
Some flatearthers think there will be an awakening. I don't see how.
The ptb work hard to keep us, as David Icke describes, dumb, drugged,and docile.
Flat Earth is really a puddle in the Infinite Plane.
Other puddle worlds exist outside our Antarctic border.
No flights are possible over Antarctica, such as between southern tips of Africa and South America.
The image is of course speculation about what lies beyond the ice wall.
Another video, which I have managed to lose :-\ suggests that the Moon reflects more of the Infinite Plane.
Not Vibes of Cosmos? ?
Has anyone seen it? about Mu and Atlantis visible outside the Antarctic ice shelf?
Some FEers think the NWO agents of deception will fake a flight to justify the fake icy continent at the bottom of the spinning ball
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wEgsS95Qknw
The globe spins 1000 mph, yet the starry night sky appears motionless?
Some flatearthers think there will be an awakening. I don't see how.
The ptb work hard to keep us, as David Icke describes, dumb, drugged,and docile.
Flat Earth is really a puddle in the Infinite Plane.
Other puddle worlds exist outside our Antarctic border.
No flights are possible over Antarctica, such as between southern tips of Africa and South America.
The image is of course speculation about what lies beyond the ice wall.
Another video, which I have managed to lose :-\ suggests that the Moon reflects more of the Infinite Plane.
Not Vibes of Cosmos? ?
Has anyone seen it? about Mu and Atlantis visible outside the Antarctic ice shelf?
Some FEers think the NWO agents of deception will fake a flight to justify the fake icy continent at the bottom of the spinning ball
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wEgsS95Qknw
A
Akanah
Guest
According to my earth-models, the distance between Perth and Buenos Aires would only be a "short stumble."
There is not much you can do wrong or fake. As long as people can fly only within the air atmosphere and not far above it through the water-sky, one does not get to see the true shape of the earth by such a flight.
There is not much you can do wrong or fake. As long as people can fly only within the air atmosphere and not far above it through the water-sky, one does not get to see the true shape of the earth by such a flight.
