The Pale Blue Dot? Chapter Fifteen: The Antarctica, Flight Paths and Circumnavigation

Originally Written By Thomas Perez. January 2, 2019 at 2:26AM. Copyright 2019. Updated 2020.

Before I engage on the topic of flight paths; I want to remind the reader that flat Earthers, like globe Earthers, do. not deny the existence of the North Pole (the ‘Arctica’). Moreover, the Arctica is not considered a land mass (continent). It is only an area considered arctic by its low temperatures and oceans surrounding it. The Arctica is the area where the North Star Polaris is fixed above. But when it comes to the South Pole (the Antarctica) flat Earthers deny it’s existence, claiming that the Antarctica is a wall of ice surrounding the enclosed Domed Earth. According to flat Earthers, the Antarctica is not a continent.

Moreover, they maintain that passenger flights deep into the Antarctica is impossible since it stretches for miles on end. Maintaining fuel for a trip to and from the entire Antarctica would be impossible, considering what the average, and even the well above average, passenger airliner tank can hold. Furthermore, flat Earthers also believe that most of the Antarctica is off limits to the rest of the civilian population from exploring it due to the Antarctic Treaty – whether by twin otters and/or personal planes. Crossing over the Antarctica is a feat that has never truly been accomplished, despite what you may have learned, heard or read. We will discuss these things as we move along.

Flight Paths: Both; By Air and Sea

We all know that there are passenger flights that do take people to the Antarctica. Places like Antarctica 21 are in the business of flying over “Cape Horn and the mythical waters of the Drake Passage, the 2019-20 Classic Antarctica Air-Cruises take you to one of the most spectacular places on earth, the coldest, highest, windiest, driest, and remotest continent – Antarctica. Thirty departures are offered during the 2019-20 season, twelve aboard Ocean Nova, four aboard Hebridean Sky and fourteen aboard Magellan Explorer.”

https://antarctica21.com/air-cruises-2019-20/2019-20-season/classic-antarctica-air-cruise/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIifz_3Ja03wIVhVuGCh1Tdwa2EAAYASAAEgJeYPD_BwE

Since this is the case, I began to ask myself 2 simple questions; 1. Do planes really fly over the Antarctic? 2. Has anyone flown over the Antarctic? The answer to both questions is: “No.”

According to ‘Aviation Stack Exchange’ (we will note their contradictions), a blogger asked a similar question in reference to whether or not if any person flown over the Antarctic. The question was put forth as follows; “Are there any flights that go over the South Pole, or any that have? I’m not interested in flights over the edges of Antarctica, I’m asking about crossing right over the Pole.”

Various answers concerning this question did not exactly match. The following answers are from different bloggers:

“There are no scheduled flights but plenty of tour operators will fly you there. Google will help. Travel. SE would also be a good place to ask. There are folks over there who have done this.”

“The commercials only fly near the “beach”, they never cross it.”

However, another commentator said the following:

“You haven’t looked hard enough. There are NZ operators who will charter for you.”

The question also prompted a reply of curiosity as to whether or not the questioner was a flat Earther. The reply is as follows:

“Please forgive me for asking, are you a “flat earth truther?” We sometimes get those numpties passing by trying to justify their theories (especially the one about the Antarctica being a ringed ice wall with military guarding it to make sure no-one learns the secret). There have been many flights over the geographic South Pole, the first documented one being in 1935 by Lincoln Ellsworth and Herbert Hollick-Kenyon. See also the first flight over Antarctica.

Pan Am flight 50, using a Boeing 747SP, also flew over both poles.

No scheduled commercial flights fly over the South Pole since there are no great circle routes in use which do so.

Flights from New Zealand to South Africa would fly over Antarctica but no airline currently flies that route.

As to problems with the compass, modern aircraft have no problems since the primary navigation source is GPS. If you were using a compass only, as you got close to the magnetic South pole (remember, this is not even in Antarctica), the compass would become increasingly unreliable. Simply maintain a straight course though, over the pole, and the compass will become increasingly reliable. However, navigating over the magnetic poles using only a compass is the preserve of explorers and the fool-hardy.

This document contains more technical detail regarding navigation. It talks mainly about the North magnetic pole but is applicable to both.

A couple of other considerations when asking about commercial flights is the need for ETOPS certification and the need to carry special survival equipment when flying south of latitude 72 degrees which is very considerable and would require the removal of revenue seats to carry it.

There is a big difference between the nearest suitable diversion airport flying over the Arctic and flying over the Antarctic.”

The Answers Continue:

“There are no scheduled commercial flights over south pole – in fact, there are none over Antarctica. That said, you can fly to south pole in south pole flights.”

The answers continue until the last comment was made. They are as follows:

“They take the same way out the way they came in, therefore there is no crossing it.”

