The Voyages of Captain Cook

Abishua

Member
Coriolis is magic on a flat earth. How does INS work on the flat earth, equations are required. But the answer is always a Gish Gallop of fantasy.

How many hours does it take to fly around the fantasy flat earth antarctica, distance and time please.

captain Cooks ship logs suposedly indicate that he traveled arround 60 000 miles to circumnavigate antarctica.. don't know how much time a plane would need to cover that distance.. but time it took him to do it and miles crossed indicate he was not going arround a small iceberg..
 
Captain Cook's ship logs supposedly indicate that he traveled around 60,000 miles to circumnavigate Antarctica. The time it took him to do it and miles crossed indicate he was not going around a small iceberg.
Oh dear - I surely thought this embarrassing old chestnut had long since been thrown by the wayside.

If you research his voyage properly you'll find that the 60,000-mile figure also includes his sailing to and from England, and a huge amount of diversion and exploration in both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
 
captain Cooks ship logs suposedly indicate that he traveled arround 60 000 miles to circumnavigate antarctica.. don't know how much time a plane would need to cover that distance.. but time it took him to do it and miles crossed indicate he was not going arround a small iceberg..

Please stick to the subject and don't throw in ancient fallacies that date back to the 19th Century. You can see that route of Captain Cook here:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cook

As you see, it was not a circle around the edge of Antarctica!

Now, back to the topic under discussion...
 
Oh dear - I surely thought this embarrassing old chestnut had long since been thrown by the wayside.

If you research his voyage properly you'll find that the 60,000-mile figure also includes his sailing to and from England, and a huge amount of diversion and exploration in both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
To expand on that point, here's a chart of Cooks voyages

Note the second voyage goes round the South Pacific twice, the third deviates North into the Arctic Ocean, and even the first isn't exactly a straight line as it zig zags across the Pacific.
 
The claim flat earthers usually present - the 60,000-mile figure - is based on his three year-long second voyage, in which he did "go all the way around Antarctica".

But, yes, they neglect to include the first and final legs of the journey from and to the UK, as well as all the detouring.

When factored properly, there's nothing unusual about the mileage. Unless @Abishua can present evidence showing otherwise?
 
To expand on that point, here's a chart of Cooks voyages

Note the second voyage goes round the South Pacific twice, the third deviates North into the Arctic Ocean, and even the first isn't exactly a straight line as it zig zags across the Pacific.

Wow, all those islands out there and Capt Cook manages to end up on the Cook Islands. What are the odds? :D
 
The claim flat earthers usually present - the 60,000-mile figure - is based on his three year-long second voyage, in which he did "go all the way around Antarctica".

But, yes, they neglect to include the first and final legs of the journey from and to the UK, as well as all the detouring.

When factored properly, there's nothing unusual about the mileage. Unless @Abishua can present evidence showing otherwise?
@Abishua, like many flat earth believers, has a huge problem with maps. In a private converstaion, I asked him:

"I'm sending this as a private message in the first instance because I don't want to derail the discussion, and I'd like to give you a chance to consider it first.

In the thread https://www.metabunk.org/how-antarctica-debunks-the-flat-earth.t8175/page-2#post-196126 in post #55, you mention "the flat earth map"

In post 61, Rory replies that "there is no flat earth map." I think he is right. The one you sho is the one used widely, but it clearly doesn't work. Just look at Australia for instance. See how it is stretched east-west? As experienced by Australians in real life, the distance from west to east between Perth to Brisbane is around 2,225 miles. North to South from Darwin to Adelaide is 2,600 miles.A difference of about 15%

Yet on the map you show, the east-west distance is nearly 3 times that from north to south. The same problem shows up in the whole southern hemisphere For instance the flat earth map's Africa is less than twice as long as it is wide, while the real one is 5.5 times as long as its width.

Clearly the map you show makes no sense in the light of experience. So where is the correct flat earth map?

Just one other question about your map.

Imagine standing at the southern tip of Africa and looking at the night sky to the south. Now travel to the southern tip of South America and do the same. According to your map, you are now looking up at arounf 90 degrees to the right of your South African viewing angle. Yet what everyone sees from these two positions is more or less the same stars, in the same pattern of constellations at any given time. How could that be possible?

Some more detail and some other problems at

http://roundearthsense.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/ifthe-earth-were-truly-globe-then-every.html
and

http://roundearthsense.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/55-if-sun-circles-over-and-around-earth.html"
Content from External Source
@Abishua replied:


I don't have all the answers.. thats why I am searching.. :)


there are much greater problems than that with heliocentric religion..
Content from External Source
As I asked him,

But over more than 150 years of active flat earth claims, nobody has yet managed to answer those questions. Doesn't that suggest there is no answer?

While on the other hand, the "problems" with round earth all depend on incredibly thin arguments or on bizarrely improbable conspiracy claims. I can prove anything you like, absolutely anything, if you allow me to use such standards of evidence.

Anyway, will you now withdraw your reference to the "flat earth map" since you acknowledge that no such map can be found?
Content from External Source
Notice the wildly different standards of evidence that @Abishua applies to claims that he likes and those that he doesn't.
 
captain Cooks ship logs suposedly indicate that he traveled arround 60 000 miles to circumnavigate antarctica.. don't know how much time a plane would need to cover that distance.. but time it took him to do it and miles crossed indicate he was not going arround a small iceberg..

Antarctica is nearly 14 million square kilometers of land surface area. That is roughly a quarter again larger than Europe, and about three-quarters the size of South America. Not a small iceberg.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top