Flat or round earth -The final experiment.

[prodromos]

View attachment 352898

Johannesburg to Santiago, certainly a plane should be able to fly straight there based on the above map.
But the route they take is actually:
View attachment 352899

They have to stop for some reason, you will not find a non stop flight from Johannesburg to Santiago.
Why can't they go straight between the two places? Because the journey is actually a bit farther than the above false maps can show.

They can go straight between the two places, but they choose to fly between the most heavily populated cities as they only make money if all seats are taken. Just because a route can be taken doesn't mean it is economically viable.

The real journey is seen better below:
View attachment 352900

On a truer map we can see it is a long journey. Going as straight, down, from Johannesburg to Santiago as possible,
they stop to refuel in Sao Paul. All routes taken by any plane will make the most sense on a sincere flat earth map.

Now plot New York to London on the same map, a flight that takes around the same amount of time as Sao Paulo to Johannesburg, yet on your flat earth model its almost half the distance. You debunk yourself trivially.

(Also, they don't stop to refuel in Sao Paulo. It is a different plane going across South America)

 

[The Liturgist]

They can go straight between the two places, but they choose to fly between the most heavily populated cities as they only make money if all seats are taken. Just because a route can be taken doesn't mean it is economically viable.

Now plot New York to London on the same map, a flight that takes around the same amount of time as Sao Paulo to Johannesburg, yet on your flat earth model its almost half the distance. You debunk yourself trivially.

(Also, they don't stop to refuel in Sao Paulo. It is a different plane going across South America)

Indeed, the specific SAO-SCL flight you brought up is an A321 and the SAO-JNB sector is the natural domain of the Boeing 787 (either a -8 or -9, although I would suspect a -8). If their 767-300ER is ETOPS it could also possibly fly that route, although I’m not sure given the 787 has a higher ETOPS rating, but the route sounds like that are where the 767-300ER and A330-200 used to dominate, 15-20 years ago, before the 787s had arrived en masse.

 

[prodromos]

Since they probably haven't followed the link I posted earlier, below are the great circle routes for the flights between the Southern Hemisphere continents.

As can be seen, on a globe they are straight lines, the shortest distance between two points. The distances on the globe correspond to the flight times, with differences due to head winds in one direction and tail winds in the other.
The Sydney-Santiago flight actually does pass South of New Zealand, which would be totally nuts on the flat earth map that has been presented.

 

[prodromos]

Here are those routes on the flat earth 'map' provided

In reality (not flat earth fantasy), the Sydney-Santiago flight does not go anywhere near the West coast of the USA, the Sydney-Johannesburg flight doesn't cross Asia via the Arab Penninsular, nor does the Sao Paulo-Johannesburg flight cross over the bulk of Brazil.
The long haul flights from Sydney take about the same time as the non-stop flight from New York to Dubai, which makes sense on the globe because the distances are very similar, yet on the flat earth it is only a little over half the distance.

Flat earther's have no argument against long haul flights in the Southern Hemisphere. They are simply not possible on the flat earth map, yet they occur multiple times every week.

 

[contratodo]

And the shortest path between Sao Paulo and Joburg is not the one indicated in your first drawing - everything looks distorted on a 2D projection of the Earth vs. the actual distances. That is why one needs a globe to understand airline routes.

The shortest path between Sau Paulo and Joburg, according to the globe model, is not the path taken by airplanes. Instead they take a path that only makes sense on a true flat projection of the earth. Any map adhering to the globe model will not show the true distances.
This is true for each and every flight route in existence. The earth is flat and stationary just as the Bible describes.

You have to use a lot of double speak to try and make this point seem to be for the globe.

We never have to look down to see the horizon .

 

[contratodo]

They can go straight between the two places, but they choose to fly between the most heavily populated cities as they only make money if all seats are taken.

Jet fuel is the main monetary concern of any airline. From Johannesburg to Santiago, they stop in Sao Paul to refuel .
Because they have to, because the journey is actually far, as shown on a sincere flat earth map.

Distance from Johannesburg to Santiago
9,170 km

Distance from Sydney to Santiago
11,340 km

Johannesburg to Santiago average flight time
32 hours, with no non stop flights.

Sydney to Santiago average flight time
15 hours, and there is a non stop one that takes only 12 hours


It is hard to find an accurate flat earth map,
in the one I last gave south and north America should be rotated a bit upwards and to the right.
But the flight and distance data speaks for itself.

All of the flights, all of them, from Jo to San, include long, mostly overnight, layovers,
because... the plane gets refueled during that time.

Because the flight is long, proving that the distance given is not entirely accurate.

The distance given is based on the globe model,
the true distance is seen in the flight travel,
and on a sincere flat earth map.

