Flat earth: Are Australia to South America flights real?

Air New Zealand now flies direct to Buenos Aires from Auckland. The flight time is approximately 12 hours. They operate three return services a week with their Boeing 777-200 airplanes all year around.

Many believers in the flat earth claim such flights are impossible and not real. This is because most flat earthers accept a map that puts Australia and South America on opposite sides of their flat earth making them so far apart that you would have to travel at more than twice the speed of sound to make the journey in the twelve hours that these flights actually take to transport passengers from Auckland, New Zealand to Buenos Aires, Argentina.

So just to find out for myself if these flights are real or not I booked a return ticket to Buenos Aires in December 2017.

I left Auckland on the evening of December 11, 2017 and did arrive in Buenos Aires approximately 12 hours later, along with a full plane load of other people. I also took the return flight from Buenos Aires to Auckland on December 24, 2017 and that similarly took about 12 hours and I most certainly arrived in Auckland.

To try and understand exactly where the plane was flying I took my iPhone with a data logger logging all the sensor information it could get for the flight. Unfortunately on the flight to Buenos Aires, perhaps to the design of the airplane, the iPhone could not pick up any GPS signal but on the return flight it was a different plane and I was able to get GPS coordinates for at least part of the flight. But the other senses like direction, altitude, speed, etc, were working an logging data on both flights.

I am including the raw datalogs for both flights below and please analyze them yourself and let me know what you find in the comments:

AUK-BA_2017-12-11_21-23-39_+1300

BA_AUK_2017-12-24_23-48-23_-0300

Please see the image below for the GPS data I was able to collect on the flight from Buenos Aires to New Zealand. It is incomplete but these are actual GPS coordinates recorded and logged by my iPhone on the flight. So it appears they have taken the long route. As we are lead to believe that if they would have flown down towards the South Pole, because the earth is a globe, it would be shorter. But instead of doing this they have flown up, towards the equator, then back down again towards New Zealand. So the route according to the GPS coordinates does appear a bit different to the route they show on their flight information system.

So the actual route appears to be quite dramatically different from the route they show us on the flight information screen:

So the conclusion is the flights in the Southern Hemisphere like the one I personally went on from Auckland to Buenos Aires do exist and are real and do take approximately 12 hours which would be impossible on the flat earth map unless the planes were flying at more than twice the speed of sound. Which I think we can be quite sure they are not. And we have verified they do fly on more-or-less the same route as they are claimed to fly on. So this information would appear to cast rather serious doubts on the validity of the accepted flat earth map.

52 Replies to “Flat earth: Are Australia to South America flights real?”

  1. DG

    Hey there, I read through your post here and found the flight pattern to be very intriguing. After a little searching, I found that the most reasonable explanation for the alteration in advertised versus actual flight path would be the local jet stream patterns at the time of your flight. If you go to this link below, you’ll find that the flight path recorded by your GPS tracker falls in line with the average jet stream pattern that would allow for minimal fuel burn. Good post!

    https://www.netweather.tv/charts-and-data/global-jetstream#2018/07/20/1800Z/jetstream/surface/level/overlay=jetstream/orthographic=-129.84,-49.27,712

  2. Marcelo A Galvan

    Pt br, Friend and if you use the UN Azimuth Map template and trace the same route? Perhaps it makes more sense, if the planes fly in the UN azimuth map model (for reference only), the trajectory would be more explained by the flat navigation and the route in question has an acceleration of 300 km hour to more site the speed of the airplane in some parts saving fuel and time. Do this research and share, thank you!

    • madhudvisa

      Yes. Of course that is the main point. It would be impossible to fly this route in the 10 hours or so that it actually takes if the earth was actually as it is depicted on the Azimuth map. Look at that map yourself. That map puts Australia and South America on opposite sides. So shortest distance would be to fly over the North Pole… So it is absolutely not possible to fly from New Zealand to Argentina in 10 hours on the AE map…

    • WreckLoose

      the azimuth projection is not a flat earth map and doesnt claim to be, its a 2d model of the globe. It is misused by people often enough that they think its supposed to be a FE model… but its not.

