Sorry but this is not the flight path on the original footage of the documentary of the PanAm 50 anyone can check it out themselves its called polar flight 50. It shows the flight going below the pensisula and thats it back up again to cape town.
Sort comments by "newest first" and find my answer to your concern under the comment that is now the second most-recent. In a nutshell, you are mistaking an infographic for data.
Sorry didn't see that, what do you think about the fact that there is not flights that goes directly south over the south pole and back up again in a 100 years? @@okreylos
There was this flight right here, which went directly south to the south pole and then back up again, 46 years ago, and there was One More Orbit, see ua-cam.com/video/_kVC2AjtCc8/v-deo.html , which did the same thing four years ago, so that's at least two flights that did that in the last 100 years. There were also a few others, but I didn't look into their details. But if you're asking why there are no *regular commercial* flights that do that, you should seek the answer in economy and safety instead of geography. For which pairs of airports would an exactly south polar route be the shortest route? Answer: none, even though one comes close: imgur.com/lA056d9 How many people fly on a regular basis between the specific pairs of airports where touching the south pole would only be a short detour? Enough to make such a route economical? In case of problems, say icing or bad weather, which are not uncommon in that general area, where can a flight on an exactly south polar route make an emergency landing? Going back to your original comment: what would the infographic you mentioned have looked like if they had drawn the actual south pole route into it? What would the target audience for that documentary have made of it?
Why not just fly a straight line from North to South and end the debate? This is not circumnavigation. Find a plane that can refuel in the air and send up fuel planes along the path. A zig zag is not a straight line. No matter how much word salad you lay out. A straight line is a straight line.
What happened after the 40 s and in the 50 s..Shit they did a lot of things. Antartic threaty , expedtitons of the 20 and 30 s discovered most likely things that does not fit the Policits and beliefs. The flat earth must be hidden as much as possible? But Cape town to New Zealand with a fuel stop in antartica ice..Its possible, its the compass and direction that could determine what did really take place..
By this definition of circumnavigation, the could have flew to the north pole, done a 179* turn, flew to the south pole, done another 179* turn and flew home, right? Still would've hit both poles
No. I am *implicitly* giving a definition of circumnavigation here by talking about how this flight's route intersected a polar great circle twice, on opposite hemispheres. Using that (my own ad-hoc) definition, what you describe would not be a circumnavigation. The International Aeronautical Federation has their own definition of pole-to-pole circumnavigation, which requires that the necessary two crossings of the equator are at least 120° of longitude apart from each other, which this flight clears, but which would also disqualify your proposed route. A third definition might require that the route contains at least two antipodal points *besides* the two poles, which this route does contain (but I'm not talking about it here, see this other video instead: ua-cam.com/video/_kVC2AjtCc8/v-deo.html), and again the route you describe would not.
Circumnavigation means to go around in a cicle... a root word being circumference. You can't follow a circle halfway, then go back the same path to where you started and make a circle. You'd only have half a circle.
Historic flight 50 it shows the path they flew I tried to show this to my friends, sorry to say my friends are sheep, thank you my friend I will try your version ✌
The reason they cannot fly direclty due south and stay due south is because it is impossible! They only flew over a ceremonial pole and then turned north again.
You do realize that once you reach the south pole, every direction would be north, right? The opposite holds true for the north pole: once you reach it, there's no direction to go but south.
Not sure what you mean with azimuthal, you mean mercator? In Mercator projection The flight path will begin somewhere on a the map as the departure point and as the boing is flying disappear at the pole, crossing it and at that instant re-appear on the other end of that mercatorprojection en continue with mentioned zigzagging back across the second pole back to where it came from. Thats what it would look like and… its a great way to make two-dimensional representations of the world called maps. We’ve used them for centuries. Point is, its still just a projection of what really happens on a two dimensional (rolled up same thing, you get a tube, not a globe) plane. The boing just does’t fall of of the one end, to magically reappear at the other hand. Thats what happens on old-school computer screens, not in real life. To actually do this, you have to circumvent some geography different from a two dimensional sheet, however you fold it, crinckling not allowed, bad science and messy map. Hint: try 3 dimensional, subcategory “globe”
A great circle on a globe is a circular straight line also called a arc route not a horizontal straight line! So when someone travels in a north to south equator direction they are traveling in a straight line until they're no longer traveling in straight line.
If someone quotes something back you wrote and asks "what do you mean by that?," then they are asking for clarification, probably because you did not communicate clearly. Do you think replying with "that's what I mean" is going to be particularly helpful?
Very interesting content right here ! If its possible for you to do so, you should put a noise reduction on your voice. Its easy with audio editing software such as audacity to upgrade the quality of your audio.
Thank you for this usefull video. Good to see independent analysis on your part and reconciliation with necessary inefficiencies like fuel and airportavailability. Nice flat earth debunk btw!
Very interesting. But this was just a model you made on the computer. Look into it. The earth has littetally never once been circumnavigated north /south or south / north. Only east/west. West/east. If someone did it and recorded it the entire time with a cumpus fixed on camera live the entire time with cameras and radar strapped all over, perhaps that may convince anyone who believes in the flat earth. I wonder why noone has done this yet?... and can any one please explain why the anartic peace treaty is the only treaty every country on earth has in common? The agreement to no be able to go and explore anartica freely... there has to be a reason for that as well...
Hi Joe, The frequently mentioned „They“ (whoever that may be) have more interesting and rewarding things to do than trying to convince a small group of people that deny all evidence which is presented to them. Most proponents of FE demand convincing evidence but then deny it. Also, the earth does not care if you or me gain knowledge about her, the potential gain is solely on our side. If you want to gain insights into the shape of the earth, you can start by looking closely at a sunset or moonset and contemplate. No need to demand evidence from „them“. Cheers Winston
"can any one please explain why the anartic peace treaty is the only treaty every country on earth has in common? The agreement to no be able to go and explore anartica freely..." I don't think anybody will be able to explain that, given that none of it is true. Here, do your own research: 2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/trty/193967.htm
Let me get this straight.. It’s 2022 with the best technology in the history of time and u have to use a 1950 flight to prove a pole to pole flight is possible? This is ridiculous No one on earth has EVER flew straight over Antarctica and popped out on the other side Ever They actually fly twice or 3 times as far just to not go over Antarctica Flight routes make zero sense on a globe yet perfect sense on a flat plane. Many emergency stops fly entirely out of the route to make an emergency stop yet on a flat plane it’s exactly in the route. Perfect even.