“What exactly are you asking for? Do you want someone to fly you over the South Pole (in which case, which pole, there are 4?). The only way you can do that is to charter your own flight. There are several operators who will do this, here’s an example but, this really has nothing to do with aviation. it’s a travel question. Oh, and please confirm that you are not a “flat earth truther.”

“Flat Earth truther?” First of all I was wondering why they fly over the north pole but never over the south pole (I didn’t find any record). Just curious why they don’t go from Australia and New Zealand to South America and Africa to save fuel? I asked it here because I thought it had something to do with the magnetic south pole and the planes compass. I don’t think they would be able to answer the technical part of the question at the travel section.”

“I just find it weird no one on earth ever flew over (even at high alt) and made a detailed report about it. (if it has happened I’m sure someone would have posted it by now.”

“The actual location of cities in the southern hemisphere (there’s a lot of ocean out there) means that flights don’t need to fly over the south pole to save fuel. The shortest distance is called the “great circle.” For a flight from say Auckland to Johannesburg, the great circle path only just touches the Antarctic coast. One that comes close would be Perth to Buenos Aires, but no airline flies that route.”

End of comments. All comments are located here: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33938/do-any-flights-go-over-the-south-pole

The answers are interesting. With that in mind, I decided to look further into some of the answers provided that seem to imply a globe spherical Earth. I first looked into Lincoln Ellsworth’s and Herbert Hollick-Kenyon’s “historical” flight over the South Pole. I went into the site that the blogger provided above. I wanted to read it for myself carefully. Here is the link to the site:
According to the information found in the link, Ellsworth and Kenyon’s destination was ‘Little America’ (American exploration bases that consisted of only two back in 1935-36). All together there have been 5 bases. Some, however, went out into the seas due to glacial break-offs. The site makes mention of where Ellsworth and Kenyon took off from. “Ellsworth and his team sailed from Dundee Island opposite the tip of South Antarctica in late 1935.” (Ibid). Not knowing exactly where Dundee Island was, I proceeded to look it up on a map. “Dundee Island is an ice-covered island lying east of the Northeastern tip of Antarctic Peninsula and south of Joinville Island.”

“Dundee Island”Geographic Names Information SystemUnited States Geological Survey. Retrieved2013-12-03.

After reading some of the information above I was about to concede to a spherical globe Earth model. And just when I was going to, regardless of all the past articles conducted in this series, and despite the fact that I started to think that perhaps the question pertaining to the shape of the Earth may never be fully understood either way due to the anomalies found especially in the so-called globe Earth model in my prior articles; I found this…

Moreover, I also found this…
After viewing the two maps above, I decided not to concede, but to continue. Anybody with a brain can see that it is blatantly obvious that Ellsworth and Kenyon did not fly over the Antarctic, because the Antarctic as a continent may, or does not exist at all. All they did was fly over a wall of ice, what is called, its peninsula. This actually confirms what most of the bloggers said above in reference to a Southern magnetic pole (the geomagnetic pole, to be exact). It also confirms why they got lost on 3 occasions, as the article by the ‘Royal Aviation Museum’ tells us. This inability to successfully find a destination the first time around is probably due to the anomalies found concerning the geomagnetic poles, specifically in this case; the Southern geomagnetic pole.

According to mainstream science;

“Because opposite poles attract, the Earth’s South Magnetic Pole is physically actually a Magnetic North Pole. The South Magnetic Pole is constantly shifting due to changes in the Earth’s magnetic field.” Moreover, “The South Magnetic Pole is the wandering point on the Earths Southern Hemisphere where the geomagnetic field lines are directed vertically upwards. It should not be confused with the South Geomagnetic Pole.”

However, the North Magnetic Pole is also wandering. “The North Magnetic Pole is the wandering point on the surface of Earths Northern Hemisphere at which the planet’s magnetic field points vertically downwards (in other words, if a magnetic compass needle is allowed to rotate about a horizontal axis, it will point straight down). There is only one location where this occurs, near (but distinct from) the geographic North Pole and the geomagnetic North Pole.

Furthermore, “The North and South Magnetic Poles are wandering points on Earth’s surface. They move, due to changes in Earth’s magnetic field. The location of the South Magnetic Pole is currently off the coast of Antarctica and even outside the Antarctic Circle.” “All magnets have two poles, where the lines of magnetic flux enter and emerge…Because opposite poles attract, this definition means that the Earth’s North Magnetic Pole is actually a Magnetic South Pole and the Earth’s South Magnetic Pole is a Magnetic North Pole.” The location of the Magnetic North Pole “Is a point on Ellesmere Island in Northern Canada.” Another site claims it to be located “North of Baffin Bay in Canada,” as of 2018.

https://earthsky.org/human-world/this-date-in-science-shackleton-expedition-discovered-magnetic-south-pole

Serway, Raymond A.; Chris Vuille (2006). Essentials of college physics. USA: Cengage Learning. p. 493.ISBN0-495-10619-4. Retrieved 2012-04-19.