The truth is that from Sydney to Santiago and Johannesburg to Santiago are about the same distance,
it is a long journey. They either use a special plane, or they have to stop to refuel.


We never have to look down to see the horizon .
The earth is flat and stationary just as the Bible describes.

 

[The Liturgist]

The shortest path between Sau Paulo and Joburg, according to the globe model, is not the path taken by airplanes. Instead they take a path that only makes sense on a true flat projection of the earth. Any map adhering to the globe model will not show the true distances.

That’s simply false. 2D maps always feature distortion, which by the way is something I was taught in third grade when we learned about the pros and cons of various projections, such as the Mercator, the Robinson, the Azimuthal Equidistant (which the Flat Earth community uses as a basis), and my personal favorite, the Goode homolosine.

Two dimensional images of three dimensional objects, which would even include your impossible flat Earth model, always lose some degree of detail, requiring compromises. For example, the height of mountain ranges is flattened with the azimuthal equidistant, and Flat Earth images depicting your model three dimensionally have to hide terrain features behind mountains in order to compensate. In the same way, two dimensional maps depicting the actual spheroid shape of the Earth have different distortions, and there are tradeoffs between distant maps. This is why the shortest route in aviation between two points is called “The Great Circle Route”, because it looks like a curve when drawn across most projections, even though the aircraft flies in a straight line.

To understand the shortest route on the spheroid Earth, you must use a globe, full stop. As an added benefit, one can buy topographical globes which depict the relative height of mountain ranges and deep valleys, without the compromises required by a two dimensional image of the Flat Earth (thus even those who argue for a Flat Earth are not arguing, I hope, for a literal Flat Earth, since their cosmology requires a 3D model in order to be understood, but therein problems will begin to arise, for example, the distances between different points will become distorted in the Southern Hemisphere).

Johannesburg to Santiago average flight time
32 hours, with no non stop flights.

I don’t know where you read that, but it’s complete equine-derived fertilizer, useful only for the compost heap.

The actual flight time, including a stopover in Rio de Janeiro, with LATAM, is presently 14 hours 30 minutes, which is precisely what the globe model predicts.

It is hard to find an accurate flat earth map,

Quite.

 

[prodromos]

We never have to look down to see the horizon

Actually we do. If you use a water level to confirm what is actually "eye level", the higher the altitude you are viewing from, the lower the horizon is below eye level.
Most people who claim what you claim, have never used any kind of instrument to determine their eye level, and thus make a purely subjective observation.

 

[prodromos]

Jet fuel is the main monetary concern of any airline. From Johannesburg to Santiago, they stop in Sao Paul to refuel .
Because they have to, because the journey is actually far, as shown on a sincere flat earth map.

No, that flight only goes as far as Sao Paulo. Anyone continuing to Santiago has to get on another flight.

Distance from Johannesburg to Santiago
9,170 km

Distance from Sydney to Santiago
11,340 km

Yes, so it is quite possible for the same aircraft to fly direct from Johannesburg to Santiago, the just don't get enough passengers for it to be economically viable.

Johannesburg to Santiago average flight time
32 hours, with no non stop flights.

That is nonsense.

Sydney to Santiago average flight time
15 hours, and there is a non stop one that takes only 12 hours

I don't know why you are posting this, since none of those distances match your flat earth map.

It is hard to find an accurate flat earth map,
in the one I last gave south and north America should be rotated a bit upwards and to the right.

There is no accurate flat Earth map because it is fantasy.

But the flight and distance data speaks for itself.

Indeed, they are impossible on the flat Earth. Something you refuse to concede.

 

[The Liturgist]

Most people who claim what you claim, have never used any kind of instrument to determine their eye level, and thus make a purely subjective observation.

It’s hard to find people who believe in a flat Earth who are willing to engage in objective reasoning rather than relying on purely subjective reasoning and intuition. Almost as hard to find as an accurate map of the Flat Earth I should say.

 

[Apple Sky]

Recently a wealthy globe-Earth proponent named Will Duffy launched a campaign dubbed “The Final Experiment,” which he claims will finally settle the globe vs. flat Earth debate forever...

 

[The Liturgist]

Recently a wealthy globe-Earth proponent named Will Duffy launched a campaign dubbed “The Final Experiment,” which he claims will finally settle the globe vs. flat Earth debate forever...

Since we’re still having this discussion despite the existence of airline flights that Flat Earthers maintained were impossible, with good reason, because the travel times between Sydney, Santiago, Sao Paulo, Jo’burg and Sydney again, are inconsistent with those predicted by the Flat Earth model, even if his experiment proves the Earth is round, people would still deny the truth of it.