Bluewirenut76 I agree, but we need to show up these spinning ball hoaxers by showing them what flight path Pan-Am 50 actually followed. Can you make a video on that?
@@okreylos why so coy?the comment made sense, if popped out bothers you, how about exits the other side? Either way it has and never will happen… Peace on the Plane Earth, bro&sis
It's wild how at least half of the flat earth comments boil down to "This doesn't disprove the flat earth, because this isn't possible, because the earth is flat." Just... try to picture what this flight would look like on a flat earth. the plane would approach Antarctica, fly literally halfway around the plane at it's furthest known edge, and then continue on to emerge on the other side of the plane.
Here are the specifications for the Boeing 747SP ("special performance") that was used for this flight: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747SP#Specifications Maximum range: 12,320km. Total distance of the south pole leg of the flight: 6,246.94km + 5922km = 12,168.94km. 12,168.94km < 12,320km.
@@okreylos Okay, you stated it's theoretic flight path. Do you have the actual article that states exactly their route. You mentioned that some of the passengers stated they saw Mt. Arubus(spelling). I can see Mt. Rainier in Seattle from a distance and we don't need to fly over it. The only other source that states that they've flown/circumnavigated the South Pole was a guy name Dick Smith using a Twin Otter airplane, but it looks like he landed here and there in Antarctica. Look for 'Dick Smith Circumnavigated the Earth via the North and South Pole' on youtube.
The flight was seen landing and taking off in Capetown; the flight was seen landing and taking off in Auckland; they said they flew directly over the south pole, no agency including the International Aeronautic Federation, which awarded them the circumnavigation record, doubted their claims. That, and assuming they flew the shortest possible route, constrains the route well enough.
At the equator traveling east and west is about 24,000 miles. Hmm 42,000miles sounds closer to Captain Ross Clark’s circumnavigation around antracita which he calculated 61,000 miles, both figures are definitely larger distance than around the equator.
Not to worry, mistaking one set of units for another is how Columbus thought he could reach India sailing west from Spain. So in a way, your stupidity is hereditary
What I have always wondered is how someone navigates around the poles? How do you calculate and maintain and follow an accurate compass heading to keep pointing towards your destination?
Same way as anywhere else, really. Remember that old-fashioned magnetic compasses are backup instruments at best, only used in emergencies when all other instruments fail. Those other instruments include heading indicators (HI), automatic direction finders (ADF), inertial navigation systems (INS), and, these days first and foremost, GPS. Take heading indicators, for example. They are based on horizontal gyroscopes, and the simplest ones used in small private aircraft drift over time and need to be re-aligned to a magnetic compass every 15 minutes or so. But that drift is mostly due to Earth's rotation and the aircraft's north-south and east-west airspeeds. More complex heading indicators used in airliners have automatic corrections for those terms, leaving only inherent random drift, which in modern gyroscopes (anything starting around 1970, really, and especially in ring laser gyroscopes) is measured in fractions of a degree per hour.
I am blown away that people believe that flying southwest to a ceremonial fraudulent South Pole, and then northwest is the same as a due south circumpolar navigation. The fact is that that a due south continuous flight is impossible!!!
Yes once passing over the Geographic South Pole you are flying north again due to it being a globe , just look at orbital track of our many satellites in polar orbits
Can't fly over directly the north pole. Funny how old maps have land mass. Now you go to Google earth and it's the ocean. The first map you showed was more realistic.
@@okreylos because you would bang your head in the domes cervix,I mean birth control ,I mean masons refractory fermamint…sadly the border towns of the 360 degree surround of Antarctica has been discovered.and trust common sense it didn’t take 12 years and 90000 miles to skip to my lulu all along the wall forever
@@BenFoilHat in 1997 Sir Ranulph Fiennes, Oliver Shepard and Charles R. Burton made a longitudinal (north to south) circumnavigation of the earth by land and sea.
Yes, there was a public live tracker as the mission took place, but I can't find any archives of the location data. It's a major bummer. I should go ahead and plot the route anyway, based on their stops and the total travel distance they quote, because they were so much closer to an optimal route than Pan-Am were.
@@okreylos FlightAware seems to have some path data for QQE011 from July 2019: discussions.flightaware.com/t/round-the-world-pole-to-pole-qqe011/52243 Actual location data is listed in table form if you click a leg then View Track Log. It has gaps, but most of it is there. PS: Oh, it has gaps. I'm guessing this is airport radar (or at least flight control domain) logs, and that excludes the poles. You can apply some logic to estimate how far off the course could have been, but as we know, some people resist such notions. A quick sketching in google earth shows a great circle navigation between the points bordering the gap could miss the north pole by 600km. However, that doesn't take the heading into account; at both points, that was straight from and to the pole. The same occurred for the south pole, where the difference makes it obvious that the interpolation covering the gap on the map ignored heading (albeit the heading appeared 4 degrees off).
Thanks for that link, they actually have a lot. Of course both poles aren't covered, but at least the reason for that is also the reason why they'd have been able to fly straight during those times, so I think the overall route is pretty well-constrained. For reasonable people, at least.
@@okreylos Yep. The courses near the south pole were actually headed to the far side of the pole, which suggests they had two turning points over antarctica (unlike the straight path map plotters estimate, which misses it entirely). Incidentally, Marble marble.kde.org/ is another neat globe program. Still looking for one where both path editing and globe visualization are reasonable.
@@okreylos This channel has some good information on the flight. ua-cam.com/video/qiInYgNWiU4/v-deo.html 'OMO South Pole Nav Lights QQE110 - And a Big Fail for Flat Earth Fake-Sayers' As I recall, satellite tracking for this flight over the poles was on flighaware for a while.