Russell, Randy. “Earth’s Magnetic Poles”. Windows to the Universe. National Earth Science Teachers Association. Retrieved 2012-04-19.

https://gisgeography.com/magnetic-north-vs-geographic-true-pole/

https://www.quora.com/Where-is-the-Earths-magnetic-North-Pole-right-now

All this may sound a bit confusing to the average reader, so let me put it in simpler terms with citations and quotes to verify what I am about to say. There is really no such thing as a North or South Pole. And while there are directional magnetic forces at work with regard to the N and S; the idea itself seems to cancel each other out. According to ‘Pysics.org’ “Roald Amundsen, Ranulph Fiennes and other arctic (North Pole – T. Perez) explorers might be surprised to learn that, when they visited the North Pole, they were actually standing on the South Pole of a magnet.” In other words; The true South pole is actually the magnetic north and True North is the magnetic south.

http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=65

Moreover, it seems that they may be beginning to flip sides. The N will become the S, and S will become the North. However, the term “flip” is somewhat descriptive by those who uphold a spherical Earth model, wouldn’t you say? But on the other hand, we can clearly see that the changes in magnetic directional influences are circular. And since they are circular, this directional path can also exist on a flat circular non-globe Earth. The following pictures demonstrate this. The 6 pictures below are taken from ‘Hyper physics Concepts.’

Pic 1…

Pic 2…

Pic 3…

Pic 4…

Pic 5…

Pic 6…

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/elemag.html

This is what science tells us. If you still do not understand, allow me to cite; “The North geomagnetic Pole, …is actually the south pole of the Earth’s magnetic field, and the South geomagnetic pole is the north pole. The magnetic field is generated by electric currents due to the motion of convection currents of molten iron in the Earth’s outer core driven by heat escaping from the core, a natural process called a geodynamo. (Wiki)

However, the illustration located in Pic 2 shows us a circular motion of current. But many would be quick to respond that the picture is only showing us what’s taking place at the top Pole (I.e., the North Pole). However, that is not necessarily true by itself. If we were to simply lay the North Pole down on its back, the directional flow of the magnetic field will hence hit anything South of it – to be precise: the Antarctic wall. But many would claim, that the field returns to the South Pole. Yes, this is true, but it can easily work on an Antarctic ice wall just as well.

Allow me to explain. On a flat Earth it’s true that unipolar magnets can’t exist, but this is not a problem for the flat Earth model. This is because ring magnets, which are shaped like, you guessed it, a flat disk, are capable of having radial magnetization. In a radial magnet, one magnetic pole is at the center and other other is at all points on the edge of the magnet. But this explanation only speaks in reference to an ice wall surrounding the entire enclosed Domed Earth. It’s a decent explanation. But, allow me to take it in another direction.

According to Wonder Physics; “The magnetic field from the iron in the base causes electricity to flow around through the ring. The electricity in the ring is called an eddy current. The eddy current causes the metal ring to become a magnet. The two electromagnets are arranged so that their north poles point at each other.”

https://wonders.physics.wisc.edu/jumping-ring/

The ‘Eddy Current’ is pictured below. Two poles opposite of one another, distributing equal current on a flat disk…

Similarly; “Ring magnets neodymium. Most ring magnets and tube-shaped magnets are axially magnetised: North and South poles are located on the flat circular surfaces (“top and bottom”). The few diametrically magnetised ring magnets with poles “left and right” are specifically marked.”

https://www.supermagnete.de/eng/ring-magnets-neodymium

Many globe Earthers tend to think that flat Earthers can not perceive the notion of a bottom. No flat Earther, I’m sure, makes this claim. So if that is the case, then I must pose a question:“What is at the bottom of a flat Earth anyway?” That question will be explored in my final chapter. Moreover, globe Earthers need to remember one thing in reference to magnetic poles; it is not that the poles are dictating the motions of the currents; but that it is the motions of the currents themselves that are the causes of the magnetic pull, or attraction, to one another.

This is not an effort to deny the ice wall, but to acknowledge that the “ring” of currents and magnetic attractions itself are also caused from the bottom of the disk, like shown in Eddy’s Current. The wall of ice at the bottom of the Earth can converge “to meet at a point.” “A pair of lines of longitude are parallel at the equator but converge toward the poles” (Google Dictionary).

This is why the United States National Centers for Environmental Information uses the Enhanced Magnetic Model (EMM). The “EMM results in significantly improved pointing accuracy than the World Magnetic Model (WMM), which uses spherical harmonic representation to degree and order 12, resolving the magnetic field at 3000 km wavelength. The EMM model provides the magnetic field vector at any desired location and altitude close to and above the Earth’s surface.

