Is Earth round or flat ?

[Stiddle Mump]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The absence of direct flights from Southern Chile to South Africa is driven by economic viability and operational logistics rather than any geographic or physical barrier. Airlines opt for routes that maximise efficiency and passenger numbers, and in this case, the indirect routes via hubs better serve those needs.

 

What about the big fence built by ancient civilisation of giants that used the cookie cutter to shape the flat disk of earth ?

 

Billion ???

Some surveys in the United States have indicated that roughly 2% of Americans might believe the Earth is flat.

 

While the flat Earth belief exists, its often amplified by online communities and remains a fringe view.

 

But... Assuming there are as many fruit-cakes in the rest of the world as there are in the USA... 

 

The 2% of the population believing in a flat-earth would be 160.5 Million People...   Thats still a lot of complete loons !!!

Don't agree with your stats Richard. I'm firmly in the middle section; the 2 billion that are unsure. I see both sides of the discussion.

 

I was a spherical earther, until Fatima persuaded me to look at the flat earth theory. By far the majority still believe the earth is spherical. But is that number diminishing?

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, JamesPhuket10 said:

 

So not much of a problem then as the dangerous fruit cakes of the world are the ones who believe in religion, they are the real threat. 😀

 

No disagreement from me there....   But at least for the stupid that forms some form of 'moral police force' to prevent them doing really stupid stuff.....  but those 'moral police forces' have become so powerful they've lost their morality and and you highlight, are and always have been real threat.

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I was a spherical earther, until Fatima persuaded me to look at the flat earth theory. By far the majority still believe the earth is spherical. But is that number diminishing?

 

I got into this 'slightly' a few pages back... (around page 11 I think)...     but its just too exhausting to try and argue something so ridiculous on an intellectual level...   

.... not because I can't find a sound counter argument to every flat earth claim and dash of claimed flat earth evidence....

...  but because its just so tiring reading the silliness with a serious mind and countering each individual argument over and over again, while people quote those I consider idiots who manage to frame well sounding but fundamentally flawed argument.

 

Its a rabbit hole which simply is not worth delving down because it offers no intelligent or informative value other than the recognition that 'some' people can sound perfectly rational yet are absolutely undeniably bonkers !!!

 

 

 

 

 

[JamesPhuket10]

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

No disagreement from me there....   But at least for the stupid that forms some form of 'moral police force' to prevent them doing really stupid stuff.....  but those 'moral police forces' have become so powerful they've lost their morality and and you highlight, are and always have been real threat.

 

What is scary is that American politicians during many speeches say "God save America", now that is really scary as they have nukes. 

That has never been said in the UK, in fact only a small percentage of people are actively religious there, but that is growing though with immigration, and we have nukes too. 

[Stiddle Mump]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I got into this 'slightly' a few pages back... (around page 11 I think)...     but its just too exhausting to try and argue something so ridiculous on an intellectual level...   

.... not because I can't find a sound counter argument to every flat earth claim and dash of claimed flat earth evidence....

...  but because its just so tiring reading the silliness with a serious mind and countering each individual argument over and over again, while people quote those I consider idiots who manage to frame well sounding but fundamentally flawed argument.

 

Its a rabbit hole which simply is not worth delving down because it offers no intelligent or informative value other than the recognition that 'some' people can sound perfectly rational yet are absolutely undeniably bonkers !!!

You are bang on the money about it being a rabbit hole Richard.

 

One could argue the toss for 100 pages and not convince anyone of your point of view. Or have you mind changed by opposing arguments.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

You are bang on the money about it being a rabbit hole Richard.

 

One could argue the toss for 100 pages and not convince anyone of your point of view. Or have you mind changed by opposing arguments.

 

 

There exists no rigorous scientific study has provided evidence that challenges the well established understanding that the Earth is an oblate spheroid....  none whatsoever.

 

 

 

[Stiddle Mump]

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

There exists no rigorous scientific study has provided evidence that challenges the well established understanding that the Earth is an oblate spheroid....  none whatsoever.

 

So you say Richard.

 

Fatima said differently. She came at it from a different viewpoint. Told me to do some investigating. Check on flight distances she said. I did.  Now I'm 50-50.

 

Did you know Richard, that a plane can't fly from the equator going north, over the pole, back to the equator the other side, and then carry on south over the south pole and back where it started? No one can explain that.

[richard_smith237]

10 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

So you say Richard.

 

Fatima said differently. She came at it from a different viewpoint. Told me to do some investigating. Check on flight distances she said. I did.  Now I'm 50-50.

 

Did you know Richard, that a plane can't fly from the equator going north, over the pole, back to the equator the other side, and then carry on south over the south pole and back where it started? No one can explain that.

 

Of course it can - just because something is not carried out, i.e. for commercial reasons, does not mean that it 'cannot' be carried out.

 

It is perfectly possible for an aircraft to fly north from the equator over the North Pole, then returns to the equator on the opposite side, and continues south over the South Pole and forms a closed loop at the staring point.

i.e. an aircraft follows follows this geodesic path, it will eventually return to its starting point.

This is a direct consequence of the geometry of a sphere, where the shortest path between any two points (the great circle route) naturally loops back if extended far enough.

 

It is also a reality that many long-haul flights already use polar routes to minimise distance, confirming that such paths are not only theoretically possible but are routinely flown.

 

 

 

Thus: While it’s theoretically possible to design a flight path that loops over both poles and returns to its starting point, several practical challenges explain why such a route is not typically used:

 

Operational Efficiency:
Airlines plan routes to minimise fuel consumption and flight time. Most commercial flights follow the most direct paths between origin and destination (i.e. major cities) rather than an extended circumnavigation.

 

Harsh Weather Conditions:
Polar regions often experience extreme cold, icing, and rapidly changing weather, which can complicate flight operations and safety.

 

Navigational and Communication Challenges:
Near the poles, magnetic compasses become unreliable and communication systems can face limitations, requiring advanced navigation technology that is less efficient over such vast, remote areas.

 

Limited Emergency Options:
With few emergency landing sites available in polar regions, pilots face increased risks if they need to divert in an emergency.

 

Geopolitical and Airspace Restrictions:
Overflights of polar areas can be subject to strict regulations and require special permissions, making them less attractive for regular commercial operations.

 

 

While modern technology has made polar routes feasible,  challenges mean that flights over the South Pole are usually reserved for special missions, research, or specific charter operations rather than routine commercial travel.

 

Thus, polar circumnavigation is geometrically sound, practical concerns such as efficiency, safety, regulatory constraints and cost make it an uncommon choice for commercial aviation and a pointless exercise from the point of view of science just to contradict a silly flat earther's idea.

 

 

Again - as mentioned earlier (and on previous pages) its a bit ridiculous treating such claims seriously and taking the time it takes to respond properly....   

 

As Fatima said to you... do some investigating... but do so in a much much better manner than the simplistic dumbed down manner which ignores common sense... 

[black tabby12345]

If the world is flat, the range of radar detection won't be limited to the horizon.