Sorry that's not a correct representation of Earth they never have obtained a full image of Earth in one picture frame so this experiment or whatever is bogus
well of course not. You could only ever obtain an image of approximately half the Earth in one frame, just as you could never see all sides of a sphere in one frame. Your statement really demonstrates the kind of logic all flerfs have (which is little to none).
@@okreylos Try putting that picture in wasitai and see what it says. I'll tell you now and it says "There is some chance that this image, or parts of it, was created by AI." All of NASA pics of Earth are FAKE it's been proven time and time again.
@@heavymetalnewsdesk That is a wrong and useless definition of "circumnavigation." Where did you hear that? The *actual* definition of polar circumnavigation by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale is: 1. The course needs to be at least 21,000 miles (34,000 kilometres). 2. The flight must have been made to a control point north of 75 degrees north latitude and a control point south of 75 degrees south latitude. 3. The crossing of the equator from north to south must be separated from the crossing of the equator from south to north by 90 to 180 degrees of longitude. 4. The flight must be completed within 365 days in the same airplane. This flight satisfied all requirements.
@@heavymetalnewsdesk That's why your definition is useless. Longitudinal lines *end* at the poles. You cannot possibly cross Antarctica by following only one of them. Maybe you meant "following one great circle without deviation?" But even that is a useless definition. Anyway, check 1:50 in the video. The flight follows one line of latitude, without deviation, into Antarctica to the South Pole, and then another line of latitude, without deviation, from the South Pole out of Antarctica. Did it not cross Antarctica in the process?
I would very much like to see you plot this flight's course on your favorite flat Earth map, using the known airports where the plane was seen landing and taking off by local spectators and TV audiences world-wide: San Francisco, London, Cape Town, Auckland, San Francisco, in that order. Then we can see how absurd *that* claim will be. Go ahead, make my day.
Sounds like this gentleman made a negative claim that this may be fake. You asking him to plot a better path is shifting the burden of proof to him and is a logical fallacy. I wouldn’t reply to you either tbh. There’s no point in arguing what route he went if his argument is that you can’t do that route in the first place, no?
I think the only people who wonder that are the people who don't understand why pole-to-pole circumnavigations are more difficult and dangerous. Hint: there's a distinct lack of airports in both the Arctic and Antarctica, and there's usually weather that's not conducive to air travel.
2 planes over Antarctica north 2 south & east 2 west wit cams 360 cams reg cams old cams every type cam as they fly over Antarctica go live not possible 2 do but no it will disprove the globe
Interesting idea. Question: how would a plane fly over Antarctica "east 2 west?" Where does it start? Where does it end? Wouldn't it fly in a never-ending circle?
@@okreylos whoever blev the globe start north or south go str8 across same 4 east west C if they ever go all the way across n a plane or get as close as possible use a rocket or 2 wit cams on it shoot both @ same time shoot both str8 up or get nasa 2 fly over Antarctica
That's right, because they circumnavigated going north to south for the first half from the north pole to the south pole, and then they circumnavigated south to north from the south pole back to the north pole for the second half. Well, ignoring that they started in San Francisco and went north first for a bit, but let's not be too picky.
I’m convinced flat earthers are trolling everyone no way anyone can be that illogical 😂 the earth is a globe it has a core this is the 3rd dimension not a piece of paper we are not drawings and we have volcanos and a magnetic field from a north and south meaning they are on opposite ends of another lol that’s how magnets work
I would like to believe that they're all trolling, because that would be less shameful for humanity as a whole, but I can no longer think so. I've interacted with too many who really, really, seemed to believe what they were saying, who said it consistently over a very long time, and who were just really, really, bad at logic and reasoning. Sad, in fact.
@@okreylos mm that is sad hopefully something happens that turns it all around like their flat earth leader converts when they visit space or something 🙂
Wouldnt matter if the #1 guy changed his mind. The next one wouldnt believe it because he was brainwashed and not educated in physics, or the ability to truly understand perspective....a lot of people don't get it, but that is a lot easier to let slide than the theory tbat "Everything we thought we knew was a lie." Here is an example: A lot of people do not believe humans went to the moon. Who says they did not do it, and then shoot footage after like a reenactment? I mean, in my mind, that is far more rational than spending tons of money faking it. Especially now that we have private entities in the space business. Without any proof who would constantly invest that kind of money privately just to see it wind up in the ocean? Logic is lost with these folks I am afraid. Excellent video by the way. Thanks for taking the time to create it.
@@okreylos Plenty of planes have circumnavigated the world east/west however no plane has ever circumnavigated north to south in a straight flight path. If you have proof of that id like to see the real footage please.
We have four airports where a plane landed and then took off, and the travel times between those airports. Why don't you go ahead and propose a route that plane might have taken, if you don't believe it was the route I show in this video? You are welcome to do it on your favorite map.
@@okreylos LOL! So what then happens after you pass the center to come out the other side if your holding the Sphere in your hands like say a basketball? Thats right you come out the opposite side upside down because in reality it's Impossiball that we exist on the surface of a 3D-Sphere. Simultaneous opposite realities of up and dow cannot exist in real time in reality period!
Yes Chris - it's fake if you're an uneducated Bible Literalist such as you are. You're a car mechanic with all the answers - why is it that those who know least think they know the most?
@@chriscreek8577 You believe in the Good Shepherd [Jesus] so that make you one of his sheep. And voting up your own comment Chris? That's insecurity Chris - you KNOW you've got nothing. And that terrible version of "Summertime" that you screw up while trying to sing - that was written by George Gershwin whose parents were Russian Jews. He also wrote “It Ain't Necessarily So,” which is atheist, ridiculing improbable bible stories such as the story of Jonah. That makes you even more of a sheep, but mainly you're a know nothing loser.
