Non-existent Southern Hemisphere flights
According to the flat earth map New Zealand and Argentina, for example, are on opposite sides almost 20,000 miles apart. So flat earthers claim it is not possible to fly between such locations in the 11 hours that a number of airlines offer flights doing. A plane would have to travel at more than twice the speed of sound to make the journey in 11 hours on a flat earth.
So flat earthers claim such flights are impossible and airlines who advertise such flights are part of the globe earth conspiracy and in reality these flights do not exist.
This is totally incorrect. To prove it for myself recently I flew from New Zealand to Argentina and back again with Air New Zealand. I took my iPhone and logged all the sensor data from the iPhone including altitude, compass direction, heading, speed, GPS coordinates, etc. I have those logs for both flights. Both flights took about 11 hours so these flights are certainly real and possible and this proves the map the flat earthers currently accept can not be correct.
I will post more details of my flights and an analysis of the data logged by my iPhone during them in another post.
Conclusion: Flat earthers are incorrect on this point. Flights between locations in the south are possible within the expected times predicted on a globe earth. This proves the currently accepted flat earth map is incorrect. It does not prove the earth is a globe but it is consistent with what we would expect on a globe and totally impossible on the flat earth map.
Supporting Flat Earth Proofs
- 43) If Earth was a ball there are several flights in the Southern hemisphere which would have their quickest, straightest path over the Antarctic continent such as Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia. Instead of taking the shortest, quickest route in a straight line over Antarctica, all such flights detour all manner of directions away from Antarctica instead claiming the temperatures too cold for airplane travel!
- 44) If Earth was a ball, and Antarctica was too cold to fly over, the only logical way to fly from Sydney to Santiago would be a straight shot over the Pacific staying in the Southern hemisphere the entire way. Re-fueling could be done in New Zealand or other Southern hemisphere destinations along the way if absolutely necessary. In actual fact, however, Santiago-Sydney flights go into the Northern hemisphere making stop-overs at LAX and other North American airports before continuing back down to the Southern hemisphere.
- 45) On a ball-Earth, Johannesburg, South Africa to Perth, Australia should be a straight shot over the Indian Ocean with convenient re-fueling possibilities on Mauritus or Madagascar. In actual practice, however, most Johannesburg to Perth flights curiously stop over either in Dubai, Hong Kong or Malaysia all of which make no sense on the ball, but are completely understandable when mapped on a flat Earth.
- 46) On a ball-Earth Cape Town, South Africa to Buenos Aries, Argentina should be a straight shot over the Atlantic following the same line of latitude across, but instead every flight goes to connecting locations in the Northern hemisphere first, stopping over anywhere from London to Turkey to Dubai.
- 47) On a ball-Earth Johannesburg, South Africa to Sao Paolo, Brazil should be a quick straight shot along the 25th Southern latitude, but instead nearly every flight makes a re-fueling stop at the 50th degree North latitude in London first!
- 48) On a ball-Earth Santiago, Chile to Johannesburg, South Africa should be an easy flight all taking place below the Tropic of Capricorn in the Southern hemisphere, yet every listed flight makes a curious re-fueling stop in Senegal near the Tropic of Cancer in the North hemisphere first! When mapped on a flat Earth the reason why is clear to see, however, Senegal is actually directly in a straight-line path half-way between the two.
There are no flights to and from Johannesburg – Santiago. They would not be enough passengers to make it pay. You have to go by roots that that make a profit. London Jo,burg and London Santiago are in demand roots. Durrrrrrrrrrrr!
You are correct of course. Southern Hemisphere is mostly ocean. It has South America, South Africa and Australia and New Zealand and only a few other very small islands. The airline routes are all about logistics. Airlines fly from a hub. Like British Airways fly from London. If you want to fly from Paris to Amsterdam by British Airways they are likely to fly you to London first and then on to your final destination. This makes sense for the airlines because they fly all their passengers to their hub and then take all the passengers from there to their final destinations. That way they bring the people from all over the world to one place and can then send full plane loads of people out from that place all over the world. It is just the way airlines work and why sometimes flights do not make sense or seem to be very direct.
There is at least one of these Southern Hemisphere flights in operation. Air New Zealand fly from Auckland to Buenos Aires in Argentina. On the flat earth map this would have to be very, very long flight. But they fly it in about 12 hours.
I actually flew on this flight last December and wrote something about it here:
https://flatearthfacts.com/flat-earth-australia-south-america-flights-real/
The flight is most certainly real and it does certainly fly from New Zealand to Argentina in 12 hours. I have flown the route twice, a return trip.
What I have written on that page about the route as plotted on google maps from the coordinates from my iPhone may be wrong because I just looked at the raw data and I have got GPS coordinates down to latitudes of -50 degrees. So Buenos Aires is at about -34.5 degrees, so it seems the plane has gone down towards the South Pole 15.5 degrees and then back up to Auckland which is at almost -37 degrees.
