Having travelled via plane from the US to Asia and back several times in my life, I can tell you from direct experience that there is a difference between flying with, and flying against, the rotation of the earth. Going from Chicago to LA, there may not be a noticeable difference, but going from Chicago to Narita, or from Hong Kong to LA, there is definitely a noticeable difference in time due to the rotation of the earth.
There are many things that affect flight performance, such as earth rotation, head winds, tail winds, storms, plane weight, plane shape/size, altitude, etc. Also couple that with the fact that pilots very rarely take the direct, straight-line path from origin to destination (especially when over the ocean).
So 2400 mph against the rotation at 30 k feet it wouldn't be insanely faster? Something is just is not adding up... it does not seem possible that 30k feet away from the spining earth it would effect an airplane still? Especially in the thinner atmosphere
Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the earth in 240 BC. Even before Christ, people knew the earth was round. I used to have a quite powerful telescope and I physically saw Saturn and Jupiter. They were definitely round. The earth is not flat.
So how do you examine the math not adding up when people zoom in and see ships that should be well below the horizon? Or are those ideas just all made up hoaxes?
(post is archived)