Again Not a real circumnavigation🤔😅😂😁 in fact, Not a circumnavigation at all. Circumnavigation derivates from circle, not zigzag😜 The refuel Argument makes No Sense at tue northpole, where they took a Turn for No reason.😂🤔🧐🤨 Lex Nicolai, what r u talkin bout flat earth debunk? 😅
"The refuel Argument makes No Sense at tue northpole, where they took a Turn for No reason." Pray tell: if you take off in San Francisco, and you want to refuel in London, but you want to fly over the geographic north pole, how do you do that without taking a turn? Those three points do not lie on a straight line. What is the shortest path from point A to point B and then on to point C if A, B, and C do not lie on a straight line? You go straight from A to B, then turn at B, then go straight from B to C. That's exactly that they did. Where do you think they would have run out of fuel if they had flown from San Francisco to the geographic north pole and then continued straight on? Hint: it starts with "Soviet" and ends with "Union." Do you think that would have gone over well in 1977?
"Circumnavigation derivates from circle" Only in your imagination. Circumnavigation: Borrowed from Latin circumnāvigātus, perfect passive participle of circumnāvigō (“sail round something, circumnavigate”), from *circum (“about, around”)* + nāvigō (“sail, navigate”), from nāvis (“ship”) + agō (“do”) [emphasis mine] Can you please point out where it says anything about circles in there?
Did you know that the Antartica Treaty would have not permitted this trip to occur? Did you know that travel is restricted entering into artic north polar region. Did you know that ships and aircraft that approach the 60th parallel south are turned away at gunpoint by over 50 nations on earth? Did you know that in article 6 of the Antartica Treaty it describes what Antartica is? It describes Antartica starting at the 60th parallel south which is ocean and ice shelves. Did you know that words Continent and Lass Mass never appear in the text of the entire Antartica Treaty? Do you know what a shelf of ice looks like? Imagine ocean water, its violent waves smashing up against a wall of ice, which is earth's southern perimeter. At the top of the ice shelf it's possible to continue to journey onward south as opposed going north on the other side of a ball. Did you know that there is a huge difference between a guided tour and independent travel? A guided tour, someone of authority takes you by the hand shows what they want you to see and prevents from seeing what they don't want you to see. An independent traveler goes wherever they want without anyone holding a gun to their head saying you can't go there. The Ruten Voyager trip was well documented with a log or journal. There is a beginning where an airplane is specifically engineered to do one thing, circumnavigation east to west. There is ending where the aircraft's engineers are greeted on the tarmac, their aircraft is given a place in a museum. The engineer-pilots tell of achievements to this very day. There is a website which the engineer-pilots show you their ambitions and achievement. What does Pan Am flight 50 have to offer showing us credibility, other than a cartoon animation globe and talking heads on CNN claiming the exploits of pilots without a face and a name?
Did you know that I have actually *read* the Antarctic Treaty? Did you know that nothing you claim is actually in there? Did you know that Article VI does not, in fact, describe what Antarctica is? Did you know that Flight 50 was all over the news when it happened in 1977, with people and news crews greeting the plane and its passengers as it landed at the stop-over airports? Did you know that *you, personally,* are prohibited from going to Antarctica because you are a *weapons-grade plum?*
Sorry but this is not the flight path on the original footage of the documentary of the PanAm 50 anyone can check it out themselves its called polar flight 50. It shows the flight going below the pensisula and thats it back up again to cape town.
Sort comments by "newest first" and find my answer to your concern under the comment that is now the second most-recent. In a nutshell, you are mistaking an infographic for data.
Sorry didn't see that, what do you think about the fact that there is not flights that goes directly south over the south pole and back up again in a 100 years? @@okreylos
There was this flight right here, which went directly south to the south pole and then back up again, 46 years ago, and there was One More Orbit, see ua-cam.com/video/_kVC2AjtCc8/v-deo.html , which did the same thing four years ago, so that's at least two flights that did that in the last 100 years. There were also a few others, but I didn't look into their details.
But if you're asking why there are no *regular commercial* flights that do that, you should seek the answer in economy and safety instead of geography. For which pairs of airports would an exactly south polar route be the shortest route? Answer: none, even though one comes close: imgur.com/lA056d9 How many people fly on a regular basis between the specific pairs of airports where touching the south pole would only be a short detour? Enough to make such a route economical? In case of problems, say icing or bad weather, which are not uncommon in that general area, where can a flight on an exactly south polar route make an emergency landing?
Going back to your original comment: what would the infographic you mentioned have looked like if they had drawn the actual south pole route into it? What would the target audience for that documentary have made of it?
@@okreylos the only way someone can claim such utter nonsense is if they flew straight along 1 longitudinal line without deviation
@@heavymetalnewsdesk Would Magellan have had to sail through solid rock in order for his voyage to count as circumnavigation?
Why not just fly a straight line from North to South and end the debate?
This is not circumnavigation.
Find a plane that can refuel in the air and send up fuel planes along the path.
A zig zag is not a straight line.
No matter how much word salad you lay out.
A straight line is a straight line.
He is a liar being paid to spread lies
What happened after the 40 s and in the 50 s..Shit they did a lot of things. Antartic threaty , expedtitons of the 20 and 30 s discovered most likely things that does not fit the Policits and beliefs. The flat earth must be hidden as much as possible? But Cape town to New Zealand with a fuel stop in antartica ice..Its possible, its the compass and direction that could determine what did really take place..
Because there is no debate.
@@dawncarney5161 But the big Lie is the flat earth
Would not end the debate from Flat Earthers. They would just move the goalpost.
Thank you for your time, wonder if they do a equator flight, and maybe there is some filmed parts of pole trip. Take care
By this definition of circumnavigation, the could have flew to the north pole, done a 179* turn, flew to the south pole, done another 179* turn and flew home, right? Still would've hit both poles
No. I am *implicitly* giving a definition of circumnavigation here by talking about how this flight's route intersected a polar great circle twice, on opposite hemispheres. Using that (my own ad-hoc) definition, what you describe would not be a circumnavigation.
The International Aeronautical Federation has their own definition of pole-to-pole circumnavigation, which requires that the necessary two crossings of the equator are at least 120° of longitude apart from each other, which this flight clears, but which would also disqualify your proposed route.
