114,000 feet (21.5 miles)High Altitude Balloon Footage shot with a 120 degree wide angle lens (corrected)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9on_Foucault

https://youtu.be/yBDOt4R6hLY

ek sal kyk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65nosFGJ1lo

@Deejay from Earth okay dit lyk goed en alles. maar hoe weet ons die correction van die fish eye was nie over corrected nie en wel volgens die lens specifications gedoen?

Het jy geweet iemand moet die pendulum 'n stoot gee om dit te laat swing?

140) Foucault’s Pendulums are often quoted as proof of a rotating Earth but upon closer investigation prove the opposite. To begin with, Foucault’s pendulums do not uniformly swing in any one direction. Sometimes they rotate clockwise and sometimes counter-clockwise, sometimes they fail to rotate and sometimes they rotate far too much. The behavior of the pendulum actually depends on 1) the initial force beginning its swing and, 2) the ball-and-socket joint used which most-readily facilitates circular motion over any other. The supposed rotation of the Earth is completely inconsequential and irrelevant to the pendulum’s swing. If the alleged constant rotation of the Earth affected pendulums in any way, then there should be no need to manually start pendulums in motion. If the Earth’s diurnal rotation caused the 360 degree uniform diurnal rotation of pendulums, then there should not exist a stationary pendulum anywhere on Earth!

Hier is jou eintlike probleem met die horison...

Die punt hier is nie of die lyn van die horison lyk of hy bietjie ge-curve is nie.

Die vraag moet eintlik wees, hoe verduidelik jy dat die lyn van die horison in die middel van die lens is op 900 voet in die Cessna, en op 114,000 voet van die ballon af?

Wat is die horison? Is dit 'n fisise skeiding tussen grond en lug, of is dit hoe joe oë vir jou 'n prentjie saamstel?

camera angle

Presies. Maak daai bal so groot soos jy wil, dis onmoontlik om die kurwe van die aarde by die venster uit te sien.

hoe kan jy die twee vergelyk? Hoe kan jy se albei cameras is 90deg na die opervlak?

Want mens mag twee goed vergelyk wat amper dieselfde is. En jy weet die kamera is op 90 grade as die lyn van die horison level is met die plane.

Off-topic maar Buzz Aldrin het blykbaar tot sy sinne gekom.

@MR VLAK En groete tot jy my vrae antwoord. 👍🏽

Dis dan waar jy die horison sien op 900 voet en 144,00 voet. In die fotos. Onmoontlik oor 'n bal.

Maak daai bal so groot soos jy wil.

Ek kan sien die aarde draai elke oggend wat ek sien hoe op kom die son oor die see op, elke aand wat ek die sterre sien still staan relatief tot die aarde wat beweeg. Elke dag wat die son se angle verander soos die tilted angel teenoor die son verander. Elke dag wat ek sien hoe hoe die weer systeme weerk die direction van weer stelsels in die suidlike vs noordlike halfrond.

Ek stem met daat lasste pic van jou.. maar soos ek se niemand hoe die camera op 90degrees nie... die punt van die photos is om die aarde af te neem nie reg nie?

En wat van enige iets wat jy in die hele gesprek gesê het kan jy bewys?

nee ek kan nie. Ek het nie die gereekskap nie. Kan jy enige van joune?

ahh nice.. baie goeie gesprek

http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html

https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round#page-12

aangesien ons nou links share

They are all debunked in the 200 Proofs thing. Even if all ten your proofs are correct (which they are not) - you're still trailing 190 - 10.

most of those proofs only work in the absence of gravity

Ja ek share maar links want jy dodge al my vrae.

and absence of defraction of light

Gravity doesn't exist.

okay ek will meer verstaan oor die density theory.

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-density-definition-and-calculation-2698950

As alles volgens density/boucancy organise. Hoekom is die see so diep op plekke? Is die dieper water meer dense?

Nie 'n teorie nie. Wetenskaplik meetbaar en laaaaankal bewys.