      • Ted NZ

        Be great if a flat earther put up the flat Earth map they propose is what think.
        Will be easier to show and see than a globe been that it would be a 2D map of their proposed 2D earth

        Any with an exponential measurement system from a nil “north pole” out is laughable
        So, do they have a map were a km is actually a km?
        On a globe, even though longitude lines all end at a single theoretical point, a km is still a km

        Japan is approx same length and area as New Zealand, but every FE map I’ve seen shows it looking under half the lengthand area…. laughable.

  3. Sanyiago

    you say they are dramatically different, but you didn’t mention the fact that the second map IS a FLAT map. if you were to modify it too fit the globe, the difference wouldn’t be so great. it would probably still be different, but not so much.
    otherwise, good job. I enjoyed the read.

  4. Flying Kiwi

    Reading through your article was very interesting, as I live in New Zealand, done many overseas flights commercially, but also have some understanding through flight training as a pilot.
    FEers will go on about why not fly directly over the South Pole, which in reality would only be “logical” if flying directly from a Western Australian city (Perth), to a South American city. Even Sydney to any Western South American city say in Chile or Peru if in a perfect straight line (as on a map) would barely touch the edge of the Antarctic continent, even from Africa to Eastern Australia goes no where near the Antarctic land mass. The only other “direct” flight that would pass over the South Pole would be from Africa to New Zealand, but as there are only 4.5 million here (in NZ), those direct flights don’t exist SIMPLY because they would run at a loss to the airlines. So they collect and drop passengers at either Australia, or S.A if going the other way. Madhudvisa mentioned air streams, YES! (please FEers read and take this info into high consideration…. if possible for you?), for anyone interested, have a look at this interactive map (below). Now… please all think logically, would you fly the plane against the wind, therefore using more fuel and taking longer, or divert and fly with the direction of the stream? I hear read this blab by FEers is no diff to crashing in the sea, compared to Antarctic, um yes there is… Do some research into shipping, sure both most likely would disastrous, but rescue is more probable anywhere oceanic, compared to mid Antarctic which is a MASSIVE continent. I would rather take odds of ditching in the Southern ocean and been in a lifeboat for a few days.

    https://earth.nullschool.net/?fbclid=IwAR3eAml0C_qWwNElX13GFl1MyzdLbGDFKR5jYIP7mLqdr5u-P0WeuKb7OfM#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=55.68,276.50,284

  5. no

    I have flown too Europe to australia quite a lot, and can tel you went no where near the arctic as would be the fastest route on a airplaine. I dont really think there are many people that are acutally flat earthers just people that like to be contary, and those who like the mental challenge of trying to make it fit the observed facts, PS i remember watching live sporting events in the northern hemishpere live at the same local time as where i live in the southern hemisphere

    • madhudvisa

      The problem is the time it takes, on flat earth map it is very, very far, one side of the flat earth to the other, would take 24 hours or so, but flight only actually takes 8 hours…

  6. Peter Prevos

    The difference in the routes is easily explained because both maps use a different projection method. Both curves are a straight line on a 3-dimensional globe.

    • metaforze

      Exactly this!

      They are precisely the same routes, only the one on the in-flight system is projected on the Mercator projection, making it look like a detour through the South! This is not the case, both your GPS data and the in-flight system are almost a straight line from NZ to Argentina.

      • Flat Earth Facts

        Yes. My practical experience in flying from Australia to Argentina in 10 hours in more-or-less a straight line is certainly in accordance with what we would expect on a globe earth, and is totally impossible on the flat earth map…

  7. H g dave

    If it was flat I could see Mount Everest from Anywhere on Earth based on its height and altitude from sea level and if Sun was moving while earth stationary as flat theorists suggest then Moon will not have phases of light

    • Dan

      H g Dave – you know when you watch the weather report and there’s that bit that tells you what ‘visibillity’ is like for the day? That’s because of atomspherics, the same reason you cant see everest.

    • Bob

      No you couldnt. Nor am i a flat earther. But i have seen ships using scopes that are 20+ miles out at sea and that is impossible on a globe model.

      • Ted NZ

        20 plus miles Bob? That’s only 35km.
        Why is that “impossible” on a globe?
        From my back lawn Solander Island (south of New Zealand) is visible on the horizon, from me to it is 79km due Southwest
        BUT, it’s only visible because Solander Island is small and over 330 metres high (1000 ft).

