Notice anything?

why no planes flying over or close antartica? Were flat earthers right?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=V56nITcxMI4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Because there's nothing in Antarctica you dumb fuck.

Because if there are issues, then there's nowhere to land to nobend. They go basically direct across large oceans, and skirt land whenever they can.

Also, that sneaky fucking rare.

rekt and chekt

Not an argument. Planes fly all the time over the pacifc ocean or atlantic ocean where there is nothing close nearby to land on.

For what?
Direct flight from Tasmania to Tierra del Fuego?

Why are there no planes over Africa? I thought they were kangz?

Surely kangz would have invented planes, right?

There'z zero reason to fly over the south pole, it would make flights longer. No one is flying from southern Chile to fucking Australia.

Direct flight from NZ to south africa
Direct flight from Australia so South america

>it would make flights longer.
It would.

>No one is flying from southern Chile to fucking Australia.
Not an argument

What is freight flights?

Because Antpengunia is a secret Nazi eugenics base no-fly training zone, dumbass.

>Direct flight from the least densely populated area of the planet to the least popular destinations of the planet

It's because the world is flat.

It's much longer to go from Australia to South Africa around the ocean, so that's why the flights all cut through the North pole.

Because the Earth is flat.

Because those are shitty countries that don't need to fly to each other, retard.

you do understand that almost half of flights in the world are freight flights?

WHO IS PAYING FOR THESE ONE WAY FLIGHTS? YOU'RE AN IDIOT WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND AVIATION

In the event of a crash, the survivors are more likely to survive and be rescued at sea than in the middle of the artic. Also planes can land on water not ice.

It's because there are no ground-based receivers (which flightradar24 uses) in antartica, so even if there were some aircrafts you'd have no way of knowing. Dumbasses.

sage this shitty thread

me and my uncle were just having a discussion about Antartica that devolved from discussion about whether or not we landed on the moon.

he told me that no planes can fly over antartica and no one can visit the interior of antartica because some guy flew over antartica and said it was actually like a jungle and had all kinds of valuable untapped resources.

there might be something to all this.

Do any of you guys here even realise that planes don't fly in a straight line, because the earth is a sphere, and the shortest on long flights is always a bow?

the weather sucks
no emergency landing
magnetic pole fucks with important instruments of a plane


don't be retarded, dude

Not an argument.

Freight companies pay insane amounts to get their goods shipped the fastest possible way.

There are thousands of flights daily over frozen siberian land. What is the difference?

Okay, good point.

That's retarded.

You're retarded.

Why risk a plane to extreme cold and rough weather just to please retards like you?

Agreed, definitely something to it. Cred Forums is full of retards who never ask the right questions.

So many armchair experts here. The only commercial flight that went close to Antarctica was the Aerolineas Argentinas flight from Sydney to Buenos Aires. As far as I'm aware that flight is no longer available due to budget constraints (Argentina being too poor to afford it, and the flight not being profitable)

Great argument. Go back to your Election thread.

Sorry I don't entertain every retard who posts absolute bullshit.

I'm certain that isn't true...

/thread

Go back to your muh elections, muh two party threads, where you think you can make a difference.

Not an argument.

why do you use that as argument?
In Cruising altitudes planes go through extreme cold temperatures. What difference does that make?

>t. (((NSA))) shitposter bot

>why no planes flying over or close antartica?
Because in case of an emergency landing you're absolutely fucked. Everyone will die even if the landing itself is good. And I'm not even sure it makes for a shorter trip, either. The further from the equator you are, the faster you go across longitudes.

That argument I already debunked here.

I don't totally believe it but could be something to it is all.

just look up Operation Highjump and you find some interesting shit

youtube.com/watch?v=V56nITcxMI4

I don't think an idiot who thinks the world is flat is allowed to think he's superior to anyone.
Have you ever been up in a high altitude plane? You can see the curvature you idiot. Have you even been on a ship? You can see the horizon drop off. That's how you can tell its curved. Moron.we settled the is earth flat debate in fucking 1200ad you purposefully obtuse idiot. Kill yourself.

>Siberia, which is populated by trees, animals, and has a few towns 100's of miles apart, but it does have a few roads
>Antarctica, which has no unfrozen water, is the coldest place on our planet, and is populated by penguins and moss
they are different. bith offer minimal survival chances, but I would choose to crash in Siberia over Antarctica any day

No, you stupid ass google

hollow earth ?

I never said that. I just baited the thread for people to click on it.
It's an interesting question. You don't agree?

"debunked"
Planes fly across oceans because they have no choice, you mouth breather. Besides, venturing outside the plane in Antarctica is much worse than to float around in an ocean.

Aquafresh, please check how many land masses are located in that region.
Also, aquafresh, please check how Flightradar and other websites function.
And aquafresh, sorry to tell you, zoom in and youll see some planes there.

The weather systems are absolutely outrageous there, too troublesome to fly through regularly.

A New Zealand flight crashed there in 1979, no one survived.