Ek verstaan die beginsel. ek se theory dat dit gravity disprove

Gravity is slegs 'n teorie en is nog nooit bewys nie.

fair

En 70% van die aarde se oppervlak is water.

ok dankie. ek probeer jou kant verstaan. nie stry nie

is die see 2km diep meer dense of dieselfde volgens wat jy verstaan?

https://youtu.be/EiBJBVBez_w Jy gaan daai video eers moet kyk voordat ons verder gaan. Want die gesprek gaan nerens heen nie. Lekker aand verder. 👍🏽

Okay dan

Ek moet maar een laaste idea hier los om oor te dink vir ons. As ek werk op die density konsep wat se alles word arrange volgens density wat waarheid het, dan se ons dat die see irrelavent van diepte dieselfde density is (1027 kg/m3) wat waar is tot n mate. Hoekom increase die pressure dan as mens dieper gaan (met een atmosphere per approx elke 10m)? die density bly altyd dieselfde doen dit nie en as dit nie doen nie dan sou sekere voorwerpe net tot n seker diepte (density) kon sink en nie verder gaan nie in die selfde tiepe fluid. Maar alles wat meer dense is as water sink tot heel onder.

Hoe kan mens dit verduidelik? Gravity... density en gravity moet saam verstaan word. As n helium ballon vry gelaat word dan gaan hy op want hy #1 is less dense as die lug #2 die krag wat hom op trek na n less dense plek is meer as gravity.

As iets in water val is dit dieseldfe konsep. Iets sink nie tot n sekere diepte nie, dit gaan al die pad af want #1 dit is meer dense as water plus #2 gravity trek dit af.

Pressure verander nie in n fluid nie oor die density van die fluid change nie (dan sou dit dalk in n ander state of matter wees, dink aan pressurised gasses wat liquids word, or liquids na solids) maar oor gravity. Hydrostatic pressure at any height below the water surface is calculated by P=hdg where h is the height below the open water surface, d is the density of water and g is the acceleration due to gravity

@Deejay from Earth , Hoe oud is jy?

I have reason 2 believe that the sun is actually a giant flashligt

and the moon is just a lsser giant flashlight with a filter on it

Plus God is a Woman

@MR VLAK Want al die triljoene tonne water accumulate bo-op mekaar. Soos 1 baksteen wat alleen staan, teenoor 10 bakstene wat bo-op mekaar gepak is. EDIT Die 10 bakstene weeg soveel soos 10 bakstene - nie soveel soos een baksteen nie. So daar is 10 bakstene se gewig wat druk op die grond. Hoe meer bakstene, hoe meer gewig op die onderste een.

@Guss 46

@MR VLAK En die feit dat water en olie nie meng nie is bewys van density - ongeag hoeveel formules jy bymekaar sit.

@MR VLAK En as Gravitasie so konstant is, hoekom weeg alles nie dieselfde nie?

@MR VLAK En dis ook die reke hoekom die lug dikker is by seevlak as bv teen 30,000 voet in die lug.

Maar sien jy kani van gewig praat as gravitasie nie vestaan nie. Gravitasie is in die definisie van gewig saam met massa. En als weeg nie die selfde nie want gravitasie bly die selfde maar massa verander agv digtheid.

@Sidius En tot en met een van julle Gravitasie actually kan bewys met 'n herhaalbare eksperiment, kan julle dit nie eers gebruik in julle argument nie. Dis teorie. Spekulasie. Verbeelding. Fantasie. Drome. Idees. Filosofie. Alles behalwe actual wetenskap.

@Deejay from Earth ek gee op

dit is soos om water uit n klip te tap.

Elke dag word dit al om jou bewys ou bull jy wil dit net nie raaksien as feit nie. En dit is actual wetenskap want dit is meetbaar wiskundig en deur experiment. Ek het vju die links al gestuur met AL die bewyse wat jou 200 bewyse either verkeerd bewys of saamstem omdat dit actualy feitlik is en op ons aarde werk maar dit kan ook op jle space pancake werk want sekere parameters kan ignore word wanneer jy sekere konsepte bewys.

https://youtu.be/JgY8zNZ35uw

https://youtu.be/TeMooNFtFJk

https://youtu.be/EJ0EKJWyl_g

https://youtu.be/1rmXP4Q2ZpI

jy seker jy is nie in die EFF debate span nie?

@MR VLAK Mooi so my seun. As jy nie logies of wetenskplik kan wen nie, raak maar persoonlik. Dis al wat jy oor het.