        Regarding weather and light.
        On the clearest day it’s sometimes barely able to be made out, but on that same day at dusk when there’s concentrated light coming on the Island from the right (West), Solander sticks out like a bashed thumb

        Does this prove/disprove globe vs FE ? No. It’s just observations
        In regard to FE, no flat earther’s have answered my questions in comments below, why not?
        The fact that their flat earth maps are all based on an exponential measuring scale.
        Which on their maps makes the length of Japan minuscule compared to the length of NZ, but the two country’s are basically the same size.

  8. Soul

    NOT A FE BUT LOOKING FOR ANSWERS:

    It’s so sad to see FE not celebrating at this, and it’s proof that unfortunately most of the FE community doesn’t understand much about math. Anyway to any careful observer: This is indeed one of the best proof of a flat earth.

    If you take a “globe map” and measure the distance between Buenos Aires and Auckland, then take the same globe and measure the distance between London and New York, and then you proceed to also take the average flight time for direct flights on these trajectories (7.5 hours in air), then you also consider the jet streams (that anyway can be “fully used” only at times, you can check this watching at the world record for civilian London – New York flights which has been scheduled on purpose by the British Airlines on a specific date to fully use the jet streams of that time bringing the flight duration down to 5 hours) and the average transoceanic flights speed (between 0.65 and 0.85 mach), you can conclude that on a globe a direct flight from Buenos Aires to Auckland should take much more (from 2 to 3 hours more depending on the airplane real speed and time of the year), while the flight time on a flat plane would correctly match what you have observed.

    This raises some questions, at least for me, if anyone would be willing/able to elaborate more on this, I would be very happy to listen to any explanation about it, because honestly I may be missing something, but this definitely scores in favor of the flat earth model.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi Soul

      The Southern Hemisphere flights are real and the flight times are consistent with a globe earth and impossible on the map given to us by the flat earth people. So that proves at least the flat earth map is completely wrong.

  9. Ted NZ

    What no Flat Earth believer will approach or debate, is the problem that their “map” is based on an exponential measurement system.
    Their kilometre is a millimetre long at their “north pole” and exponentially becomes about 5 kilomtres long their outside “Antarctica rim”.

    Their “map” shows New Zealand to be 4 or 5 times longer than what it is. But, as I’ve driven it numerous times, The South Island is abput 1100 km long and I’ve driven it in 13 hours.
    Just as I’ve driven 1100 km up the UK, in same time frame.

    Secondly in regard to there “but no flights go across Antarctica” globe map of the South Pole. Maybe they could get on Google and research The Rhumb lines?
    Then they’ll reaslise that that is one reason very few flights go over the South Pole, but the other is safety, simply look at the immense distances of empty ocean and no civilisation when viewing the South Pole compared to the North.
    No airline company wants one of their flights on trouble down there, virtually nil chance of survival.

    Flat Earth followers need to look at what they propose as the “reality” with logic, practicality and the application of basic math

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi Ted

      Yes. You are correct of course. This is not really a site for globe earthers to fight with flat earthers. We are trying for something different. We are trying to find out what is the truth actually about the structure of the solar system, etc.

      The “Flat Earth Map,” it is not a flat earth map actually and you are correct, Southern Hemisphere, it is not drawn to scale as far as the sizes of the land masses. It was not made as a flat earth map, and it was never intended to be an accurate depiction of the world as it is. It is for navigation.

      The beauty of the “flat earth map” is you can draw lines on it from where you are to where you want to go and measure the compass direction and head in that direction and you will get there. So if you want to go from Los Angeles to Auckland, on the flat earth map you can just plot your course and measure the angle and head in that direction and you will arrive in Auckland. That is what the “Flat Earth Map” is really for, a navigational aid. It is a depiction of a globe, like all other flat maps, it is a projection of a globe on a flat piece of paper. So this particular projection, yes, it distorts the sizes of New Zealand, etc, but it keeps the directions accurate for navigation.

  10. Ted NZ

    Still you have diverted fron the points i have raised.
    Regardless of the 2D projection that a flat earth map uses, if to scale or not, the flat earth map still uses an exponential measurement system..!
    We know the time frames to fly between 2 points across the southern hemisphere, going by any flat eath map that same distance would take a tenth the time (or less) in their “northern” hemisphere.