A third definition might require that the route contains at least two antipodal points *besides* the two poles, which this route does contain (but I'm not talking about it here, see this other video instead: ua-cam.com/video/_kVC2AjtCc8/v-deo.html), and again the route you describe would not.
Circumnavigation means to go around in a cicle... a root word being circumference. You can't follow a circle halfway, then go back the same path to where you started and make a circle. You'd only have half a circle.
Historic flight 50 it shows the path they flew I tried to show this to my friends, sorry to say my friends are sheep, thank you my friend I will try your version ✌
The reason they cannot fly direclty due south and stay due south is because it is impossible! They only flew over a ceremonial pole and then turned north again.
Where exactly is this "ceremonial pole" you speak of?
You do realize that once you reach the south pole, every direction would be north, right? The opposite holds true for the north pole: once you reach it, there's no direction to go but south.
Exactly. Going through Antarctica won’t let you pop back to the other side. That will never happen.
Many thanks for your videos.
It would be great to show the path on an azimuthal projection map. ;)
Not sure what you mean with azimuthal, you mean mercator? In Mercator projection The flight path will begin somewhere on a the map as the departure point and as the boing is flying disappear at the pole, crossing it and at that instant re-appear on the other end of that mercatorprojection en continue with mentioned zigzagging back across the second pole back to where it came from. Thats what it would look like and… its a great way to make two-dimensional representations of the world called maps. We’ve used them for centuries. Point is, its still just a projection of what really happens on a two dimensional (rolled up same thing, you get a tube, not a globe) plane. The boing just does’t fall of of the one end, to magically reappear at the other hand. Thats what happens on old-school computer screens, not in real life. To actually do this, you have to circumvent some geography different from a two dimensional sheet, however you fold it, crinckling not allowed, bad science and messy map. Hint: try 3 dimensional, subcategory “globe”
@@lexnicolai1442 Seriously?
Behold!
ua-cam.com/video/LNZfK0ESIMo/v-deo.html
There you go: imgur.com/ZCKKAVu
A great circle on a globe is a circular straight line also called a arc route not a horizontal straight line! So when someone travels in a north to south equator direction they are traveling in a straight line until they're no longer traveling in straight line.
"A great circle on a globe is a circular straight line also called a arc route not a horizontal straight line!"
What do you mean by that?
@@okreylos That's what I mean!!
If someone quotes something back you wrote and asks "what do you mean by that?," then they are asking for clarification, probably because you did not communicate clearly.
Do you think replying with "that's what I mean" is going to be particularly helpful?
@@okreylos I already was clear with you! Not my problem you don't understand it.
Here, watch this video about great circles being straight lines, and then try again: ua-cam.com/video/T41niy7sbgA/v-deo.html
Very interesting content right here !
If its possible for you to do so, you should put a noise reduction on your voice. Its easy with audio editing software such as audacity to upgrade the quality of your audio.
Heh. I used to run denoising in Audacity, but people kept complaining that they found noise reduction objectionable, and I should stop doing it.
@@okreylos yeah it’s difficult to please everyone! Cry babies!!! Just watch learn and teach. Jeez
This was in the 70s? Surely we have more tech now to do it again and document it properly, don't we? Or is it an impossible route?
ua-cam.com/video/_kVC2AjtCc8/v-deo.html
Thank you for this usefull video. Good to see independent analysis on your part and reconciliation with necessary inefficiencies like fuel and airportavailability. Nice flat earth debunk btw!
Very interesting. But this was just a model you made on the computer. Look into it. The earth has littetally never once been circumnavigated north /south or south / north. Only east/west. West/east. If someone did it and recorded it the entire time with a cumpus fixed on camera live the entire time with cameras and radar strapped all over, perhaps that may convince anyone who believes in the flat earth. I wonder why noone has done this yet?... and can any one please explain why the anartic peace treaty is the only treaty every country on earth has in common? The agreement to no be able to go and explore anartica freely... there has to be a reason for that as well...
Hi Joe,
The frequently mentioned „They“ (whoever that may be) have more interesting and rewarding things to do than trying to convince a small group of people that deny all evidence which is presented to them. Most proponents of FE demand convincing evidence but then deny it.
Also, the earth does not care if you or me gain knowledge about her, the potential gain is solely on our side.
If you want to gain insights into the shape of the earth, you can start by looking closely at a sunset or moonset and contemplate.
No need to demand evidence from „them“.
Cheers
Winston
"can any one please explain why the anartic peace treaty is the only treaty every country on earth has in common? The agreement to no be able to go and explore anartica freely..."
I don't think anybody will be able to explain that, given that none of it is true. Here, do your own research: 2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/trty/193967.htm
@@okreylos Yeah right.
Let me get this straight..
It’s 2022 with the best technology in the history of time and u have to use a 1950 flight to prove a pole to pole flight is possible?
This is ridiculous
No one on earth has EVER flew straight over Antarctica and popped out on the other side
Ever
They actually fly twice or 3 times as far just to not go over Antarctica
Flight routes make zero sense on a globe yet perfect sense on a flat plane.
Many emergency stops fly entirely out of the route to make an emergency stop yet on a flat plane it’s exactly in the route. Perfect even.
"flew straight over Antarctica and popped out on the other side"
"... popped out on the other side..."
Oh my.
Good point
Bluewirenut76 I agree, but we need to show up these spinning ball hoaxers by showing them what flight path Pan-Am 50 actually followed. Can you make a video on that?
@@okreylos You're an low IQ individual. No flight has crossed the interior of Antarctica because it is not possible.
@@okreylos why so coy?the comment made sense, if popped out bothers you, how about exits the other side? Either way it has and never will happen… Peace on the Plane Earth, bro&sis
It's wild how at least half of the flat earth comments boil down to "This doesn't disprove the flat earth, because this isn't possible, because the earth is flat."
Just... try to picture what this flight would look like on a flat earth. the plane would approach Antarctica, fly literally halfway around the plane at it's furthest known edge, and then continue on to emerge on the other side of the plane.
