I saw an interesting post about a Flat Earth map today over on Google Maps Mania today and found myself wondering why this has gotten this far.  From a land surveyorâs standpoint, Gleasonâs 1892 New Standard Map of the World is not evidence of a flat Earth â it is an example of a specific map projection doing exactly what it is designed to do.
Gleasonâs map uses an azimuthal equidistant projection, a well-known and legitimate cartographic method that surveyors and geodesists still use today. This projection preserves distance and bearing from one central point (in this case, the North Pole). Thatâs why the map included rotating âhandsâ or rulers: they allowed a user to measure accurate azimuths and distances outward from the pole only.
However, as any surveyor knows, no flat map can preserve everything. In an azimuthal equidistant projection:
Distances and bearings from the center are accurate
Distortion increases rapidly away from the center
Distances and directions between non-central locations are wrong
So while the map can function as a practical educational or navigational tool from the pole, it fails for comparing distances or routes elsewhere â exactly what geodetic theory predicts.
The modern interactive version by Khaled Mimoune, including adjustable daylight overlays, further illustrates how cartographic projections can visualize real-world phenomena (like illumination and seasons) on a flat surface. From a surveying perspective, this reinforces the distinction between:
The Earth (a globe)
A map (a mathematical projection of that globe)
In short, Gleasonâs map doesnât demonstrate a flat Earth. It demonstrates that projecting a curved surface onto a plane requires distortion, a foundational principle in surveying, geodesy, and every State Plane Coordinate System used in professional practice today.
Â
Flat Earth does not survive real-world surveying practice.
Not philosophically, not mathematically, and definitely not in the field.
Surveying is one of the oldest applied sciences on Earth, and we measure curvature whether we intend to or not.
On a flat plane, level lines would remain parallel forever. In reality:
Level lines converge toward Earthâs center
This is why level loops close only when curvature is accounted for
Ignore curvature and your elevations drift
Rule of thumb every surveyor learns:
Curvature drop â 0.667 ft per mile²
Thatâs not a NASA number â thatâs a surveying correction.
If I run a precise level line:
1 mile â negligible difference
5 miles â measurable
20+ miles â impossible to ignore
State DOTs, USACE, and geodetic surveys require curvature and refraction corrections. If Earth were flat, these corrections would introduce errors â but instead they remove them.
In geodetic control:
Large triangles do not sum to 180°
The excess increases with triangle area
That excess matches spherical geometry exactly
This was proven centuries ago and is still used today.
If Earth were flat:
Control networks would never close
State Plane Coordinate Systems wouldnât work
GNSS solutions would drift uncontrollably
They donât.
Every U.S. state uses projected coordinates based on:
An ellipsoid
A map projection (Lambert, Transverse Mercator)
Why?
Because Earth is curved and weâre flattening it on purpose, carefully.
If Earth were flat:
No projections needed
No scale factor
No convergence angle
Yet we measure:
Grid vs ground distance differences
Meridian convergence
Scale factor changes by location
You can verify this with a total station and two benchmarks.
Survey-grade GNSS works because:
Satellites orbit a curved Earth
Signal timing assumes an ellipsoid
Positions are solved in 3D space
If Earth were flat:
RTK corrections would fail
Baselines wouldnât resolve
Vertical solutions would collapse
Instead, we routinely get:
Horizontal accuracy < 0.03 ft
Vertical accuracy < 0.06 ft
Every day. By county surveyors, not space agencies.
Surveyor response:
Refraction is real
Elevations matter
Atmospheric ducting happens
Line of sight â line of level
Surveyors distinguish between:
Optical visibility
Geometric line of sight
Level surface
Geoid vs ellipsoid
Flat Earth arguments usually mix all four into one sentence.
Long before satellites:
Surveyors in the 1700s measured meridian arcs
Found Earthâs radius within a fraction of a percent
Using chains, theodolites, and stars
No rockets. No CGI. Just math and patience.
Hereâs the blunt PLS truth:
If Earth were flat, surveying as a profession would not work.
Boundary surveys wouldnât close
Control networks would fail
Elevation datums would drift
Engineering projects would not align
Yet highways meet.
Bridges connect.
Pipelines close.
And property corners agree.
Not stupidity â but:
Mistrust of institutions
Misunderstanding of scale
Confusion between models and reality
Lack of exposure to field-grade measurement
Once someone runs:
A 10-mile level loop
A geodetic control adjustment
A GNSS baseline across counties
Flat Earth quietly disappears.
Iâve surveyed:
Coastal projects
Long pipelines
Multi-county control networks
High-precision leveling routes
The Earth curves.
We measure it.
We correct for it.
And we get paid because of it.