So I do not know why the plot on google maps did not show this. I will have to check it out again.
But based on looking at the raw GPS data logged by my phone it appears the plane flew down towards the South Pole to take advantage of the shorter distances due to the great circle phenomenon that occurs when flying over a globe…
So I am still trying to analyze the data on this but right now it seems everything is consistent with a globe earth…
Buenos Aires, Ministro Pistarini International Airport
to,
Doha, Hamad International Airport Qatar
18h40m
then technical stop in;
Doha, Hamad International Airport
Qatar
then to,
Cape Town, Cape Town International Airport
another 10h 15min
with connection time 2h 10 min
for total time of 31 hours 5 minutes
it seems like on a ball earth it would be much faster to just go straight to cape town.
hi
sorry for weak english.
did you be awake in both flight?
if so, did you notice an unusual sudden jerk in airplane movement?
and one another question
can somebody flight with his personal jet at these airways?
Hi Samlan
Yes. I was awake all the time in both directions and there was no sudden jerk in the flights. I have all the iphone logs, GPS was not working on the flight to South America, it was partially working on the flight back, but iphone has a compass and altimeter in it so it logs the direction the plane is heading [according to its compass and according to its GPS]. So I have not looked at these data logs in great detail but it seems to me the compass directions did not make sense in my first glance. But I am not actually sure iphone compass would work properly in a plane anyhow.
How do you know they were taking advantage of a so called great circle phenomenon of a “globe earth” as apposed to a faster air current when you had no way to tell if you were being told the truth about the air speed of the aircraft?
There are multiple southern ocean flights that disprove a flat earth …
http://www.gcmap.com/featured/20190320
From that site, this disclaimer:
‘Information on this site may not be accurate or current and is not valid for flight planning or navigation. No warranty of fitness for any purpose is made or implied. Flight planning and navigation should only be done using official charts.’
Disproof, huh?
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=BREAKING+POINT+(HOW+LONG+WILL+THE+LIE+LAST___)
The southern ocean flights in know way disprove flat earth. They may, along with evidence provided by the SACS transatlantic cable length ( south of Earth’s equator ), establish that South America and Africa prove closer than some flat earth map makers illustrate them to be, but none of that disproves FLAT EARTH.
I think you miss the point of flat earthed saying this flight should take mire than 11 hours. What they mean is that is the published distance is accurate it will require more time. The fact that is only takes 11 hours shows they are closer. Meaning the globe earth map is wrong.
Tom what you have written is insane. Maybe you just made a mistake. According to the globe earth map the flight from Sydney to Buenos Aires should take about 11 hours, and it does take about 11 hours. This does not prove anything but it is consistent with what we expect would happen if we were on a globe earth. However, just look at the flat earth map and where Buenos Aires and Sydney are, they are diametrically opposed on opposite sides of the flat earth. Shortest distance would be to fly over the North Pole. So to fly that distance which must be 20,000 miles or more in 11 hours is clearly totally impossible. So this does prove that the map put forward by the flat earth people is wrong for sure.
So airline pilots, astronauts, scientists, ship captains and the governments of the world are all in the global conspiracy? The only reason I’m on the site is because a longtime friend of mine is convinced the earth is flat from watching videos. I think she has developed a form of mental illness because she also thinks JFK Jr and Elvis are both alive. I agreed to read up on the subject and nothing I have read is changing my mind, it goes against all science. There is a scientific explanation for everything and there is no way a conspiracy of that scale could be kept secret.
There are airline pilots that believethe earth is flat. Same with ship captains and even scientists
Now what?
Of course you can believe anything you want to. The problem is, at the moment, it is irrational to believe the earth is flat. I am not saying 100% for sure it is not flat. But there is no rational explanation of how things could work if the earth was flat. There is no model that can predict and explain what we observe happening around us assuming the earth to be a flat plane.
So, at least currently, there is no rational explanation as to how the earth could be flat and at the same time produce what we see in the sky and experience around us. So until there is such an explanation, a valid scientific predictive theory for the flat earth that works at least as well as the globe earth model, belief in the flat earth is irrational.
Incorrect. Airline pilots all know the Earth is round. None of them think its flat. lol
Yes. Of course everyone thinks the earth is a globe. That is the idea we are given from birth. So naturally everyone thinks the earth is a globe. But that does not mean that the earth is necessarily a globe.
It takes an honest, open heart to know and acknowledge the truth. First of all, there is a Creator Who created all things visible and invisible. A globe Earth does not exist. Search it out with an honest open heart. There’s lots of proof not only on the Internet, but in Nature. Water seeks its own level (water level) .
https://awakeningflatearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/31180087_406363176497966_7569420473792987136_n.jpg
Nature proves a globe earth. Key example. Hurricanes.