If Earth were flat, reasoning this circular should be impossible.
flat earthers should see this video
They did not poll circumnavigate if you would do a little research instead of watching the animated video. And all the mainstream indoctrination
You must have lived in Scotland, because you said Pish. Nice video, thanks!
No, never lived there. But I have met my share of scottish people.
The technology of the 747 was not that advance to conserve fuel back then. The flight over the south pole is a bit too long, that plane had to land.
Here are the specifications for the Boeing 747SP ("special performance") that was used for this flight: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747SP#Specifications Maximum range: 12,320km. Total distance of the south pole leg of the flight: 6,246.94km + 5922km = 12,168.94km. 12,168.94km < 12,320km.
@@okreylos Where did it take off and where did it land?
It's in the video.
@@okreylos Okay, you stated it's theoretic flight path. Do you have the actual article that states exactly their route. You mentioned that some of the passengers stated they saw Mt. Arubus(spelling). I can see Mt. Rainier in Seattle from a distance and we don't need to fly over it.
The only other source that states that they've flown/circumnavigated the South Pole was a guy name Dick Smith using a Twin Otter airplane, but it looks like he landed here and there in Antarctica. Look for 'Dick Smith Circumnavigated the Earth via the North and South Pole' on youtube.
The flight was seen landing and taking off in Capetown; the flight was seen landing and taking off in Auckland; they said they flew directly over the south pole, no agency including the International Aeronautic Federation, which awarded them the circumnavigation record, doubted their claims. That, and assuming they flew the shortest possible route, constrains the route well enough.
Great video bro. You should do a video on the 1979 Transglobe Expedition too.
At the equator traveling east and west is about 24,000 miles. Hmm 42,000miles sounds closer to Captain Ross Clark’s circumnavigation around antracita which he calculated 61,000 miles, both figures are definitely larger distance than around the equator.
He was using kilometers, not miles. In miles: 26097.59 miles
And the distance settings the equator is closer to 25,000 miles than 24,000: 24,901miles. Through the poles: 24,860 miles.
Not to worry, mistaking one set of units for another is how Columbus thought he could reach India sailing west from Spain. So in a way, your stupidity is hereditary
What I have always wondered is how someone navigates around the poles? How do you calculate and maintain and follow an accurate compass heading to keep pointing towards your destination?
Same way as anywhere else, really. Remember that old-fashioned magnetic compasses are backup instruments at best, only used in emergencies when all other instruments fail. Those other instruments include heading indicators (HI), automatic direction finders (ADF), inertial navigation systems (INS), and, these days first and foremost, GPS.
Take heading indicators, for example. They are based on horizontal gyroscopes, and the simplest ones used in small private aircraft drift over time and need to be re-aligned to a magnetic compass every 15 minutes or so. But that drift is mostly due to Earth's rotation and the aircraft's north-south and east-west airspeeds. More complex heading indicators used in airliners have automatic corrections for those terms, leaving only inherent random drift, which in modern gyroscopes (anything starting around 1970, really, and especially in ring laser gyroscopes) is measured in fractions of a degree per hour.
@@okreylos are you suggesting stars are unreliable?
@@djangoapple8230 No, but now that you mention it, stars *are* unreliable. They work 50% of the time, at best.
@@okreylos yeah, they only work at night. 50% of the time.
@@okreylos 50% of the mapping would be inaccurate if polar land masses are inaccurate.
I am blown away that people believe that flying southwest to a ceremonial fraudulent South Pole, and then northwest is the same as a due south circumpolar navigation. The fact is that that a due south continuous flight is impossible!!!
You are making no sense - not surprising you fell for the flat earth bs :)
@@P_Luke_12345 I am making no sense because your brain is broken, due to your indoctrination. You are a product of horrible education.
Yes once passing over the Geographic South Pole you are flying north again due to it being a globe , just look at orbital track of our many satellites in polar orbits
so they refuelled on south pole??????????
No.
But the eart is flat... isn't it ????:s
Can't fly over directly the north pole. Funny how old maps have land mass. Now you go to Google earth and it's the ocean. The first map you showed was more realistic.
"Can't fly over directly the north pole."
Why not?
No one has ever flown over Antarctica from north to south like in this video.
That must be because the only way to fly over Antarctica is from north to north.
Get it? No? Okay then.
@@okreylos north-south circumnavigation is not possible because the earth is flat. You can fly over Antarctica of course, but not circumnavigate.
@@okreylos because you would bang your head in the domes cervix,I mean birth control ,I mean masons refractory fermamint…sadly the border towns of the 360 degree surround of Antarctica has been discovered.and trust common sense it didn’t take 12 years and 90000 miles to skip to my lulu all along the wall forever
@@BenFoilHat in 1997 Sir Ranulph Fiennes, Oliver Shepard and Charles R. Burton made a longitudinal (north to south) circumnavigation of the earth by land and sea.
@@BenFoilHat and earth is definitely not flat.
Interesting. Thank you very much for the info. Does the 2019 record-breaking pole-to-pole circumnavigation have exact way points do you know?
Yes, there was a public live tracker as the mission took place, but I can't find any archives of the location data. It's a major bummer.
I should go ahead and plot the route anyway, based on their stops and the total travel distance they quote, because they were so much closer to an optimal route than Pan-Am were.
@@okreylos FlightAware seems to have some path data for QQE011 from July 2019: discussions.flightaware.com/t/round-the-world-pole-to-pole-qqe011/52243
Actual location data is listed in table form if you click a leg then View Track Log. It has gaps, but most of it is there. PS: Oh, it has gaps. I'm guessing this is airport radar (or at least flight control domain) logs, and that excludes the poles. You can apply some logic to estimate how far off the course could have been, but as we know, some people resist such notions.
A quick sketching in google earth shows a great circle navigation between the points bordering the gap could miss the north pole by 600km. However, that doesn't take the heading into account; at both points, that was straight from and to the pole. The same occurred for the south pole, where the difference makes it obvious that the interpolation covering the gap on the map ignored heading (albeit the heading appeared 4 degrees off).