@Deejay from Earth dit was lankal persoonlik van jou kant af. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/469490581899575297/476490804890959913/DQUZmZeUIAAqSh2.jpg

ek join net in

@MR VLAK Dit is actually wat jy glo want jy verstaan nie hoe werk perspektief of die mens se oog nie. Dis net feite.

Oja maar ek is n GLobetard?

globe retard?

retard?

Wel jy kan niks bewys van wat jy glo nie?

sien jy is illogical

@MR VLAK Sorry ou maat, jy kon nie eers een vraag beantwoord nie. Not even ONE.

"Kings dethroned : a history of the evolution of astronomy from the time of the roman empire up to the present day; showing it to be an amazing series of blunders founded upon an error made in the second century B.C

https://archive.org/details/kingsdethronedhi00hickrich

Sopas geneem. Centurion. Nou wil ek graag weet hoe kan die sonstrale op verskille hoeke inkom as die son een honderd en nege keer breër is as die aarde?

Die lig kom deur die wolke en dit kom teen verskillende hoeke in omdat hy so groot is maar ook so vêr. Die hoeke word veroorsaak deur die posisie van die wolke. Ons het AL jou vrae beantwoord jyt net gekies om te sê ons maak assumptions waar ons nie doen nie en om jouself te glo inplaas van om na ons kant te luister en ons siening te bekyk soos ons joune probeer bekyk het.

Onthou jy nie die aarde het n atmosfeer nie? Klomp van die lig partikels word absorbeer. Ander word rond gereflekteer en die ander beweeg in relatief reguit lyne😉

@Sidius Die idee hier is nie om te probeer uitfigure of julle model teoreties kan werk nie. Die idee is om te toets en wetenskaplik te bewys wat die actual feite is, sonder spekulasie of persoonlike oogpunt van enige iemand af nie.

Sien daar gaan jy weer met ons wat aaneem en spekuleer en teoreties en al jou woorde. Maar jy kan lykmy fisies net nie van jou pannekoek afklim en debateer nie. Jy het jou siening en ons probeer dit insien. Ons het ons siening en jy kyk net van jou kant van die bord af en smeer al ons bewyse toe omdat jy vas glo dat ons op n space pizza snow globe lewe... plus jyt nounou n boek gereference wat praat oor 20 BCE. Jyt noudie dag vir ons n klomp videos gepos waarin mense glo die noag vloed was 300 of 400 jaar trug? So dus bestaan als van 1600 af gladnie vir jou nie en kan jy niks daaruit reference vir jou plat aarde nie. Niks experimente wat daar uitgegoer is nie. Geen argeologiese finds nie. Geen wiskunde nie... asb tjop ek probeer regtig nice wees maar debat kom van meer as 1 angle af anders is dit net geraas en chaos.

Wat het van old fashioned trig geword?

@Sidius Niemand hier se persoonlike opinies maak enige verskil aan die bewysbare feite nie. Die is 'n baie deep-seated issue en dit krap mense om. Dis hoekom dis beter om te stick met actual bewyse. Julle bewys julle model, en ek bewys myne.

En plat aarde is published vir peer review in die vroëe 1900's nie in die 1600's en ek het geen experimente verwys uit daai era nie. En ja ek glo die groot vloed van die bybel het so 3-400 jaar terug gebeur.

Laat weet as julle 'n Gyroscope eksperiment wil crowd-fund , dan toets ons self of die aarde beweeg. Dit gaan so 10k kos, en obviously vir wetenskaplike redes mag ek nie eers naby aan die toerusting kom nie.

@Deejay from Earth jou persoonlike opinie en photos van die internet af maak ook geen verskil aan bewysbare feite nie

@MR VLAK Yebo yes absoluut, dis hoekom ons hierdie eksperiment moet kan herhaal. Dis waaroor wetenskap gaan is dit nie?

https://youtu.be/nUFMZkxochs?t=5370

Die actual eksperiment is aan die einde van die video. Daar moet drie grade apparent-drift wys elke vyftien minute, regardless van jou positionering op die aarde.

Ek het nie data om nou te kyk nie. Maar in beginsel stem ek saam

( Text version en die hele gyroscope ding word mooi uiteengesit). Cheers julle tot later ek moet gaan werk. https://savageplane.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/gyroscope-basics-the-pendulous-vane-fallacy/

Ek sien niemand het kommentaar gelewer op die video waar Buzz Aldrin persoonlik op kamera erken hulle was nooit op die maan nie? Kan ons almal darem ten minste net aanvaar die maan-landings was 'n hoax?