Magnetic anomaly maps provide insight into the subsurface structure and composition of the Earth’s crust. Over continental areas, magnetic anomalies illuminate geologic, tectonic, and geothermal evolution of crust and lithosphere. In the world’s oceans, anomalies trending parallel to the isochrons (lines of equal age) reveal the temporal evolution of oceanic crust. Magnetic maps are widely used in the geological sciences and in resource exploration.”

https://cmr.earthdata.nasa.gov/search/concepts/C1214558247-NOAA_NCEI

The following picture is a depiction of the EMM model. It is taken from ‘The National Center for Environmental Information.’

The direct link is located here…

https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/EMM/emm_acknowledge.shtml

The Eddy Current is not difficult to picture on a flat Earth model. Picture yourself going to view the bottom of a flat Earth. From there you will, in all likelihood, see that the ice that surrounds the circle of the Earth, converges at the bottom. Although I believe it is not to scale, the following picture may help to convey what I am saying. Here is a typical flat Earth picture with the ice wall surrounding the Earth. Pictures that do not depict an ice wall surrounding a flat Earth are mainly uploaded on the internet and depicted by those who like to take cheap shots at flat Earthers without doing the proper research.

These sarcastic pictures often show something like the following three pics…

There are MANY things wrong with the three pictures above, like for I.e., the relative size of the Sun, the planets are seen as, well; planets – when in reality they are simply wandering stars, an Earth is seen without its ice wall (hence no current around, or at the bottom) and we see “space” – a concept that may not be altogether true. More on “space” in Chapter Sixteen. But I’ve seen worse. Those responsible are not true truth seekers. They believe what they have been told and spoon fed. Never once do they question the status quo of modern day scientific academia, or of its cunning artful historical past.

So much for the Poles. Let us now look into ‘Swoop Antarctica;’ a travel agent that swears by its name that one can travel far deep, even into the South Pole itself. According to ‘Swoop Antarctica,’ there are three packages one can purchase to go the South Pole. The 1st package costs 51,250.00. But after looking into their own maps, I found that the so-called South Pole is just a designated area called ‘Union Glacier Camp’ and so forth. See picture below…

The 2nd package cost 48,950.00 – this package takes you to; ‘Union Glacier Camp, ‘Weddell Sea’ and ‘Gould Bay.’ See picture below…

The 3rd package costs 28,775.00, with an option to climb Mt. Vinson for an additional 40.000. In general this package takes you to, you guessed it; ‘Union Glacier Camp’ – just a bit South of Mt. Vinson. See picture below…

The Union Glacier Camp is located 79° South. That is 11° short of the alleged South Pole. In miles that is 759mi away. See picture below…

With prices that high, you would expect the “real McCoy.” There are also many cheaper flight and cruise packages ranging from 5,623 – 16,995. But again, they are at designed areas if flown in by charter, and by the peninsula, along its wall, if taken by cruise ships. The site freely admits this…

https://www.swoop-antarctica.com/

https://www.swoop-antarctica.com/travel/getting-there#cruise-or-fly

Let us now look into some flight paths that globe Earthers claim impossible on a flat Earth. Here are 5 examples.

1. We are told that to get from San Diego to Sydney, Australia, or vice versa, the flight path of travel is WSW (West Southwest) or ENE (East Northeast) as the following two compasses and one directional bearing picture tell us…

Bearing picture is taken from…

https://www.distance.to/San-Diego/Sydney

Many globe Earthers insist that there is no other alternative to such a flight path, because the Earth is a ball. However, I must disagree with that conclusion. The WSW – ENE flight paths work just as fine on a flat Earth surface. See flat Earth picture below. Sidney Australia is located on your far left, exactly WSW from San-Diego to Sidney, and ENE from Sidney to San Diego. But many would still argue that according to the flat Earth map below, the bearing is not exactly WSW or ENE. However, according to the points of the compass above, “the compass point that is one point west of Southwest. Southwest by west. Compass point – point – any of 32 horizontal directions indicated on the card of a compass;” (Wiki); at 241.21°, with 253.125° being the maximum. See compass point chart below, row No. 22.

2. Another ludicrous example of a ball Earth model is the flight path from Texas, USA to Adu Dhabi, ARE. It makes no sense all to tell people that pilots must perform a crazy loop above an ocean, and then fly over masses of land to get from point A to point B, as the following picture tells us…

https://www.distance.to/Texas,USA/Abu-Dhabi,ARE

On a flat Earth, the flight path is quite simple as seen in the picture below…

They tell us it’s bearing is NNE (North Northeast) at 27.50°. That’s fine. Look at our compass above, and count 7° clock wise from 20° until you reach 27° (27.50 to be precise). It works perfect on a flat Earth.

3. The 3rd example is the flight between Johannesburg, South Africa to Perth Australia. According to the globe model, this flight path takes another loop. But this time it is not an absurd loop. The flight path can actually work on both models, BUT only IF it is going direct; without any stop-overs. Notice the loop (the dark line) and straight line (the lite colored line) confirming this. However, it should be noted that on a flat Earth, stop-overs make perfect sense, but on a globe Earth it simply does not. On the globe Earth model it makes no sense to make another unnecessary triangular loop just for a stop-over in Dhabi. The two pictures below demonstrate this.

