In a previous post about the Vendee race, a commenter, GJ, suggested a partial circumnavigation by water, along a particularly smooth circular part of Antarctica, close to the coast line, to detect a convex or concave shape. A convex verification would be consistent with an island which in turn proves a sphere-earth and a concave shape would be consistent with the rim-- which would be proof of a flat earth. The idea intrigued me and is close enough to my primary mission here of a complete circumnavigation to prove 15,000 or 65,000 miles, consistent with the sphere or flat earth respectively, that I thought we should start a new blog post dealing with it on its own. The original exchange between GJ and me on the Vendee post is below the illustration.
GJNovember 29, 2015 at 2:22 PM
I just found this excellent blog. There is so much to process here. I believe the secret and the answer is at Antarctica. Is it a convex or concave mass on the approach and navagation? Would one steer towards it (into it) continuously as one curves around it, making it an island continent OR would one need to continously steer away from it to hug its rim - always turning away as not to run into it and hit its wall edge. Would like to discuss if you have any thoughts. Thank you for all of the great research
ReplyDelete Replies RickDecember 1, 2015 at 7:12 AM
That's a good insight GJ. Steering into it or away from it would indeed indicate a convex or concave shape. Excellent thought.
As I struggled to convert the paper circle into rim with scissors and paste-ups, and later struggled to place research stations on the Gleason map (azimuthal projection consistent with flat earth), that thought rattled around in the back of my mind but I didn't quite articulate it the way you did so concisely.
It's a good thought. The first problem that occurs to me is the scale on which we're working here. It's hard to confirm slight inward steering vs. outward steering on a 15,000 or 60,000 mile circuit. Of course, if the sailboat race or any circumnavigation is real, the navigator on the ship would be able to tell us what he did to get around. THAT requires we know a navigator. And that would be interesting to pursue.
But then-- if we could make contact with a navigator who was willing to talk to us-- even for a portion of the trip around the island-- we'd be close to selling him on a complete circumnavigation. Still-- the partial test you propose is interesting theoretically. The actual coast line is so jagged that navigation inward or outward would almost have to be conducted by an expert air or sea navigator who knew what he was doing. So overall, I think it's a good idea but the scale of the problem makes it as difficult as the original idea of a complete circumnavigation test.
Thanks for the insight however. Great idea.
Delete GJDecember 2, 2015 at 3:57 PM
Rick
Absolutely, the scale is unimaginable ! And yes, extremely difficult to discern inward/outward turns.However, a partial coastline sail from Coats Land around to Victoria Land, is mostly circular coastline. I imagine, in every sense of the word, imagine...that plotting a course just slightly north of the delineated Arctic Circle as to avoid most if not all cragged edges. What Im saying; is a way to get a read of the overall shape and the general direction in which you steer the vessel, inward or outward (plotting the big picture). Add to this expedition, a radar/tracking device that is recording its path and can provide a graphic "map" of its journey. Now...ive imagined this scenario as well. Imagine sailing directly along 80degree longitude towards the West Ice Shelf and facing it nose in, and perpendicular to the wall. Now turn a perfect 45 degrees left...straight line. You would either hit the rim, eventually OR arrive on land. If it is an island cap you would be traveling away from it as it fades away from your right. Thanks for you thoughts on this!! Like I mentioned, I had not seen this aspect of Antarctica (circle or rim) explored ANYWHERE, it, for me, is the most crucial missing piece to all of it. I believe it can be an absolute undeniable proof. Simple geometry? haha
Delete RickDecember 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM
Yes, this approach is nowhere else on the net-- other than a possible fake attempt by a flat earther who suggested sailing boats around antarctica in opposite directions to see when and where they meet. My simpler circumnavigation as proof is suggested possibly before me but certainly zeroing in on this as proof one way or another has never explored to the depth I'm going, before me, Captain Rick of the Antarctic Circumnavigation Flat Earth Exploration Team.
So.... you're now going into some shoreline detail for a PARTIAL circumnavigation that indicates a convex or concave shape. It's already late tonight but I'll look at this over the next several mornings. It's the most interesting response I've had so far on this blog as it relates directly to my mission. Thanks for the hint about the "mostly circular coastline" between Coats and Victoria.... I'll dig out my maps and upload a new blog post about this which illustrations.
I'm currently bogged down in retail / Christmas / piano so I expect to blog-post in detail on your suggestion in January.
