Also, I’ve been on a number of flights since I first began looking into the shape of the earth with an open mind. And my videos show a flat land. And invariably the planes ascend, remain level and then descend. Which makes perfect sense on a flat earth, and no sense on a globe.
There are definitely aspects that work on BOTH models.
But it’s flat. “Like a seal on wax” is roughly how the bible puts it.
Who said anything about a video?
I think you misunderstand.
If you plot a path to fly around the globe (through buenos aires, for example) then the duration of flight and times match up to how long it would take and cannot make sense on a flat earth.
You dont even need to buy thr tickets. Just go on orbitz and punch in any 2 destinations
I was a travel agent many years ago. How many flight paths did you find that go OVER the arctic circle or Antarctica?
Why do you think flight times prove anything is a far more interesting question.
Like I said in a previous reply to someone, there are aspects which work on both flat and ball models, however there is no curvature, so there is no ball.
Let me know once you have proof of curvature lol
The Verrazano Narrows bridge is a hilarious example of ‘accounting for curvature’ which highlights the level water under the bridge.
You were a travel agent and you suddenly can't map out a flight plan that would go around the hypothetically round planet?
Do you understand that flying 18 hours east makes it faster to get back to where you started by continuing to travel east instead of turning around? That doesnt bother you at all?
(post is archived)