The globe model, and it’s unnecessary triangular loop, is shown with a question mark. The more sensible flat Earth model is shown at the bottom…

Now let’s take a look at It’s flight path. It records a bearing of ESE 118.47°.

On a flat Earth, the bearings work just fine, as the picture above (the bottom half of it) demonstrates. Moreover, these stop-overs and/or direct flights are confirmed here. This link is one of many examples…

https://www.flightcentre.com.au/travel-news/destinations/top-ten-stopover-options-to-double-your-holiday

4. And still yet, another ludicrous flight path on a globe model is the, for I.e., Western Sidney Australia to Santiago, DOM (Dominican Republic). On a ball Earth the flight path looks as follows. You will note the dark lines (the globe Earth model path) and the lite colored path (the flat Earth model). New Zealand is that black little dot…

It’s bearing is SSE at 149.56…

https://www.distance.to/Sidney-Rd,York,Western-Australia,6302,AUS/Santiago,DOM/-39.02034233065672,124.01120424270631

Here is how it would look on a flat Earth, maintaining a SSE path at 149.56. However, if we were to look at our compass above, we will note that 149.56 is more near to the SEbS path. Curious enough, these flights perform stop-overs in LAX (Los Angeles International Airport) which does not make sense at all, since LA is located in the Northern hemisphere. Why go way up if your destination from Australia to Santiago is supposedly in the Southern hemisphere? It would be more feasible to stop-over in New Zealand, but they do not. Moreover, the dark lines above indicate a WSW path, but that is not the path pilots take according to bearings. Overall, the flight path on a ball Earth is ridiculous. But it totally makes perfect sense on a flat Earth model.

5. And finally our 5th example: South Africa to Sao Paolo Brazil. Here is a picture of its flight path…Please Note: Picture also includes Australia flight path…Another ridiculous enormous loop…

This is how it would look on a globe. Notice there is no change, even after I fish-eyed it. Both pictures look relatively the same with reference to South Africa to Sao Paolo, Brazil. But again, notice the enormous loop from Australia to Sao Paolo, Brazil.

Here is s better picture of it…

It’s bearings is WSW at 254.12…

According to our compass above, this bearing places it at WbS by 4°. On a flat Earth model the path makes perfect sense again. You can see Africa at the lower right and South America to the lower South West.

I can go on with other such examples, but I believe five is enough. Southern flight paths like San Diego Chile to Australia or visa versa should fly over the alleged Antarctica, because it is the quickest path. But they do not do this. They say “it’s too cold.” But let us remember, there are supposedly several flights to, from, and even over the Antarctica. But what they call “flying over,” is really a flight near the Antarctic peninsula; just like Ellsworth and Kenyon. Cape Town, South Africa to Buenos Aires, Argentina should be traveled along a straight path over the Atlantic; but this simply does not happen. And in reference to “flying over” the Antarctic for the sake of going over it for 2,000 dollars or more, they never really do. If you don’t believe me just Google it. Moreover, since they say it’s too cold to fly over the Antarctic then the most reasonable flight path would be to stay and fly within the SH, with refueling stops at New Zealand and other nearby destinations in the SH. Moreover, pilots actually admit to traveling in the NH with stop-overs, only to proceed again to the SH flight path. They say; “There is no real market for it.”

I am not saying that one can not land on the Antarctic. The following citation confirms that one can; “If as a civilian, you want to contract Kenn Borck Air (Canada or others) for a South Pole jaunt, you are looking at about a $50,000 flight/person or so. They fly Twin Otters. You also have to camp (Michael Palin did this for a BBC as a stunt).” Twin Otters are small aircrafts. “Many Twin Otters still serve in the far north, but they can also be found in Africa, Australia, Asia, Antarctica, and other regions where bush planes are the optimum means of travel.” (Wiki). However, all of these otter planes serve only research and various scientific camps in the Antarctic. However, again; landing on a continent or a ringed ice wall can be pretty much non-conclusive as to where one is (more on this in a bit); this also includes Jenn Brock Air. No flights are mentioned to the Antarctica for the average Joe…See link below…So I don’t know what the blogger meant by saying; “as a civilian one can.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenn_Borek_Air

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Canada_DHC-6_Twin_Otter

https://www.quora.com/Why-don%E2%80%99t-planes-fly-across-the-Southern-Hemisphere-across-the-South-Pole

Moreover, in reference to flight paths with actual stop overs, we can easily conclude that “none fly over the Antarctica.” Why? Because it is not a continent. It is an ice wall. The following 2 pictures after the (Ibid) below conforms this.

(Ibid).

Circumnavigation: Columbus, Magellan, Leif Erikson and Captain Cook.