Now we have the real problem laid out bare for the entire world to see. The people won't even believe eye-witness testimony from one of the Astronauts themselves, how on earth are they going to believe an experiment? Or an article? They will also not believe the evidence of their own senses. My point is this, the information is forced into the mind through TV programming, "education" , forced exams with punishments for not answering the prescribed answers correctly. There's a lot of psychology going on there. No debate over the curriculum. For twelve years, they broke your spirit and stole your mind. You know how curious little kids are? That is what drives us and gives us a sense of purpose. That curiosity is supposed to be with us our entire life. But they fill your mind with any random garbage, doesn't matter what. As long as you believe it. They educate us to get us to stop asking questions. Don't believe me? What are they teaching the kids about their history today in South African schools?

@Deejay from Earth lankal kommentaar gelewer oor wat hy gesê het, nie baie wys om sy woorde so te interpreteer nie, veral in die video wat jy gepos het wat maar baie konteks uit los nie. Ek dink maar dit is onwys om daai konteks uit te los, en boonop dit, te aanvaar dat die konteks uitgelos word om juis 'n persoonlike gelowige punt te bewys... Dit vat die objektiwiteit uit die argument uit daai.

@Sheamus Interessant, hoe interpreteer jy dit wat hy in die video sê?

Luister na alles wat hy sê, hy praat van hoekom hulle nie terug is nie. So sy woorde was misplaas

Daai video lyk my baie soos 'n ou Omie wat moeg is om te lieg vir die wereld, en hy kan nie nog 'n kind in die oë kyk en vir haar lieg nie. Dis hoe ek dit interpreteer.

Want hulle was nooit daar nie - jy kan nie terug gaan iewers heen waar jy nog nooit vantevore was nie

https://youtu.be/_MoS5Yw9ZgE

@Deejay from Earth ek kort meer info oor daai goed. Daai link se net dit is 'n lieg storie

Thanks

Hy lieg. Hy moet John Savage se artikel gaan lees.

Pendulous vanes maak die gyro net klein bietjie meer akkuraat.

Die savage article help nie dit verduidelik nie

Niks met die spin uit waai nie. Dis net eweredige lug-vloei uit die flywheel uit.

Ek sal nog lees. Dankie

Dit is dan letterlik waaroor die hele artikel gaan?

Dan hoekom mors hy tyd om te verduidelik hoekom hulle nie terug gaan nie, as hy moeg is van kak praat? As hy bedoel het hulle was nie daar nie, sou hy dít sê en dit daar los en nie bother om rondom dit te verduidelik hoekom hulle nie terug gegaan het nie... Jy los uit daai hele deel van die gesprek wat belangrik is want dit is deel van sy antwoord.

@Sheamus So regardless van die woorde wat actually uit mense se monde uit kom, is alles nog steeds oop vir "interpretasie"?

@Deejay from Earth die article is ja. Maar hy verduidelik nie vir my die counter teen die nie "The pendulous vanes do not care what causes the misalignment which may be due to precession, harsh manouvers, extended periods of turning or the movement across the curvature of the Earth"

Hoekom het hy haar nie net vertel hoe awesome dit was op die maan nie?

Ja so ver as wat konteks en objektiwiteit gaan, as jy selective word oor wat jy kies, dan raak dit subjective.. Daai word probleematies

@MR VLAK Kyk die hele twee ure video. Alles word perfek vir jou verduidelik.

Okay sal maar dit moet kyk dan vanaand

cool

Want dit was nie die vraag nie, so hoekom moet hy praat oir hoe awesome dit was? Dit is dan nie 'n direkte antwoord nie lol

Want as hy regtig daar was, waaroor anders sou hy gesels?

Lol die vraag was hoekom hulle nie weer daar was nie, wat het dit te doen met hoe awesome dit was? Mense kom daar met 'n doel en met geld, wat hy eintlik geantwoord het, mense het nie daar gegaan want dit is alleenlik awesome nie.

Sien jy wat gebeur as mense interpreteer in plaas van luister?