Delete GJDecember 3, 2015 at 2:09 AM
Rick
Looking forward to your response in January. After I wrote my last post, I had another thought you might be able to speak to. In regard to sailing directly towards Antarctica and approaching it nose in, at the West Ice Shelf and perpendicular to its wall, then turning a 45 degree angle and sailing due ...left. Lets say that this imaginary expedition had radar tracking in real time. One of two things would be evident: If it is a rim, the ship would move counterclockwise around it. If it is an island cap and the ship hugged its shore, the ship travels clockwise around it. I would like to continue to add new ideas to your blog that you can explore at a later time after the holidays. Thanks again!
Delete RickDecember 3, 2015 at 5:39 AM
OK, that one is so tricky for me to imagine right now that I have to map it out for sure. Here's what I can do right now to get started-- since "barely started" is "almost done" in my practical philosophy. (The idea behind it is that every time you act, you strengthen the motivation behind that act). I'll post a new blog entry right now on this idea. That way, you can add to this particular idea on a clean page. The page we're on right now ridicules that Vendee Race-- which got you started here. This "Partial Navigation to Detect a Convex or Concave Antarctic Shoreline" idea of yours will be the title of the post-- and the index entry as well.
Delete
 |
| Here is just one example of a partial circumnavigation that could be used in the way GJ suggested. |
I just found this excellent blog. There is so much to process here. I believe the secret and the answer is at Antarctica. Is it a convex or concave mass on the approach and navagation? Would one steer towards it (into it) continuously as one curves around it, making it an island continent OR would one need to continously steer away from it to hug its rim - always turning away as not to run into it and hit its wall edge. Would like to discuss if you have any thoughts. Thank you for all of the great research
ReplyDelete Replies RickDecember 1, 2015 at 7:12 AM
That's a good insight GJ. Steering into it or away from it would indeed indicate a convex or concave shape. Excellent thought.
As I struggled to convert the paper circle into rim with scissors and paste-ups, and later struggled to place research stations on the Gleason map (azimuthal projection consistent with flat earth), that thought rattled around in the back of my mind but I didn't quite articulate it the way you did so concisely.
It's a good thought. The first problem that occurs to me is the scale on which we're working here. It's hard to confirm slight inward steering vs. outward steering on a 15,000 or 60,000 mile circuit. Of course, if the sailboat race or any circumnavigation is real, the navigator on the ship would be able to tell us what he did to get around. THAT requires we know a navigator. And that would be interesting to pursue.
But then-- if we could make contact with a navigator who was willing to talk to us-- even for a portion of the trip around the island-- we'd be close to selling him on a complete circumnavigation. Still-- the partial test you propose is interesting theoretically. The actual coast line is so jagged that navigation inward or outward would almost have to be conducted by an expert air or sea navigator who knew what he was doing. So overall, I think it's a good idea but the scale of the problem makes it as difficult as the original idea of a complete circumnavigation test.
Thanks for the insight however. Great idea.
Delete GJDecember 2, 2015 at 3:57 PM
Rick
Absolutely, the scale is unimaginable ! And yes, extremely difficult to discern inward/outward turns.However, a partial coastline sail from Coats Land around to Victoria Land, is mostly circular coastline. I imagine, in every sense of the word, imagine...that plotting a course just slightly north of the delineated Arctic Circle as to avoid most if not all cragged edges. What Im saying; is a way to get a read of the overall shape and the general direction in which you steer the vessel, inward or outward (plotting the big picture). Add to this expedition, a radar/tracking device that is recording its path and can provide a graphic "map" of its journey. Now...ive imagined this scenario as well. Imagine sailing directly along 80degree longitude towards the West Ice Shelf and facing it nose in, and perpendicular to the wall. Now turn a perfect 45 degrees left...straight line. You would either hit the rim, eventually OR arrive on land. If it is an island cap you would be traveling away from it as it fades away from your right. Thanks for you thoughts on this!! Like I mentioned, I had not seen this aspect of Antarctica (circle or rim) explored ANYWHERE, it, for me, is the most crucial missing piece to all of it. I believe it can be an absolute undeniable proof. Simple geometry? haha
Delete RickDecember 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM
Yes, this approach is nowhere else on the net-- other than a possible fake attempt by a flat earther who suggested sailing boats around antarctica in opposite directions to see when and where they meet. My simpler circumnavigation as proof is suggested possibly before me but certainly zeroing in on this as proof one way or another has never explored to the depth I'm going, before me, Captain Rick of the Antarctic Circumnavigation Flat Earth Exploration Team.