Before I start with circumnavigation, I would like to make mention of the Mercator Projection. A mercator projection is “a projection of a map of the world onto a cylinder in such a way that all the parallels of latitude have the same length as the equator, used especially for marine charts (Emphasis by T. Perez) and certain climatological maps.” (Google Dictionary)

According to ‘Earth is Not a Globe,’ we read the following PDF pages (18-21)…

The book then goes on speak about the misconceptions of a curvature. Something that I’m sure Columbus and Magellan did not “experience,” but thought they did. However, we are still told that individuals like Columbus sailed West and Magellan sailed around the world (as pictured on a globe Earth). But if we were to look at the alternative, circumnavigation routes performed on a flat Earth would show that they appeared to simply have encircled the Earth while getting from point A to point B.

With reference to Columbus, his circumnavigation routes are shown here…

In reference to Magellan, who came after Columbus, his circumnavigation route is depicted here, assuming a ball Earth…

Let me start with Columbus first. According to Columbus’ 4 voyages, we can clearly see that his routes were between WSW to ENE, and WbN and so forth. These departures and destinations can indeed be performed on both; a globular or flat Earth. It is irrational to think of the spherical Earth model, in reference to Columbus’ sailing, as the only alleged empirical model that works. Considering Columbus’ navigational route, and placing it upon the flat Earth model (I.e., the Gleason Map), we can clearly see how the same journeys can be performed on a non curvature plane. In Columbus’ case, getting from point A to point B and from B to A again, on 4 different voyages, on a flat Earth is not far fetched.

It should be understood that Columbus was not the first explorer to discover the Americas, the Viking; Leif Erikson did, nearly 500 years (999AD) before Columbus in 1492. Moreover, the Norseman Erikson knew of a merchant by the name of Bjarni Herjólfsson “who claimed to have sighted land to the west of Greenland after having been blown off course. Bjarni reportedly never made landfall there, however. Later, when travelling from Norway to Greenland, Leif was also blown off course, to a land that he did not expect to see, where he found “self-sown wheat fields and grapevines.” He next rescued two men who were shipwrecked in this country and went back to Greenland (and Christianized the people there). Consequently, if this is to be trusted, Bjarni Herjólfsson was the first European to see America beyond Greenland, and the two unnamed shipwrecked men were the first people known to Europeans to have made landfall there.” “Leif then approached Bjarni, purchased his ship, gathered a crew of thirty-five men, and mounted an expedition towards the land Bjarni had described.”

archive.org

Short, 2010, pp. 203–04.

Other expeditions were done by Leif’s brother, Thorvald Asvaldsson. However, hostilities between the crews of the Norse people and the local inhabitants of the new land prevented any permanent settlement. Unfortunately, from my understanding, we do not have any record of Erikson’s (Erik the Red) circumnavigation routes, just his routes. Did Columbus know of Leif Erikson? If he did it would have given him courage to find a new route and set sail to the far East: Asia, India, China, Japan and the spice Islands. Here is a picture illustrating Leif’s circumnavigation routes, recorded in the Saga’s. The routes can easily be performed on a flat Earth model…

With reference to Magellan, his voyages are quite different, he went further South and around the South African continent. But obviously he did not go to the ends of the Earth, per-se, as many believe he did. The picture, and many others like it, depict the same route. Many Globe Earthers insist that “if he didn’t sail on a spherical Earth, then why didn’t he, or his crew, see the “famous” ice wall?” I thought that answer would be rather obvious. Again, the truth of the matter is that he did not sail far South enough to encounter it, nor did he see it on his encirclement back. However, another individual did indeed discover the Antarctic, though it is said that in so doing he only discovered the Antarctic circle. The individual I refer to is none other than Captain James Cook.

The following picture illustrates Magellan’s navigational route on a flat Earth…

Captain James Cook. I will not get into who Cook was, besides the obvious. He was a thorough meticulous Captain and an excellent map maker. He conducted 3 voyages, on which it is said by popular belief that he crossed the Antarctic circle 3x’s. More on this in a bit. “The first voyage of James Cook was an expedition to the South Seas to observe the Transit of Venus and to secretly search for the unknown Great Southern Continent (Terra Australis Incognita)(which was rumored to exist; T. Perez)in 1768.”