Dink dit is 'n kak voorbeeld jou punt te maak, jy kan beter argumente maak as om 'n ou omie uit konteks te vat.

"becasue we didn't go there" kan seker tog net op soveel maniere interpreteer word dude? Ek moet weer ry sal reply as ek terug is.

Lol jy vat net daai woorde wat hom a sekonde vat om te sê is reg, en all die ander goed wat hom 'n paar minute vat om te verduidelik is vikeerd... Wat is die kanse dat hy een sin vikeerd gewoord het teenoor 'n hele paragraaf of twee vikeerd gewoord het? Jy sny uit daai hele paragraaf of twee se konteks, want dit pas nie jou geloof soos daai een sinnetjie wat jy wel op fokus nie. Daai is problematies DeeJay, dit is hoekom ek sê, dit is 'n kak voorbeeld om jou punt te maak, vermy dit eerder.

Ek dink daai interview is cgi

Met down scaling na potato quality

OK ek praat strooi. Maar is daar 'n beter source?

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/719869/Buzz-Aldrin-reveals-we-did-not-go-to-moon-bombshell-video

Zoom so bietjie in.

So the father of modern rocketry was a raging Nazi.

Yet we find something strange on his gravestone.

@Deejay from Earth Nice pic! KJV translation would make it even better 😉

Thanks, I just picked one from the google.

And in the interest of disclosure - I am not a Christian, I left the church after I was confirmed. Became an atheist for a while. Tried new age. Was Agnostic for a while. Stopped thinking about it for a while too. Dabbled in Scientology & auditing. Had four or five Ayahuasca ceremonies with actual Shamans in the Peruvian Amazon. Then last year I started fasting, and I got really good at it. And in May this year, something happened, and let's just leave it there and say this is when I became a spiritual man again.

"Prove all things" is why I know what I know.

**WARNING CONTAINS GRAPHIC SOUNDS OF PUKING FOR A FEW MOMENTS**

Holy shitballs I just invented bold fonts.

This is the place I went to in Uquitos Peru. Blue Morpho lodge.

https://youtu.be/dz0XLVUq3WI

DMT?

@Deejay from Earth Well I hope your journey ultimately leads you to Christ, who is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

DMT is the key compound at work yeah... Psychedelics are good exposure to different perspectives that reveal the biased nature of our senses, it wont lead you to God, but it can make you aware of what your meatsuit really is... We don't experience reality directly, we experience it through biological instruments, and because it is biological, it is influenced by our biological prejudices, which become very clear under the influences of psycho active substances.

Life changing stuff that. It's very real.

did you break through?

@MR VLAK only once on DMT, 3 times on mushrooms.. Now psychedelics don't work on me anymore.

Break through in what way?

@Sheamus Well... atleast you cant become a addict i guess. lol

@Deejay from Earth from what i understand there is a point after smoking that you need more to get you over the wall and feel the sense of leaving your body behind? From what I understand of it, its called a break through i think

Ayahuasca felt the same as, just less than the holy spirit / kundalini thing that happens when you fast a lot.

@MR VLAK I only felt unconditional love.

Nothing bad whatsoever. Just joy.

Sounds awesome

@MR VLAK If ever you can - I recommend it.

Do you feel it changed you or your perception of the world? I have only experienced Acid which I feel it as close to something similar I can get here

@MR VLAK that's not exactly breaking through, that sounds like tolerance... It's true, but only within a few days. Tolerance is very shallow really, takes about a week to restore your tolerance.

@MR VLAK For me, not immediately. However my life has come full circle now I believe and the Ayahuasca trip was a key part so hell yes, it changed my life.

@Sheamus leaving your ego. Thats a break through?

@Deejay from Earth I am glad you could experience that. Hopefully one day I can do the same.

@MR VLAK Start fasting properly and you can experience better than that right in your own living room.

@Deejay from Earth more info please?

@MR VLAK ketosis is a natural way to get there, but with full control of your senses

It is all about achieving higher states of consciousness through a rejection of the material world by fasting and get this - LITERALLY giving your shit away. It's entirely physiological. (My opinion)

You don't leave your ego... Break through is insight to a new perspective. Only thing you leave is this reality, in exchange for another. With a change of reality comes a change in perspective. But because its an inner experience, it's very good for introspection. You get to meet yourself, and whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on what you've become.