Thanks for that link, they actually have a lot. Of course both poles aren't covered, but at least the reason for that is also the reason why they'd have been able to fly straight during those times, so I think the overall route is pretty well-constrained. For reasonable people, at least.
@@okreylos Yep. The courses near the south pole were actually headed to the far side of the pole, which suggests they had two turning points over antarctica (unlike the straight path map plotters estimate, which misses it entirely).
Incidentally, Marble marble.kde.org/ is another neat globe program. Still looking for one where both path editing and globe visualization are reasonable.
@@okreylos This channel has some good information on the flight. ua-cam.com/video/qiInYgNWiU4/v-deo.html 'OMO South Pole Nav Lights QQE110 - And a Big Fail for Flat Earth Fake-Sayers'
As I recall, satellite tracking for this flight over the poles was on flighaware for a while.
Sorry that's not a correct representation of Earth they never have obtained a full image of Earth in one picture frame so this experiment or whatever is bogus
"they never have obtained a full image of Earth in one picture frame"
Oh really? www.nasa.gov/content/blue-marble-image-of-the-earth-from-apollo-17
well of course not. You could only ever obtain an image of approximately half the Earth in one frame, just as you could never see all sides of a sphere in one frame. Your statement really demonstrates the kind of logic all flerfs have (which is little to none).
@@okreylos Try putting that picture in wasitai and see what it says.
I'll tell you now and it says "There is some chance that this image, or parts of it, was created by AI."
All of NASA pics of Earth are FAKE it's been proven time and time again.
that is not circumnavigation
Why not? And what even is your point?
@@okreylos Circumnavigation requires following 1 longitudinal line without deviation
@@heavymetalnewsdesk That is a wrong and useless definition of "circumnavigation." Where did you hear that?
The *actual* definition of polar circumnavigation by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale is:
1. The course needs to be at least 21,000 miles (34,000 kilometres).
2. The flight must have been made to a control point north of 75 degrees north latitude and a control point south of 75 degrees south latitude.
3. The crossing of the equator from north to south must be separated from the crossing of the equator from south to north by 90 to 180 degrees of longitude.
4. The flight must be completed within 365 days in the same airplane.
This flight satisfied all requirements.
@@okreylos because you can't prove that you crossed Antarctica unless you follow one longitudinal line that's why
@@heavymetalnewsdesk That's why your definition is useless. Longitudinal lines *end* at the poles. You cannot possibly cross Antarctica by following only one of them. Maybe you meant "following one great circle without deviation?" But even that is a useless definition.
Anyway, check 1:50 in the video. The flight follows one line of latitude, without deviation, into Antarctica to the South Pole, and then another line of latitude, without deviation, from the South Pole out of Antarctica. Did it not cross Antarctica in the process?
So you never been on the plane, you don’t know the flight path, all you have is absurd claims and of course cartoon animations 😂😅
I would very much like to see you plot this flight's course on your favorite flat Earth map, using the known airports where the plane was seen landing and taking off by local spectators and TV audiences world-wide: San Francisco, London, Cape Town, Auckland, San Francisco, in that order. Then we can see how absurd *that* claim will be.
Go ahead, make my day.
Sounds like this gentleman made a negative claim that this may be fake. You asking him to plot a better path is shifting the burden of proof to him and is a logical fallacy. I wouldn’t reply to you either tbh. There’s no point in arguing what route he went if his argument is that you can’t do that route in the first place, no?
ye. and no one wonders why we do thousands of west-east circums and only 3 North-south...
I think the only people who wonder that are the people who don't understand why pole-to-pole circumnavigations are more difficult and dangerous. Hint: there's a distinct lack of airports in both the Arctic and Antarctica, and there's usually weather that's not conducive to air travel.
2 planes over Antarctica north 2 south & east 2 west wit cams 360 cams reg cams old cams every type cam as they fly over Antarctica go live not possible 2 do but no it will disprove the globe
Interesting idea. Question: how would a plane fly over Antarctica "east 2 west?" Where does it start? Where does it end? Wouldn't it fly in a never-ending circle?
@@okreylos whoever blev the globe start north or south go str8 across same 4 east west C if they ever go all the way across n a plane or get as close as possible use a rocket or 2 wit cams on it shoot both @ same time shoot both str8 up or get nasa 2 fly over Antarctica
@@okreylos those r ?s we need 2 no & find out how far is it wats there does it ND is it a few 100 miles is there land byond Antarctica
@@leetheboss8538 Oh dear lord, idiots like you can vote... Jesus.
@@P_Luke_12345 good thing I don't vote Fukn dick head
So another words they didn't circumnavigate north to south good job
That's right, because they circumnavigated going north to south for the first half from the north pole to the south pole, and then they circumnavigated south to north from the south pole back to the north pole for the second half.
Well, ignoring that they started in San Francisco and went north first for a bit, but let's not be too picky.
This is not circumnavigation...
When Magellan sailed around the world, was that a circumnavigation?
Speaking is easy 😂😂
I’m convinced flat earthers are trolling everyone no way anyone can be that illogical 😂 the earth is a globe it has a core this is the 3rd dimension not a piece of paper we are not drawings and we have volcanos and a magnetic field from a north and south meaning they are on opposite ends of another lol that’s how magnets work
I would like to believe that they're all trolling, because that would be less shameful for humanity as a whole, but I can no longer think so. I've interacted with too many who really, really, seemed to believe what they were saying, who said it consistently over a very long time, and who were just really, really, bad at logic and reasoning. Sad, in fact.
@@okreylos mm that is sad hopefully something happens that turns it all around like their flat earth leader converts when they visit space or something 🙂
Wouldnt matter if the #1 guy changed his mind. The next one wouldnt believe it because he was brainwashed and not educated in physics, or the ability to truly understand perspective....a lot of people don't get it, but that is a lot easier to let slide than the theory tbat "Everything we thought we knew was a lie."
