<It's not like a google maps app, you can't just drop a pin. So, either you calculate it or we can just for with, lets say 8k miles.
Need a Second chance to read? Just saying. , you're not here genuinely to learn, you are here to teach, and since your still programmed, you're just regurgitating the same simple shit everyone is bombarded with since childhood. Acting like flat earth is dumb, while simultaneously not being able to explain it, proves you're programmed
What would make you interesting, is if you tried to prove yourself wrong. Objectively, as a challenge to your own intelligence. See if you can hold an idea without swallowing it. You'd be the first.
Everyone who takes the time to really understand flat earth proofs, becomes an ex glober. Its because it's common sense, but most people can't break the programming
I can guess the number is 12,000 km. So. Plus or minus. Why do you think you need that info, for what logical purpose will U used it for?
To compare it with reality.
So, if the distance between the two on the Gleason map is 12000km, what's the diameter of the whole flat Earth?
If the Gleason map is an accurate map of a flat Earth and the distance you propose is correct, it would mean that the land masses closer to the North Pole are much, much smaller than they would be on a globe. do you agree with that?
<It's not like a google maps app, you can't just drop a pin. So, either you calculate it or we can just for with, lets say 8k miles.
Need a Second chance to read? Just saying. , you're not here genuinely to learn, you are here to teach, and since your still programmed, you're just regurgitating the same simple shit everyone is bombarded with since childhood. Acting like flat earth is dumb, while simultaneously not being able to explain it, proves you're programmed
What would make you interesting, is if you tried to prove yourself wrong. Objectively, as a challenge to your own intelligence. See if you can hold an idea without swallowing it. You'd be the first.
Everyone who takes the time to really understand flat earth proofs, becomes an ex glober. Its because it's common sense, but most people can't break the programming
why can't you just give a number? you have a map, doesn;t that map show you distances?
Look at a Gleason map. Also, tell me what accuracy you need, and why.
I can guess the number is 12,000 km. So. Plus or minus. Why do you think you need that info, for what logical purpose will U used it for?
Or, is this just a cheap ploy, attempting to connect my knowing of an exact distance to my knowing of something else. That's why I'm asking
To compare it with reality.
So, if the distance between the two on the Gleason map is 12000km, what's the diameter of the whole flat Earth?
If the Gleason map is an accurate map of a flat Earth and the distance you propose is correct, it would mean that the land masses closer to the North Pole are much, much smaller than they would be on a globe. do you agree with that?