So.... you're now going into some shoreline detail for a PARTIAL circumnavigation that indicates a convex or concave shape. It's already late tonight but I'll look at this over the next several mornings. It's the most interesting response I've had so far on this blog as it relates directly to my mission. Thanks for the hint about the "mostly circular coastline" between Coats and Victoria.... I'll dig out my maps and upload a new blog post about this which illustrations.
I'm currently bogged down in retail / Christmas / piano so I expect to blog-post in detail on your suggestion in January.
Delete GJDecember 3, 2015 at 2:09 AM
Rick
Looking forward to your response in January. After I wrote my last post, I had another thought you might be able to speak to. In regard to sailing directly towards Antarctica and approaching it nose in, at the West Ice Shelf and perpendicular to its wall, then turning a 45 degree angle and sailing due ...left. Lets say that this imaginary expedition had radar tracking in real time. One of two things would be evident: If it is a rim, the ship would move counterclockwise around it. If it is an island cap and the ship hugged its shore, the ship travels clockwise around it. I would like to continue to add new ideas to your blog that you can explore at a later time after the holidays. Thanks again!
Delete RickDecember 3, 2015 at 5:39 AM
OK, that one is so tricky for me to imagine right now that I have to map it out for sure. Here's what I can do right now to get started-- since "barely started" is "almost done" in my practical philosophy. (The idea behind it is that every time you act, you strengthen the motivation behind that act). I'll post a new blog entry right now on this idea. That way, you can add to this particular idea on a clean page. The page we're on right now ridicules that Vendee Race-- which got you started here. This "Partial Navigation to Detect a Convex or Concave Antarctic Shoreline" idea of yours will be the title of the post-- and the index entry as well.
Delete
Why don't you just do it by air in a private plane. IT would be less riskiers and would finish faster You will be able to guage the convex or concave very easily
ReplyDeleteIt seems simple enough doesn't it? However, I don't fly. I'm near the 30th parallel in Arizona, far from the Antarctic. I don't have discretionary time and money to go on cruises or flights. Even if I did hire a private flight, I don't know air navigation at all so would not be able to tell which way I was going. Further, when flying near the south pole, I'm not certain how the magnetic south pole would make the compass on a plane behave. What seems simple at first turns into a logistically impossible problem once you start down a path.
DeleteI have good news. All you would have to do is ask any of the thousands of pilots who have flown tens of thousands of missions to the numerous Antarctic research stations and outposts there that have been both seasonally and continuously manned since 1903. I'm sure a few of them would have reported any sign of flat happening down there ... much less "concave".
DeleteYou're sure that a few would have reported "any sign of flat happening"? ..."much less concave"?
DeleteBut you don't seem to understand the problem-- if I understand your argument. Flat doesn't just "happen" and concave is not easily detected. The scale is too large.
I'm proposing a pilot fly around Antarctica to determine mileage. Along with that, that pilot would have to continually steer to the right as he goes around clockwise or east on a ball earth. He would have to steer to the left as he goes clockwise on a flat earth. The steering suggestion was GJ's.
The problem with detecting steering is that the coastline is jagged and very long so accumulated net changes right or left would almost certainly have to be computer logged. And the problem with pilots is that none have really circumnavigated and documented the effort.
It's not as simple as you suggest. Thousands of missions are point to point missions with limited scope in terms of the rim or the island, whatever it is.
I know it might seem hard to believe but this is a very tricky problem.
Rick
ReplyDeleteThanks for opening a new page on this. I think I was not clear in my description of my partial navagation path the other day. What I am considering is a path from Coats Land due south and ending at Victoria Land. Effectively circling the shape at its most circular shoreline. Imagine sailing due south from South Africa, approaching the rim/island and continuing on towards Victoria Land, then turning due north again heading to New Zealand. This route would also work with the 45 degree angle test sail as well. What do you think?
I'll have to map it out. One of us has to map it out for readers here as well as ourselves. It has to be illustrated on both flat earth and sphere earth projections. That's why I can't get around to it till January.
ReplyDeleteI hope the answer arrives. You guys are great researchers and the curiosity that is alive on this website is many steps in the right direction. Keep it up!!
ReplyDeleteThanks for the encouragement, Anon. It helps keep me going too.
DeleteWOW thanks guys for all your hard work. I just started on the FE research a month ago and have become a believer just by not finding a curve with the math they give you to use as well as pics from everyday people in flight showing no curve but photos from nasa have them curved. Admiral Byrd trip there also got me going on Antarctica, somethingis going on down there. looking forward to your findings. Blessings, Kevin G Gushlaw
ReplyDelete