Materialism is the opposite of Spirituality and they can never fully overlap - they can only overlap at the fringes.

Finding the balance is the thing. But now I know where the path starts.

I will be back, I need to research this stuff some more!

If you want to fast to try and attain higher states of consciousness, you need to be fasting on a very disciplined schedule. Looks like three days a week fasting for a a couple of months will get you there. It's on this path where you find out what "Know Thyself" is all about. It's awesome, it's natural, it's entirely physiological and anyone can do it. The Kingdom of God truly is within you.

FBI hat is me a few years ago.

@MR VLAK Cheers dude thanks vir die chat. http://www.beatrice.com/TAO.pdf

@Deejay from Earth Who's the second pic?

Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee yesterday or the day before

Wow lost a lot of weight well done! (if you don't mind my saying)

35 odd kilo's. 10 Months. No exercise. Rigorous fasting.

👍🏻

THAT is what has become of humanity.

How morbidly depressed that is

Eh...um...🆘!!!

That video broke my brain🤣

Who'd have thought that "fluent American" would be the most sensible thing said in a video??? 🤣

@Malcolm the Seceder Yeah that actually hits home lol

thing that shocked me really was why the hell is she asking some stranger online to buy a game for her???

Lol is that what it was?

I think she's a bit <:IQ:468409414592757780> to be honest🙄

lol you know... when i heard about her asking a random stranger for a game, i thought this was going to turn out into some sexual favor, when she started talking about weight, i was expecting her to be talking about the weight of something else lol, and then when she started mumbling about her lack of basic knowledge of the solar system, i figured that is really the problem, must be low IQ thanks to this toxic society, she doesnt give a flip about not knowing, she is ignorant as fck and doesnt care about it.... it's so sad honestly, but also humorous, like a really shitty comedy skit that became reality

I agree

A society that wastes the life of a child like that is not a society worth having. We are all born inquisitive & creative geniuses.

yeah she is future slave force, it's obvious they want them dumber than ever before, makes you wonder how low they plan to go with this

😆

haha!

I came, I ran the gif above, I saw this illustration that matched my run on the gif, I laughed

lekker lang naweek al julle mense. veilige trips as jle travel.

@Sidius Hau! Nothing in there is factually true or accurate in any way.

The Circle of the Earth. Check out the library stamp.

more almal

@Deejay from Earth @Guss : 46. Ek bedoel jou ouderdom.

Ja ek is 46. 22/6/72

@MR VLAK More

Good morning

Worlds First Mobile Phone? (1922)

https://youtu.be/Gxy7ZNh0yMw?t=56

Capture from 4:59 in the video

I believe the light comes in from the top of the cloud and scatters , which then reflects on the bottom layer which is slightly denser.

I can follow that logic. But a cloud is the same thing as fog on the road and a cars headlights shining on/in it cant penetrate through it very far as it is water vapor and water droplets scatter light in random directions due to their shape and voids between particles which is the reason it interacts differently than light through pure water. So I dont agree fully.

Yeah there's so much left to re-discover here for the scientifically-minded. The whole thing is nothing short of magic. Personally I don't sweat the nitty gritty details too much, I am more interested in what it's for and what makes it tick.

Nikola tesla Why did Tesla say that 3,6,9 was the key to the universe?

Not one North / South circumnavigation. Because no-can-do on Flat Earth.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/998/787/1fa.jpg

When you ask Hilter if the earth is flat

https://youtu.be/b5DOBMIiaug

lol good one

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/first-circumnavigation-via-both-poles-surface/

@MR VLAK Please refer me to where the journeys are officially recorded by the governing body of the sport.

Comments from the article. 😂

Yeah those comments are funny. Its like moths to a flame, they cant help themselves.

I do not understand why a expedition will be documented by a governing body of sport? http://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/history/transglobe.html

book a cruise or flight and go check it out https://www.polarcruises.com/antarctica/ships

All of that can be easily plotted on the FE map.

That's how you circumnavigate flat earth. which consists of 70% flat water.

http://www.sailing.org/news/4596.php

How far does the FE model say it would be?

from what i find (http://rickpotvinflatearth.blogspot.com/2015/05/aerial-circumnavigation-of-antarctica.html) 60000 miles

Rick Potvin is cool, haven't been on his site in ages.