“The 2nd voyage took place in 1772.  Resolution, commanded by Captain Cook, and Discovery, commanded by Lieutenant Furneaux, set sail from Britain, via Madiera (Jul-Aug) and Cape Town, South Africa (Oct-Nov), towards the Antarctic in search of the Great Southern Continent (a 2nd time; T. Perez). In 1776, (his 3rd voyage; T. Perez) in a repaired Resolution (July), Cook began to search for the (a possible; T. Perez) North West Passage, 

http://www.captcook-ne.co.uk/ccne/timeline/voyage1.htm

In his 2nd voyage which started in 1772 and ended in 1775, Cook “In 1773…and his crew crossed the Antarctic Circle for the first time but although they discovered nearby islands, they did not catch a sight of Antarctica itself. It is believed he was as close as 240 km (150 mi) from the mainland.”(Wiki). On this 2nd voyage Cook crossed the Antarctic 3 times. He crossed it on; January 17, 1773, December 20, 1773 and January 26 – February 17, 1774. (Ibid). Obviously, it took him a year to cross it on 3 different occasions during his 2nd voyage. His 3rd crossing would prove to be his Southernmost route. “The most southerly penetration, reaching latitude 71°10′ South at longitude 106°54′ West. Cook undertook a series of vast sweeps across the Pacific, finally proving there was no Terra Australis by sailing over most of its predicted locations.” (Wiki)

It is known that while looking for the rumoured Southern continent, Cook discovered Australia and New Zealand. He realized that these land masses were not a part of this rumored Southern continent at all. This version of the story is a popular belief. Cook admitted that this alleged continent did NOT exist at all. The alternative and plausible explanation for this non-existent rumored continent is that it is a 60,000 mile or more ringed ice wall that encircles the Earth of which Cook confirms.

Why 60,000 or more miles? Answer: If the Earth was indeed a globe, 25,000 miles in equatorial circumference as heliocentrism claims, then a complete circumnavigation of Antarctica would be approximately 12,000 miles. But if the Earth was flat with, Antarctica surrounding the entire circumference, a complete circumnavigation of Antarctica would have to take over 60,000 miles. During three voyages lasting three years and eight days, Captain Cook and crew sailed a total of 60,000 miles along the Antarctic coastline never once finding an inlet or path through, or beyond, the massive glacial wall. This might make an interesting point to support the “flat earth” model if in fact 60,000 nautical miles were recorded in Cooks logs. But is there any mention of this? Yes there is, but records of it are ambiguous. But before I get into that possibility, let us look into the motive as to why a “rumored continent” was in…shall we say; “circulation.”

As I just mentioned, the first two voyages were based on a mission: The 1st motive behind Cooks voyages was to find the transit of Venus; and the 2nd was to find the elusive South continent. He found the transit of Venus, but did not find a Southern continent. So he decided to set sail a 2nd time to find it. And even though there was no evidence for it the 1st time, this continent was still rumored to exist. “The history of Antarctica emerges from early Western theories of a vast continent, known as Terra Australis, believed to exist in the far south of the globe. The term Antarctic, referring to the opposite of the Arctic Circle, was coined by Marinus of Tyre in the 2nd century AD. Terra Australis (Latin for South Land) was a hypothetical continent first posited in antiquity and which appeared on maps between the 15th and 18th centuries. The existence of Terra Australis was not based on any survey or direct observation, but rather on the idea that continental land in the Northern Hemisphere should be balanced by land in the South” “This theory of balancing land has been documented as early as the 5th century on maps by Macrobius who uses the term Australis on his maps.”

John Noble Wilford: The Mapmakers, the Story of the Great Pioneers in Cartography from Antiquity to Space Age, p. 139, Vintage Books, Random House 1982, ISBN 0-394-75303-8

Ambrosius Aurelius Theodosius Macrobius, Zonenkarte. Retrieved 7 July 2014.

So what we learn here is that map makers from the 15th and 18th centuries were influenced by Macrobius from the 5th cent and actually made up a hypothetical land mass to match that found in the North. But what we learn from Cook, and his expertise in meticulously making maps as he saw things for himself, is that he concluded that no such Southern continent existed.

Now back to Cooks 60,000 mile or more journey. As mentioned before, in his 2nd voyage, Cook sailed Southernmost as he could get, approximately “reaching a latitude of 71°10′ South at longitude 106°54′ West.” With that in mind, we must ask ourselves a simple question, “where is the Antarctic located by latitude and longitude?” Answer: “The position of the Arctic Circle is not fixed. As of 27 December 2018, it runs 66°33′47.4″ south of the equator.” With this in mind, if we were to allow a rumoured Southernly continent to exist near the circle, Cook was 5° (degrees) short of his destination.

“Each degree of latitude is approximately 69 miles (111 kilometers) apart.” 5°×69=345mi. In other words, Cook was supposedly 345mi away, and did not know it. And according to spherical Earthers; “The range varies (due to the earth’s slightly ellipsoid shape) from 68.703 miles (110.567 km) at the equator to 69.407 (111.699 km) at the poles. This is convenient because each minute (1/60th of a degree) is approximately one [nautical] mile.” This supposed axis makes no difference on a flat Earth, as we have learned more or less in chapter thirteen. And as far as the “is not fixed” phrase, the expanding Earth (its dome) as opposed to an expanding universe is the likely explanation for this, as discussed in chapter three.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_voyage_of_James_Cook

“Obliquity of the Ecliptic (Eps Mean)”. Neoprogrammics.com. Retrieved 2014-05-13.

