I ran across this sailing ship company recently... http://www.picton-castle.com/. After considering their previous work, I might think about pitching them on a trip around 55 S. Here's a previous trip they made... which is fairly close to 55S...
Still, the Picton Castle might be a viable candidate for proving a circumference greater or less than the equatorial circumference of 25,000 miles-- thus lending credibility to either a flat or globe earth. Certainly if the Picton Castle sailed MORE than 25,000 at 55 S Lat., say 35,000 miles-- then that contradicts a globe right there since the global circumference, according to globe theory, would be LESS than 25,000-- say 20 or 15,000 miles. It'll be interesting to hear what Picton Castle owners write back to me once I construct my pitch to them on this matter.
If they survived the voyage above, then surely they know how to do another voyage a bit more south that that route-- although they may already be aware it's too long and hazardous. I'll find out by emailing them over coming weeks. The downside is that it's an old fashioned sailing ship-- I'd rather find a company that hires newbies, like Picton Castle does, but on a modern jet turbine powered huge yacht....
I only post this here tonight because I'm looking to update this blog with something relevent and this idea seems mildly feasible. Overall, I'm too overwhelmed with work and day to day survival in Phoenix Arizona to spend any time here and my computer is now too slow to be enjoyable to use, given that most websites demand higher processing power.
Still, the Picton Castle might be a viable candidate for proving a circumference greater or less than the equatorial circumference of 25,000 miles-- thus lending credibility to either a flat or globe earth. Certainly if the Picton Castle sailed MORE than 25,000 at 55 S Lat., say 35,000 miles-- then that contradicts a globe right there since the global circumference, according to globe theory, would be LESS than 25,000-- say 20 or 15,000 miles. It'll be interesting to hear what Picton Castle owners write back to me once I construct my pitch to them on this matter.
On the Gleason map 1892, I get one inch = 1,600 miles. From face of ice wall at the 12:00 position to face of ice wall at 6:00 it measures 16 inches. So that equals a diameter from wall to wall = 25,600 miles. This means that on the Gleason map the circumference of the face of the ice wall (shore line of Antarctica) on flat earth = 80,425 miles. This is 20,000 more miles than what you calculated for a circumference of the ice wall.
ReplyDeleteIs the Gleason map out of scale??
Could you tell me how you calculated the circumference of Antarctica?
Is there a more current (accurate) polar azmuth map of the world that you would recommend?
Please respond to:
budmattison@gmail.com
(518)686-7843
BUD: This means that on the Gleason map the circumference of the face of the ice wall (shore line of Antarctica) on flat earth = 80,425 miles.
ReplyDeleteRICK: I'll have to review my notes and get back to you in coming days. I actually forget, right now, how I came to 60,000 miles. Thanks for the question. It IS interesting that you got the diameter 25,600 as virtually equal to the spherical circumference. Let me spend a week on this and see what I come up with.
Rick,
DeleteIt's been 14 days! I just hope you didn't forget about my question. :)
The suspense is killing me..
Better yet Give me a call
518.686.7843
Talk soon
Bud Mattison
Tic tock tic toc
ReplyDeleteStill waiting
Thanks for wasting everybody's time Rick...