  11. ON THE LEVEL.

    “Unfortunately on the flight to Buenos Aires, perhaps to the design of the airplane, the iPhone could not pick up any GPS signal but on the return flight it was a different plane and I was able to get GPS coordinates for at least part of the flight. But the other senses like direction, altitude, speed, etc, were working an logging data on both flights.”

    Most flights avoid going to far over open ocean, but here it appears GPS fails through significant parts of both your flights. It seems much more consistent with terrestrial hyperbolic radio navigation.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      On The Level. You miss the point totally. The flight took 10-11 hours. Consistent with the globe earth model, but impossible on your flat earth map. That is the point. This is 100% proof that your flat earth map is incorrect. That’s all.

      As far as the satellites, most flights these-days, they have satellite internet. Everywhere. All over the planet. So that is not possible from ground-based stations.

      Anyhow the point of this article is that the reality is consistient with what is predicted by the globe earth model but impossible on your flat earth map. So this is 100% proof that the so-called flat earth map is incorrect. Because on that New Zealand and Argentina are on totally opposite sides of your map. You’d have to cross the NORTH pole to make this trip on a flat earth. And you can’t do that in 10-11 hours…

      • ON THE LEVEL.

        $On The Level. You miss the point totally. The flight took 10-11 hours. Consistent with the globe earth model, but impossible on your flat earth map. That is the point. This is 100% proof that your flat earth map is incorrect. That’s all.”

        Be honest. I don’t have a Flat Earth map, as I’ve mentioned all the maps have problems and so do the globes. Your flight was 12-13 hours not 10-11. Just saying keep it real.

        Have a great day!

        • Flat Earth Facts

          OK, you don’t have a map. That’s the problem. You have an idea “The earth is flat.” But you can not even draw a map that is consistent with our actual physical experience and observations presuming the earth is flat.

          However, we can plot our experienced observations on a globe and it works quite well.

          So here, we have got confirmation that the globe model is at least possible and it is consistent with our observations.

          But you can not understand how the earth could be flat, you can not imagine a map that would work if the earth was flat, you can not explain what we see happening in the sky if the earth was flat.

          So you are not logical, your presentation has no basis, you don’t even have a model, you don’t have a theory, you have this idea, “earth is flat” but you have no way of explaining how it could be flat, no understanding of how it could work if it was flat. So it is pointless talking about it to the scientifically minded who need a logical explanation.

          You are not a logical person, your belief in the flat earth is sentimental only. It is pointless to say all these crazy things. It is more or less insanity.

          • ON THE LEVEL.

            “You are not a logical person, your belief in the flat earth is sentimental only. It is pointless to say all these crazy things. It is more or less insanity.”

            You’re projecting. You’re the one who cannot explain why there’s no 24 hour sun overhead in the southern extremities but has been seen in the Arctic regions numerous times. Why video attempts to show a 24 hour sun in Antarctica have been disproven. Why you’re own posted video from the southern tip of South America was cut is left unexplained, apparently the narrator is supposed to tell you what you see rather than it being self evident.

            Further, why the two supposed hemisphere are completely dissimilar climactically, in distribution of lands and electro-magnetically. You can’t even explain how a magnetic compass works at the equator.

            You can’t explain why maps and globes after 1540 fail to show known land masses displayed, attested to and acknowledged prior to that time. You can’t even explain why or how the presumed satellites and international fake station stay aloft or can reside in the region they do at the temperatures supposedly measured for the region. Your attempt to explain NASA’s clear recorded actions to fake travel on the international fake station was funny and lamentable. Your attempt to explain why many companies manufacture hyperbolic radio navigation devices that exactly mirror supposed satellite GPS was just to parrot the claim they’re used as back-up. If so why is there an entire private industry of outside parties investing in them?

            You can’t explain how if the globe has the 25k mile circumference claimed we can see, visibility permitting, much farther than 3 miles standing on the shore ( tens of miles ). You failed to look at those southern skies and explain why so many people claim that several Southern constellations like the Southern crux cannot be seen everywhere South of the equator, but all northern constellations can be seen north of the equator! You express great faith in degrees latitude such that Polaris supposedly falls below the horizon at the equator, but then have to admit it can be seen south of the equator. Your own post listing observations from over 20 degrees south of the equator. Bizarrely, you blame it on refraction. This despite the fact you acknowledged the Earth’s supposed tilt was dreamed up to account for those very observations.