Here is an example:
A lot of people do not believe humans went to the moon. Who says they did not do it, and then shoot footage after like a reenactment? I mean, in my mind, that is far more rational than spending tons of money faking it. Especially now that we have private entities in the space business. Without any proof who would constantly invest that kind of money privately just to see it wind up in the ocean? Logic is lost with these folks I am afraid.
Excellent video by the way. Thanks for taking the time to create it.
@@gabriellesinclair971ya you guys are totally sane
Complete un proven nonsense
What about this is unproven? The plane was seen landing and taking off at the airports I list, by a world-wide TV audience.
@@okreylos Plenty of planes have circumnavigated the world east/west however no plane has ever circumnavigated north to south in a straight flight path. If you have proof of that id like to see the real footage please.
We have four airports where a plane landed and then took off, and the travel times between those airports. Why don't you go ahead and propose a route that plane might have taken, if you don't believe it was the route I show in this video? You are welcome to do it on your favorite map.
@@okreylos They didnt circle the globe from north to south they skirtedaround the edges of both poles,it shows the path 1:23 into the Pan Am video.
Now I'm confused. What do you think the world actually looks like? Not like the map they use in that video, right?
The earth is FLAT...FULLSTOP
What is a flat fullstop ?
@@tiggy2756 He meant to say "The earth is flat. Period."
Impossible if it is a sphere. At what point would you be upside down?
At no point. "Down" is always towards the center of the sphere.
@@okreylos LOL! So what then happens after you pass the center to come out the other side if your holding the Sphere in your hands like say a basketball? Thats right you come out the opposite side upside down because in reality it's Impossiball that we exist on the surface of a 3D-Sphere. Simultaneous opposite realities of up and dow cannot exist in real time in reality period!
Fake
If actually flying the route wouldn't convince you, then nothing will. So don't pretend your beliefs are evidence based.
Shit bugs the fu k outta me
You are making this nonsense up
FAKE......
Fake is all flat-turds can ever say, it's getting boring listening to them.
Yes Chris - it's fake if you're an uneducated Bible Literalist such as you are. You're a car mechanic with all the answers - why is it that those who know least think they know the most?
You sheeple are pathetic! That's why 'they" can get away with FAKING all of your scamdemics!..
@@chriscreek8577 BORING !
@@chriscreek8577 You believe in the Good Shepherd [Jesus] so that make you one of his sheep. And voting up your own comment Chris? That's insecurity Chris - you KNOW you've got nothing. And that terrible version of "Summertime" that you screw up while trying to sing - that was written by George Gershwin whose parents were Russian Jews. He also wrote “It Ain't Necessarily So,” which is atheist, ridiculing improbable bible stories such as the story of Jonah. That makes you even more of a sheep, but mainly you're a know nothing loser.
Again Not a real circumnavigation🤔😅😂😁 in fact, Not a circumnavigation at all.
Circumnavigation derivates from circle, not zigzag😜
The refuel Argument makes No Sense at tue northpole, where they took a Turn for No reason.😂🤔🧐🤨
Lex Nicolai, what r u talkin bout flat earth debunk? 😅
"The refuel Argument makes No Sense at tue northpole, where they took a Turn for No reason."
Pray tell: if you take off in San Francisco, and you want to refuel in London, but you want to fly over the geographic north pole, how do you do that without taking a turn? Those three points do not lie on a straight line.
What is the shortest path from point A to point B and then on to point C if A, B, and C do not lie on a straight line? You go straight from A to B, then turn at B, then go straight from B to C. That's exactly that they did.
Where do you think they would have run out of fuel if they had flown from San Francisco to the geographic north pole and then continued straight on? Hint: it starts with "Soviet" and ends with "Union." Do you think that would have gone over well in 1977?
"Circumnavigation derivates from circle"
Only in your imagination.
Circumnavigation: Borrowed from Latin circumnāvigātus, perfect passive participle of circumnāvigō (“sail round something, circumnavigate”), from *circum (“about, around”)* + nāvigō (“sail, navigate”), from nāvis (“ship”) + agō (“do”) [emphasis mine]
Can you please point out where it says anything about circles in there?
Did you know that the Antartica Treaty would have not permitted this trip to occur? Did you know that travel is restricted entering into artic north polar region. Did you know that ships and aircraft that approach the 60th parallel south are turned away at gunpoint by over 50 nations on earth? Did you know that in article 6 of the Antartica Treaty it describes what Antartica is? It describes Antartica starting at the 60th parallel south which is ocean and ice shelves. Did you know that words Continent and Lass Mass never appear in the text of the entire Antartica Treaty? Do you know what a shelf of ice looks like? Imagine ocean water, its violent waves smashing up against a wall of ice, which is earth's southern perimeter. At the top of the ice shelf it's possible to continue to journey onward south as opposed going north on the other side of a ball.
Did you know that there is a huge difference between a guided tour and independent travel? A guided tour, someone of authority takes you by the hand shows what they want you to see and prevents from seeing what they don't want you to see. An independent traveler goes wherever they want without anyone holding a gun to their head saying you can't go there.
The Ruten Voyager trip was well documented with a log or journal. There is a beginning where an airplane is specifically engineered to do one thing, circumnavigation east to west. There is ending where the aircraft's engineers are greeted on the tarmac, their aircraft is given a place in a museum. The engineer-pilots tell of achievements to this very day. There is a website which the engineer-pilots show you their ambitions and achievement. What does Pan Am flight 50 have to offer showing us credibility, other than a cartoon animation globe and talking heads on CNN claiming the exploits of pilots without a face and a name?
Did you know that I have actually *read* the Antarctic Treaty? Did you know that nothing you claim is actually in there? Did you know that Article VI does not, in fact, describe what Antarctica is? Did you know that Flight 50 was all over the news when it happened in 1977, with people and news crews greeting the plane and its passengers as it landed at the stop-over airports?
Did you know that *you, personally,* are prohibited from going to Antarctica because you are a *weapons-grade plum?*
This just proves Flat Eart🤯
Its not a ball
That's right, it's a globe.
It’s a globe, cry harder. You have no evidence for your flat fantasy world
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣What a load of crap.
Yes, your comment is load of crap.