Nature does not prove a globe earth.
We are not sure, that is the strange thing. As a globe earther to prove the earth is a globe. They fail.
They don’t know what to say.
Only thing is they can point to photos of the earth from space. But on further investigation it does not seem we have the ability actually to photograph the globe earth from space.
So try it. Ask a globe earther to prove the earth is a globe and see him fail…
Ok I will bite.
Love a good discussion.
When the sun sets it casts my shadow hundreds of meters long before disappearing. Does that not tell me the sun hits me from the side with an almost 90 degrees angle?
It tells you the sun appears on the horizon.
So sun certainly appears to be at 90 degrees to you. But so is the horzon.
Look at the clouds moving in the sky. You can see a cloud directly above your head and if you watch that cloud as it moves towards the horizon you will notice it gets lower down in the sky. Actually the cloud, it appears on one horizon directly opposite you and rises up to the center directly above your head and then it moves over the the opposite horizon and appears again directly opposite you on the other side.
So that cloud is doing exactly the same thing as the sun does. It appears on one horizon, then rises up in the sky until it is above your head, then, as it goes across the sky, gets lower and then disappears at the opposite horizon.
So the cloud behaves EXACTLY the same way as the sun. But we know the cloud is not rising and setting, cloud is not going up and down, cloud is just above the earth at a fixed distance and going across the sky at a fixed distance from the earth.
So what the cloud is doing and what the cloud appears to you to be doing, that is two completely different things.
To you the cloud appears on one horizon, rises up to where it is directly above your head, and “sets” on the opposite horizon directly opposite to you.
So we can not believe what we are seeing in the sky. It is an illusion caused by perspective.
Actually the things are just moving across, and, like the cloud, they appear to rise and come up in the sky and then go down and set on the other side.
But actually, like the cloud, they are just rotating above our heads a fixed distance from the earth.
This rising and setting, like the sun does, it is just an illusion created by perspective…
Sorry your sun hypothesis doesnt make any sense.
The sun is actually so far over the horizon that it even shines under the clouds at some point.
Go take a journey to Antarctica, you actually can… You would be confused how you have a 6 months long day there whilst the other random parts on your map have night…
You wi
It does make sense. Sun does EXACTLY the same thing that clouds, airplanes, satellites, etc do. The all appear on one horizon, rise up in the sky and then go down and set on the opposite horizon. But we know these things are not actually going up and coming down. They remain at a fixed distance above the earth, the appearance of them rising and setting is only due to the optical illusion of perspective.
So obviously this perspective optical illusion is also working on the sun, moon, stars, etc.
I have been almost to Antartica and you can see the film I made down there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GWJEve5A3I
Yes. There is 24 hour sun in Antartica in summer, which is December down there. You are correct.
And yes. This blows away the map the flat earthers currently present. There is no way, on the current flat earth model, that there could be 24 hours of sun in summer in Antartica. That is why most flat earthers think this does not happen. Because it can not happen with their model.
But you are correct, I did go down there and check it out, and yes, most certainly, during December in Antartica the sun is visible in the sky circling around, just like it does in the North Pole.
So this observation is consistent with the globe earth model, and breaks the flat earth model. So in this regard you are correct for sure.
Your sunset theory is also completely inconsistent with reality.
You can use the optical illusion theory when I ask you but why does it look like it. But your theory goes down the drain when I use my shadow as an example.
That means it is actually not an optical illusion, especially when the sun shines under the clouds when it sets.
I understand and appreciate your point but the reality that our view of the sun is obviously impacted by perspective, like our view of the clouds is impacted by perspective, is not inconsistent with reality. There must be perspective involved in our view of the sun. So this has to be considered. The way we see the sun rising up and setting down on the opposite side of the sky is obviously largely a product of perspective.
What exactly happens at the time of the sun setting, and seeing clouds illuminated from below, that is may be some sort of reflection because the sun can never be below the clouds… The sun is always above the clouds… Far far far above the clouds…
So exactly what is happening in this case I do not know.
So the theory of the rising and setting of the sun being caused by perspective is not necessarily completely inconsistent with reality. I do understand your point, but we are not really 100% sure how the sun is illuminating the bottom of the clouds in this situation. There may be an explanation of this that is compatible with the perspective hypothesis.
Hurricanes dont prove flat or globe, you may as well said trees prove globe earth or brownies
the “refueling stops” aren’t actually refueling stops but 2 completely different flights
Sooo what about all of these??
QF63/QF64 Sydney – Johannesburg
SA222/SA223 Johannesburg – São Paulo
QF27/QF28 Sydney – Santiago
LA800/LA801 Auckland – Santiago
SA280/SA281 Perth – Johannesburg
ANZ30/ANZ31 Auckland – Buenos Aires
QF14 Ezeiza – Darwin