            Finally, I could go on but leave it to say the main points of a flat earth map including the southern ICE-WALL extremity, sun & moon circling over a flat earth and a north polar electro-magnet drawing directional lines to all points on the Earth I accept and follow from observation.

            If you erroneously deny what I claim explain how a magnetic compass can find away to point to the North Pole at the equator.

            Good luck.

            Have a great day!

            P.S. I’ll take it that if this post does not appear, that you are as you say likely illogical, “crazy” and would you say insane.

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Hi On the Level. I do not believe that the earth is flat or that the earth is a spinning globe in space. I am open to any possibility and I do strongly suspect that our current understanding of the earth as a globe spinning in space is not correct, at least not a complete understand of the system as it is actually working.

            However finding small faults or discrepancies in the globe earth model, which I do agree exist, does not prove that the earth is flat.

            I am point out that it is not logical to believe something which you can not explain. So that is your position. You believe the earth is flat but can not explain how the earth could be flat. You already stated you have no map and no idea how a map could be drawn if the earth is flat.

            You point out that all maps have discrepancies. And yes. Everyone knows that it is not possible to draw a map of the surface of a globe on a flat piece of paper without distorting the shapes and sizes of the continents and/or the distances between them. That is give. All flat maps will have distortions because they are projections of a globe onto a flat plane.

            But if you draw the continents on a globe then you can draw them in their actual correct sizes and shapes and have the correct distances between them with no distortion and no difference between the presentation on the globe and our practical experience.

            So that is certainly a point in favor of the globe earth model and a point against the flat earth model. That no flat map can accurately represent the shapes / sizes and distances of the continents but they can be accurately represented on a globe…

            As far as the missing land, let us know exactly where it is, and we can look for it. We do actually have satellite imagery of almost all of the planet.

            Even if the satellites are balloons as you say. Somehow they have got something up there, at least in low earth orbit, orbiting the earth and taking photos. That is certainly verifiable and if you don’t believe that you are certainly not very bright, or just denying the reality because it disagrees with your religion.

            I live south of the equator, in Australia, and often look up at the sky at night. And whenever I look in the sky the southern cross not always there. It moves around, it circles the southern celestial pole. So depending on where you are exactly at times it could be below the horizon. Depending on how far south you are. You have to understand that in the Southern Hemisphere we are not so far south as people are in the northern hemisphere. Sydney, for example, is only 33 degrees south. So from there the southern celestial pole has only moved up 33 degrees in the sky above the equator. So we do not see all the southern constellations at the same time. The southern celestial pole is always there, same spot, 33 degrees above the horizon. So sometimes part of the southern cross will be below the horizon in Sydney.

            Southern Cross will always be above the horizon from 35 degrees south to 90 degrees south [South Pole]. But from 0 degrees south [the equator] to 35 degrees south the southern cross will be either partially or completely below the horizon at times.

            The same thing is happening in the northern sky. That is why I say “Flat earthers don’t look at the sky.” And you are proving me correct. Because it is the same in the Northern hemisphere. As you move closer to the equator the polestar drops down closer to the horizon and so more of the northern stars become sometimes below the horizon.

            So what is happening in the northern and southern skies is identical.

            As far as seeing in the distance, yes, as far as I can tell that is a real issue, in certain circumstances we can see a lot further than we should be able to see on a globe. I do not believe in the globe, necessarily, but I do not rule out the possibility that we are on a spinning globe either.

            As I said searching for small inconsistencies in the globe earth model does not prove the earth is flat. If you want to say the earth is flat, then you have to be able to explain how the earth could be flat and produce the physical observations we experience. You need a flat earth model that works as well as the globe earth model. Otherwise it is illogical. Logic requires that you should be able to explain your beliefs in some sort of reasonable way. There is currently no reasonable way to logically explain how the earth could be flat. So it is illogical.

            That does not, however, mean it is not flat, but what it means is we can not imagine how it could be flat and at the same time we could experience the things we experience. So you have to explain it. That is the positive thing, you have to explain how it could work if the earth was flat, not just try to find faults in the globe model. Because finding faults in the globe model does not prove the earth is flat.