Berger, A.L. (1976). “Obliquity and Precession for the Last 5000000 Years”.Astronomy and Astrophysics.

These are the routes Cook made as seen in a globe fashion. The green line is his furthest Southernmost route. All one has to do is picture this illustration on a flat plane, surrounded by an ice wall, and the encircling can easily be seen. Just follow the arrows, especially the green one…

Moreover, if “The circumference of the Antarctic Circle is roughly 16,000 kilometres (9,900 mi).And“The area South of the Circle is about 20,000,000 km2 (7,700,000 sq mi) and covers roughly 4% of Earth’s surface. And “The continent of Antarctica covers much of the area within the Antarctic Circle;” then by what standard are they achieving such measurements? There is a difference between miles, square miles and miles squared. The following website link tells us of the differences between them…

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/58423.html

“The square mile (abbreviated as sq mi and sometimes as mi²) is an imperial and US unit of measure for an area equal to the area of a square with a side length of one statute mile. It should not be confused with miles square, which refers to a square region with each side having the specified length.” Question: “What is one statute mile?” Answer: …“A unit of distance on land in English-speaking countries equal to 5280 feet, or 1760 yards (1.609 kilometers).” The Antarctica itself is said to be; “At 14,000,000 square kilometres (5,400,000 square miles), it is the fifth-largest continent. For comparison, Antarctica is nearly twice the size of Australia.”

Nuttall, Mark (2004). Encyclopedia of the Arctic Volumes 1, 2 and 3. Routledge. p. 115.ISBN 978-1579584368. Retrieved 26 July2016.

William M. Marsh; Martin M. Kaufman (2012).Physical Geography: Great Systems and Global Environments. Cambridge University Press. p. 24.ISBN978-0-521-76428-5.

Rowlett, Russ (September 1, 2004). “S”,How Many? A Dictionary of Units of MeasurementUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Retrieved February 22, 2012.

Davies, Charles (1872). Mathematical dictionary and cyclopedia of mathematical science. Original from Harvard University: A.S. Barnes and co. p. 582.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/statute+mile

British Antarctic Survey. “Bedmap2: improved ice bed, surface and thickness datasets for Antarctica” (PDF)The Cryosphere journal: 390. Retrieved 6 January2014.

Supposedly “the equatorial circumference of Earth is about 24,901 miles (40,075 km). While, from pole-to-pole — the meridional circumference of the Earth is only 24,860 miles (40,008 km) around. This shape, caused by the flattening at the poles, is called an oblate spheroid.” We also know that the “voyage lasted three years and eight days covering more than 60,000 miles, Cook had proved there was no Southern Continent unless it was at the pole itself” – Hough also says the same thing. It is likely that Cook traveled the circle of the Earth once, thinking that he had recorded the circling of the Antarctic 3 times (Jan 1773, Dec 1773 and Feb 1774) logging it at a total 60,000mi. Ergo; 24,860×3=74,580. A difference of 14,580 which will account for the word “more” and as to why such a recording, and retelling of the log is “ambiguous.”

https://www.space.com/17638-how-big-is-earth.html

http://www.south-pole.com/p0000071.htm

Hough 1994, p. 239

The 3rd voyage, as mentioned above, was to find an inlet path between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. “In August 1778 carefully documented the position and thickness of the ice barring the explorers’ way. They were searching for a corridor that they thought would link the Pacific and northern Atlantic oceans and offer a new maritime trade route between Great Britain and the Far East.” “Cook never found that route, known today as the Northwest Passage. But his observations and those of his crew provide the earliest recorded evidence of then-extensive summer ice cover in the Chukchi Sea. That part of the Arctic Ocean lies between Alaska and Russia. These records, when compared to modern observations of sea ice, indicate how dramatically Arctic ice cover has changed”

https://www.livescience.com/57037-james-cook-voyage-tracks-arctic-climate-change.html

Cook scoured the edge of the ice wall for 11 days, but though he traveled as far west as the coast of Siberia, he couldn’t find an opening. “The Northwest Passage is the circuitous sea passage, long sought by explorers, between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans. Though it was eventually found through a series of discoveries, it was not completely navigated until Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen (1872–1928) explored it between 1903 and 1906.” Moreover, “The Northwest Passage is a sea route that connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. In the past, the Northwest Passage has been virtually impassable because it was covered by thick, year-round sea ice…The potential benefits of a clear Northwest Passage are significant.”

https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/oceans-continents-and-polar-regions/arctic-physical-geography/northwest-passage

https://geology.com/articles/northwest-passage.shtml

Many ball Earth supporters claim that the Northwest Passage proves a spherical Earth, since it connects the Pacific and Atlantic oceans; as the picture below demonstrates…Yes, it does connect it. But this “connection” is not limited to a spherical Earth model. Connections from the Pacific to the Atlantic oceans, or visa versa, can easily be done on a flat Earth…