 

[prodromos]

Recently a wealthy globe-Earth proponent named Will Duffy launched a campaign dubbed “The Final Experiment,” which he claims will finally settle the globe vs. flat Earth debate forever...

Do you think there are different people following this thread than in the threads you have already posted this video? Are you hoping to expose more people to the idiocy of Eric "the idiot" Dubay?

 

[The Liturgist]

In reality (not flat earth fantasy), the Sydney-Santiago flight does not go anywhere near the West coast of the USA,

Indeed, if it did, I can guarantee you they would add a stop in LAX, and upguage the aircraft to something in the size range of a Boeing 777-300 or A380-800 or A350-1000.

Fun fact: in Australia, you have a few places where there is a Break of Gauge between the broad gauge trains of Victoria and South Australia, the narrow gauge trains of Western Australia and Queensland, and the standard gauge trains of New South Wales and various trans-Australian lines, for example, the Indian Pacific from Sydney to Perth and the Ghan from Adelaide to Darwin. In the airline industry, a Break of Gauge or Change of Gauge is used to refer to when passengers on the same flight number have to change from a smaller aircraft to a larger aircraft or vice versa. These used to be more common, for example, El Al’s TLV-LAX service featured a break of gauge at JFK, and later this onward connection was operated as a codeshare flight by North American Airlines, a small operator that was part of a group with World Airways and ATA, which was sadly mismanaged into oblivion (I only in retrospect realized I could have flown North American non-stop to Ghana, but at the time i was only aware of their 767 service to Guyana in South America and their domestic services with the Boeing 757-200). The advantage of making it a codeshare was that North American, as a US airline, could sell seats on the JFK-LAX flight, whereas El Al could not. But operating that servie in the early 90s before El Al’s first 747-400s arrived was how North American got started. But I believe it retained the same flight number. Of course, soon thereafter there was a non-stop El Al service, since TLV is well within range of LAX with newer aircraft types like the 744 or 787, and has enough demand.

In 2000-2004 LAX was paradise for the 747 enthusiast, since a number of airlines used the 747-400 to get there, including in some cases where they clearly did not need the capacity, only the range, as the 747SP was by that point well past its prime. One memorable international flight was AOM’s service to Paris Orly from Papeete in French Polynesia, which had a stopover in Los Angeles, on the A340-200, which was the longer range and less lousy version of the A340, although I would note that the aircraft in AOM’s fleet were spectacularly uncomfortable compared to the A330s and A340s flown by other airlines such as Virgin Atlantic.

 

[Apple Sky]

even if his experiment proves the Earth is round, people would still deny the truth of it.

When Globers say the earth is round they are right, as the earth is round, circular & level, like a disc & does not move. The unmovable disc shaped earth abodes in a sphere, like a Terrarium, where everything is contained, as thus;

The earth & the moon do not orbit the sun, they both orbit the earth within the terrarium/firmament.
So whether or not there is a 24 hour sun in Antarctic makes no difference what so ever.
-

 

[prodromos]

So whether or not there is a 24 hour sun in Antarctic makes no difference what so ever.

Only the fact that it is impossible in your snow globe imaginary world.

 

[Apple Sky]

Only the fact that it is impossible in your snow globe imaginary world.

Why is it ?

 

[trophy33]

Why is it ?

Why cannot a triangle have four sides? Because its logically impossible. The same answer as to your question.

Try to use your imagination and imagine how could the Sun travel in your "model" of the Earth.

 

[prodromos]

Why is it ?

When the Sun is on its circle path North of the equator on your model, the Arctic has constant daylight while the light never reaches the Antarctic 'border' on your model. Whe the Sun is on its circle path South of the equator, the Arctic now receives no light, but on your flat model only part of the Antarctic 'border' can receive light from the sun, the opposite side has to be in darkness as it is further from the Sun than the Arctic is.

In reality, Antarctica receives 24 hour sunlight during Summer. Every part of the outer border of your flat earth model is lit by the Sun, even though a big section of the earth between the Sun and the border is in darkness.

 

[Apple Sky]

When the Sun is on its circle path North of the equator on your model, the Arctic has constant daylight while the light never reaches the Antarctic 'border' on your model. Whe the Sun is on its circle path South of the equator, the Arctic now receives no light, but on your flat model only part of the Antarctic 'border' can receive light from the sun, the opposite side has to be in darkness as it is further from the Sun than the Arctic is.

In reality, Antarctica receives 24 hour sunlight during Summer. Every part of the outer border of your flat earth model is lit by the Sun, even though a big section of the earth between the Sun and the border is in darkness.

Well, all's I can say is that there is no 24 hour sun in Antarctica.