          • ON THE LEVEL.

            Just a request. Can you explain why it takes 12-13 hours for a Boeing 777-200 to travel 5-6000 miles at a flight speed of about 650 miles per hour?

            Your so logical and all. Thought you might know!

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Flying non-stop from Auckland to Buenos Aires:
            Flight distance: 6,448 miles or 10377 km
            Flight time: 13 hours, 24 minutes

            So my flights were a bit shorter than this. But.

            6500 miles in 12 hours lets say: 6500 / 12 = 542 MPH.

            But you know it is not flying always 650 MPH. It is much slower on takeoff, and when it is getting up to cruising height, and landing, and they always go slower for better fuel economy and to give them the ability to make up lost time if they are running late.

            So they could do it quicker than what they actually do, but they go slower for these 2 reasons, to save fuel and to give them the ability to meet their schedules even if, say, the takeoff is delayed, they can fly a bit faster and still land at the scheduled time.

  12. ON THE LEVEL

    “As far as the missing land, let us know exactly where it is, and we can look for it. We do actually have satellite imagery of almost all of the planet.”

    Wrongo! you have high altitude photographs of small regions of Earth spliced together into a composite image of a larger region. Those images are simply the ones they allow you to see. You have no idea how much of the Earth you are viewing. These images are unlikely taken from above the Karman line 100km up, defined in the 1940’s as the lowest region of outer space. It’s becoming fashionable to now to call the lower Mesosphere/layer outer space. Branson claimed to have gone to space recently, but was infact in the Mesosphere/plane. He never made it that high, nor has any so called “satellite” or high altitude platform, they are likely all below 100km.

    “I live south of the equator, in Australia, and often look up at the sky at night. And whenever I look in the sky the southern cross not always there. It moves around, it circles the southern celestial pole. So depending on where you are exactly at times it could be below the horizon. Depending on how far south you are. You have to understand that in the Southern Hemisphere we are not so far south as people are in the northern hemisphere. Sydney, for example, is only 33 degrees south. So from there the southern celestial pole has only moved up 33 degrees in the sky above the equator. So we do not see all the southern constellations at the same time. The southern celestial pole is always there, same spot, 33 degrees above the horizon. So sometimes part of the southern cross will be below the horizon in Sydney.

    Southern Cross will always be above the horizon from 35 degrees south to 90 degrees south [South Pole]. But from 0 degrees south [the equator] to 35 degrees south the southern cross will be either partially or completely below the horizon at times.

    The same thing is happening in the northern sky. That is why I say “Flat earthers don’t look at the sky.” And you are proving me correct. Because it is the same in the Northern hemisphere. As you move closer to the equator the polestar drops down closer to the horizon and so more of the northern stars become sometimes below the horizon.

    So what is happening in the northern and southern skies is identical.”

    You should in time be able to see the Southern crux and any other constellations from any southern equatorial position as the star system rotates. This is seen all the time in the North with Virgo and other constellations, that can be revealed with time-lapse photo-imaging. From what I’ve read this cannot be done South of the equator for several Southern constellations. My travels south have been limited. please tell me what you experience. Thanks.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi On the Level.

      It is the same as the North, the sky here, it behaves exactly the same except we don’t have an actual star at the central point where everything rotates around.

      And it is the same with southern cross, if you are below the 35 degree mark, closer to the equator, at times part or all of the southern cross may be below the horizon, but yes, if you wait it will rotate around the southern celestial pole and you will see it.

      So south and north celestial poles act exactly the same way, and in a way consistent with what we would expect to see from a globe spinning in space.

      Now, possibly we may not be on a globe spinning in space, but it is certainly a very valid assumption to presume it is very likely we are on a globe spinning in space because what we see happening in the sky, it really quite strongly suggests that we are on a globe spinning in space.

      If you are going to convince us we are on a flat plane then you have to give some model that would enable this manifestation in the sky from a flat plane. So far that is missing from the flat earth people.

  13. ON THE LEVEL

    “But you know it is not flying always 650 MPH. It is much slower on takeoff, and when it is getting up to cruising height, and landing, and they always go slower for better fuel economy and to give them the ability to make up lost time if they are running late.

    So they could do it quicker than what they actually do, but they go slower for these 2 reasons, to save fuel and to give them the ability to meet their schedules even if, say, the takeoff is delayed, they can fly a bit faster and still land at the scheduled time.”

    There exist two jet streams pilots can use to save fuel en-route between Aukland and Buenos Aires or visa versa. One is closer to the equator ( which may help to explain your observed flight diversion ) and the other farther south in the opposite direction. Jet streams can add hundreds of miles per hour to clocked air speed as observed from land.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Yes, of course, and sometimes there are headwinds also that slow them down. Point is they have to fly to a schedule. They have to take off at a certain time and land at a certain time, so they go slower generally to save fuel and to give them the ability to meet the schedule and still land at the correct time if there are delays taking off, for example.

      So the point is the observed times for these Auckland – Buneos Aires flights, which I have personally experienced and documented with so much data logged by my iphone sensors, even GPS signal is not always there, all the other sensor readings and timestamps are there, the point is these observations are completely in line with what we would expect to experience on a globe earth, but totally impossible on the generally presented flat earth map that puts these two cities on the opposite sides of the North Pole.

      On the flat earth, to do this trip you would have to fly from Auckland up and over the North Pole for shortest route and that would be like 30,000 miles or something… Not possible in 12 hours.

      That is my point.

      These flights prove the flat earth map is totally incorrect, impossible, and they are inline with what we would expect to experience on a globe.

      • ON THE LEVEL

        Just a post to examine the claim Eric Dubay made that globalists tilt the Earth to explain how we can see polar stars beyond the equator. In fact, tilting the Earth does no such thing. Tilting the globe Earth supposedly changes Earth’s relation to the sun, not the stars. Earth is supposedly fixed to Polaris and by extension the rest of the rotating Star Field. Please think about that. It’s supposed to explain the seasons not star maps.

        This is a big problem for globalists. Why? It means we should not be able to see either Polaris south of or Southern Crux north of the equator due Earth’s presumed convex ball shape. In fact, an astronomy website of the globalist ilk provides photographic evidence the Southern Crux can be seen 25 degrees north of the equator ( even more than Earth’s presumed tilt ) in Hawaii!!! They claim it can be seen at varying times there throughout the year!

        https://earthsky.org/sky-archive/southern-cross-visible-in-hawaii-before-sunrise/

        Globalists have provided no explanation for this, even refraction won’t help them here. This further proves globalists rarely if ever look at the sky and when they do it doesn’t help because they understand nothing.

        Would greatly appreciate your thoughts.

        Have a great day!

        • Flat Earth Facts

          Hi On the Level

          You are correct in saying the tilt is to explain the seasons and the varying lengths of the days and nights at different times throughout the year. And actually it does do a very good job of that.

          And yes. Earth has to be tilted so that North Pole is always pointing towards North Star and South Pole is always pointing to southern celestial pole.

          So the earth’s tilt is always the same and it always keeps it poles pointed in the same direction as it rotates around the sun.

          This would be a problem but to solve that problem of not really being able to detect the movement of the earth from the view of the stars changing as the earth moves to the other side of the sun, they have put the stars so so so far away, light years away, making that almost 200 million mile movement of the earth irrelevant when compared to the light-year distances of the stars.

          However, you have confused seeing the North Star or the southern celestial pole with seeing the Southern Cross.

          It is a very different thing, seeing the Southern Celestial pole, [the point the south star would be in if we had one] or the North Star and seeing the Southern Cross.

          Southern Cross rotates around the Southern Celestial pole. So if you were at the Equator. You would see both the northern and southern celestial poles at the horizon on opposite sides. And you would see all the northern constellations rotating in the north half of the sky and all the southern constellations rotating in the south. But you would only see half of them at any given time, the other half will be below the horizon. Southern Cross is away from the southern celestial pole. So sometimes at the equator it will be clearly and fully visible in the south, and at other times it will be below the horizon.

          At that time, when the Southern Cross is visible from the equator, it is also visible for some distance to the north of the equator, because the pole is on the horizon at the equator, Southern Cross is some distance away from the pole and rotating around it. So on a globe we would expect to be able to see the southern cross and many other southern stars quite some distance north of the equator.

          You can see all the southern stars from the equator, and all the northern stars, but only half of them at any particular moment, and as you go north or south of the equator gradually you see more of the stars in the north, if you are going north, and less of the stars in the south.

          The southernmost point of Hawaii is about 18 degrees north, so yes, certainly, absolutely, the southern cross will sometimes be visible from there. We would expect to see it on a globe earth, there is no contradiction here.

          • On the level

            Below is star trail video from the equator with the pole well above the horizon. There is of course no way to prove the attached video is authentic, but that can be said about most shown. It’s interesting to not the paucity of equatorial and sub equatorial star trail videos.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CyG2zc8HkU

            Star Trails At The Equator, The Universe Is A Rotating Ball(research Tycho Brahe) – YouTube

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Well at the equator on a ball the poles can not be way above the horizon. So if it is true then that is difficult to explain with the globe earth model. I don’t know. But I have personally tested many of the points, not this one exactly, but every other point I have tested has turned out to be consistent with the globe earth model.

            Next time I am at the equator I will check. But I expect I will probably find the poles at or near the horizon.

            If not, yes, difficult to explain with the globe earth model.

          • Flat Earth Facts

            An interesting article. “In fact it was by watching the constellations move across the sky as the ancient Greeks travelled across the Earth, that they came to realise that the Earth was spherical and not flat.”

            That is why I say “flat earthers don’t look at the sky,” because it is by looking at the sky that thoughtful people have come to conclude that the earth is most likely a globe.

            https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/06/17/2929420.htm

      • ON THE LEVEL

        “So the point is the observed times for these Auckland – Buneos Aires flights, which I have personally experienced and documented with so much data logged by my iphone sensors, even GPS signal is not always there, all the other sensor readings and timestamps are there, the point is these observations are completely in line with what we would expect to experience on a globe earth, but totally impossible on the generally presented flat earth map that puts these two cities on the opposite sides of the North Pole.

        On the flat earth, to do this trip you would have to fly from Auckland up and over the North Pole for shortest route and that would be like 30,000 miles or something… Not possible in 12 hours.

        That is my point.

        These flights prove the flat earth map is totally incorrect, impossible, and they are inline with what we would expect to experience on a globe.”

        Please note, I do not dispute your flight time claims or take off and landing locations. Some of your distance assumptions could use improvement though.

        Buenos Aires is claimed 8609.62 miles south of North pole and 2391.21 miles south of equator. Aukland is 8764.32 miles south of North pole and 2545.91 miles south of equator. This means, assuming the two cities are on opposite sides of the North pole the separation distance should be 17373.94 miles.

        While much farther than observed apparent flight distance, it’s good to remember the figure is riddled with assumptions. It’s doubtful Aukland & Buenos Aires are directly opposite the North pole even on a flat earth map. In fact, the flat earth maps I’ve seen show them closer than that. The distance assumptions involved are for a globe and thus prone to error and should be revisited. It does not at all seem impossible to explain the world on a flat map. More on the subject later.

        Have a great day!

  14. WreckLoose

    i typed a well thought and respectful comment included a supporting link and everything. Must have hit a nerve bc you wouldnt post it. that in itself proves you are a bitch and liar and dont know wtf you are talking about and i take back all the respectful tones i used. ps satalites are fake af retard

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi WreckLoose. If we publish everything it would just become a mud-slinging match between the believers in the flat earth religion and the believers in the globe earth religion. Both are blind followers. Of course, as I say, the followers of the globe earth religion, they have a working scientific model and lots of plausible logical explanations. But still they seem to act like blind religious zealots, also, blind to any potential problems in their model.

      So there is no point in just having a website full of believers in the globe fighting with believers in the flat earth. There are many places for that.

      Here we are trying to explore actually if it is possible to develop a model that accurately predicts our observations, that is different from the currently accepted globe model.

      So we are interested in exploring this possibility, and interested in thoughtful persons from any side of the debate who are prepared to exercise their brains and try thinking outside the box.

      So we don’t publish all the comments, very sorry for that. If you write something thoughtful and if you are open minded, then probably I will publish it. But so many comments we don’t publish, it is not a public forum where everything gets published.

      We have an agenda, and that is to promote thoughtful respectful discussions on the possibility that the currently accepted model, globe earth model, may not be a completely correct description of the system we find ourselves inside.

Leave a Reply to Ted NZ Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *