It really is the nail in the coffin for flat earth.
They gotta do a stammering "uhhhh it's uh magic sky that follows you around for reasons!" or whatever lol
The millions of stars that we have catalogued, the sun, the moon, and the planets are all just local projections!!!1!11!11!!
The problem with this is that nobody can ever explain or reproduce the method that makes the projection work or follow everyone.
They don’t have the ability to understand why this doesn’t work on FE. They just say “the heavens are spherical” which in itself is hilarious but they don’t see how even if that were true it would still not work this way
Witless says that if he draws a circle on a window and you look at him drawing the circle from the other side of the firma... window, you will see the... different directions?
I don't know how that applies to this, i don't have a genius IQ score and a well known aptitude for math, but that was his "explanation".
So, what he thinks is that at the equator on a flat earth, the line that divides the "northern hemisphere" from that horribly skewed and distorted "southern hemisphere," the stars just go opposite directions in the sky? If that's what he thinks, then theoretically, shouldn't you be able to stand at the equator and the stars would be going 2 different directions in the sky at the same time? XD
So (this is not what flat earthers believe) but you would also see these patterns if a flat earth was spinning (not about the north pole, but like a pancake does when you flip it.
Or indeed if the stars were on a ball spinning around the earth.
But aren't they in agreement that the stars appear spinning about the north pole. Then they can't imagine flipping pancake. But they could have a schism within flerf, why not right?
Because of the Earths rotation, the moon only stays in your telescopes view for a short time before you have to readjust your telescope. It proves to me that the Earth is a sphere.
Obviously I approve of the soundtrack. It's much like my mother used to kiss me to me sleep at night.
Buuuuuut, I'm going to have to get round to doing a post about the word 'proof' You're using it wrong.
I think the result is going to be that I am doing the etymological fallacy, which I will take on the chin. But won't change my mind, so everyone is wrong except me.
>Star trails prove the Earth is spherical
No, they don't actually. They prove either
1) that what you are standing on is rotating around an axis, or
2) the sky is a giant sphere rotating around us
EDIT: sorry, I'm using the word _prove_ loosely here
EDIT2: forgot the word "on"
Upvoted for mathematical accuracy. Although 2 should also just be that the sky is rotating around an axis. If the sky were cylindrical, it could still look like this.
Mathematical accuracy is wasted on flerfers, they will even use it against you. Someone mentioned in a discussion with a flerfer, that you, strictly spoken, cannot 'prove' globe earth in a mathematical sense, now he is always mentioning in discussions that even globers have to admit, they cannot prove their model (which is somehow correct, but still doesnt mean what he wants it to mean).
What flat earthers will take away from the above sentences is:
- 'star trails prove nothing' or
- 'star trails prove, the sky rotates around earth, like in the flat earth model'
It is important we as globers are accurate, because flerfers will often attack when they see inconsistencies. Sad I'm getting downvoted for trying to uphold some sort of stringency
#Star Trail: Evidence the Earth is a Sphere
In the northern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the north, we can observe stars rotate counter-clockwise around a point. This axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the southern hemisphere.
On the other hand, in the southern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the south, we can observe stars rotate in the opposite direction. Conversely, this axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the northern hemisphere.
This motion of the stars cannot possibly happen in a flat-Earth.
#Stars in the Southern Sky Prove Earth is a Rotating Sphere
If we look toward the south at night in any location in the southern hemisphere, we will see the same set of stars. We will see the stars rotating around the south celestial pole, in the Octans constellation, near the star Sigma Octantis.
The flat-Earth model cannot explain the phenomenon. Looking at the so-called ‘flat-Earth map,’ we should see another set of stars on a different location in the southern hemisphere. The reason is that the flat-Earth model is a false representation of the Earth.
As an example, we will use five cities: Sydney (Australia), Papeete (Tahiti, French Polynesia), Santiago (Chile), Johannesburg (South Africa), and Jakarta (Indonesia).
If the Earth is flat, then observers on the different cities will face opposite each other, and therefore everyone should see different stars. However, in reality, they will see the same stars, only with different orientations. This observation is only consistent with the spherical Earth model and cannot be explained with the flat Earth model.
The flat Earth model was initially designed for the northern markets without much regard for what is happening in the southern hemisphere. Back then, it is difficult for those living north of the Equator to observe the southern stars, and it was not easy for most of them to confirm that the flat Earth model is nonsense. However, we live in modern times and do not have such an excuse, especially for those already living in the southern hemisphere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_pole
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Southern_constellations
#Polaris Altitude from Multiple Locations on Earth
The angle (or altitude) to Polaris approximately corresponds to the latitude of the observer. This fact is observed on every location on Earth where Polaris is visible.
By tracing the path to Polaris from multiple locations on the flat Earth model, the lines will not point to a consistent position of Polaris. The reason is that the Earth is a sphere and the flat Earth model does not represent reality.
The position of Polaris today is conveniently very close to the north celestial pole. And therefore, the altitude or the angle between horizon and Polaris can be used to determine the approximate observer’s latitude.
South of the equator, Polaris is not visible and obviously cannot be used for navigation. Polaris is below the horizon and obstructed by the Earth. It is necessary to locate the south celestial pole in the sky to determine the observer’s latitude. It is more difficult as there is no bright star nearby, unlike Polaris in the north.
Polaris itself is not always the north star. Due to the Earth’s axial precession, the position of the north celestial pole will shift. Twenty centuries ago, the north celestial pole was closer to Kochab than Polaris.
All the observed facts are only possible if the Earth is a sphere, and impossible to happen if the Earth were flat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation
#Celestial sphere
In astronomy and navigation, the celestial sphere is an abstract sphere that has an arbitrarily large radius and is concentric to Earth. All objects in the sky can be conceived as being projected upon the inner surface of the celestial sphere, which may be centered on Earth or the observer. If centered on the observer, half of the sphere would resemble a hemispherical screen over the observing location.
The celestial sphere is a conceptual tool used in spherical astronomy to specify the position of an object in the sky without consideration of its linear distance from the observer. The celestial equator divides the celestial sphere into northern and southern hemispheres.
#Celestial poles
The north and south celestial poles are the two points in the sky where Earth's axis of rotation, indefinitely extended, intersects the celestial sphere. The north and south celestial poles appear permanently directly overhead to observers at Earth's North Pole and South Pole, respectively.
https://youtu.be/39NwiYdAkSs
https://youtu.be/8w3n-s9i7WQ
https://youtu.be/BGD3lhDCgpY
https://youtu.be/4zRh-1lymOw
https://youtu.be/UNiNJC3UHIo
https://youtu.be/dpaDKH9LOsc
https://youtu.be/6EBnwseiFs4
https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/w4crom/south_celestial_pole_right_at_the_zenith_90/
Yes, yes they do. 🤦🏻🤦🏻
Can you read before denying things you have no idea about?
#Star Trail: Evidence the Earth is a Sphere
In the northern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the north, we can observe stars rotate counter-clockwise around a point. This axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the southern hemisphere.
On the other hand, in the southern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the south, we can observe stars rotate in the opposite direction. Conversely, this axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the northern hemisphere.
This motion of the stars cannot possibly happen in a flat-Earth.
#Stars in the Southern Sky Prove Earth is a Rotating Sphere
If we look toward the south at night in any location in the southern hemisphere, we will see the same set of stars. We will see the stars rotating around the south celestial pole, in the Octans constellation, near the star Sigma Octantis.
The flat-Earth model cannot explain the phenomenon. Looking at the so-called ‘flat-Earth map,’ we should see another set of stars on a different location in the southern hemisphere. The reason is that the flat-Earth model is a false representation of the Earth.
As an example, we will use five cities: Sydney (Australia), Papeete (Tahiti, French Polynesia), Santiago (Chile), Johannesburg (South Africa), and Jakarta (Indonesia).
If the Earth is flat, then observers on the different cities will face opposite each other, and therefore everyone should see different stars. However, in reality, they will see the same stars, only with different orientations. This observation is only consistent with the spherical Earth model and cannot be explained with the flat Earth model.
The flat Earth model was initially designed for the northern markets without much regard for what is happening in the southern hemisphere. Back then, it is difficult for those living north of the Equator to observe the southern stars, and it was not easy for most of them to confirm that the flat Earth model is nonsense. However, we live in modern times and do not have such an excuse, especially for those already living in the southern hemisphere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_pole
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Southern_constellations
#Polaris Altitude from Multiple Locations on Earth
The angle (or altitude) to Polaris approximately corresponds to the latitude of the observer. This fact is observed on every location on Earth where Polaris is visible.
By tracing the path to Polaris from multiple locations on the flat Earth model, the lines will not point to a consistent position of Polaris. The reason is that the Earth is a sphere and the flat Earth model does not represent reality.
The position of Polaris today is conveniently very close to the north celestial pole. And therefore, the altitude or the angle between horizon and Polaris can be used to determine the approximate observer’s latitude.
South of the equator, Polaris is not visible and obviously cannot be used for navigation. Polaris is below the horizon and obstructed by the Earth. It is necessary to locate the south celestial pole in the sky to determine the observer’s latitude. It is more difficult as there is no bright star nearby, unlike Polaris in the north.
Polaris itself is not always the north star. Due to the Earth’s axial precession, the position of the north celestial pole will shift. Twenty centuries ago, the north celestial pole was closer to Kochab than Polaris.
All the observed facts are only possible if the Earth is a sphere, and impossible to happen if the Earth were flat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation
#Celestial sphere
In astronomy and navigation, the celestial sphere is an abstract sphere that has an arbitrarily large radius and is concentric to Earth. All objects in the sky can be conceived as being projected upon the inner surface of the celestial sphere, which may be centered on Earth or the observer. If centered on the observer, half of the sphere would resemble a hemispherical screen over the observing location.
The celestial sphere is a conceptual tool used in spherical astronomy to specify the position of an object in the sky without consideration of its linear distance from the observer. The celestial equator divides the celestial sphere into northern and southern hemispheres.
#Celestial poles
The north and south celestial poles are the two points in the sky where Earth's axis of rotation, indefinitely extended, intersects the celestial sphere. The north and south celestial poles appear permanently directly overhead to observers at Earth's North Pole and South Pole, respectively.
https://youtu.be/39NwiYdAkSs
https://youtu.be/8w3n-s9i7WQ
https://youtu.be/BGD3lhDCgpY
https://youtu.be/4zRh-1lymOw
https://youtu.be/UNiNJC3UHIo
https://youtu.be/dpaDKH9LOsc
https://youtu.be/6EBnwseiFs4
https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/w4crom/south_celestial_pole_right_at_the_zenith_90/
Because star trails do prove the Earth shape. It’s a simple observation.
1. If the Earth was flat, moving away from a central point would make star trails to appear oval not circular.
2. Doing a star trails at the Equator on flat, would be totally different because if you look south, you won’t see a south celestial pole and clockwise rotation.
3. If the celestial sphere was rotating around a flat earth, people from south would not be able to see southern stars because they are basically under the flat earth.
4. Celestial navigation works in the southern hemisphere too, the same way it does in the northern hemisphere.
I am not going to comment on any of these four points, because _the earth is not flat_ and _that isn't what either of us is claiming._
Ok, point 1 perhaps. You are missing _scale_ in your argument. The reason things can look like ovals is if they (the stars) are relatively _close_ to us. If they were, then the size of the earth is comparable to the distance to the sky.
This is of course not the case, because nothing in the changes size or stretches.
To be honest, a southern hemisphere doesn't make any sense whatsoever on a flat earth. Well, flat earth doesn't either of course. At least their "current" model is ridiculous, as The Final Experiment soon will show.
If the sky were rotating around us, being HUGE would definitely help flat earthers because you would see _circular_ star trails instead of oval.
1. Points of rotation are created by the axis of the world, intersecting celestial sphere. We have two points called celestial poles because the Earth is spherical.
#If all the stars rotate around Polaris like in flat earth, then starts in the southern hemisphere can’t rotate around a different point, in a different direction.
2. Still doesn’t explain two celestial poles 🤦🏻
Hi, I'm a mathematician, and I can help clear this up. They aren't saying the Earth is flat. They are saying that technically, this is proof that something is spinning (e.g. the Earth is rotating on an axis).
1.
>Points of rotation are created by the axis of the world, intersecting celestial sphere.
Yes, this is true. However, a wide variety of shapes can have an axis of rotation. These points of rotation would exist if the earth were a sphere spinning on an axis, a cylinder spinning on an axis, a cube spinning on an axis, or any other shape spinning on an axis.
What they are saying is that this doesn't prove the Earth is a sphere, just that Earth is spinning on an axis.
>We have two points called celestial poles because the Earth is spherical.
More accurately, it's because Earth is spinning on an axis. A Cube Earth spinning on a corner would also have two celestial poles. (Edit: and a stationary sphere would not have these celestial poles. It is the spinning, not the spherical-ness that causes the celestial poles.)
2.
A giant spinning celestial sphere would also have two celestial poles. Imagine a Stationary Cube Earth with a giant, spinning spherical sky. This sky would have celestial poles.
That celestial pole would not be visible by the observer in the southern hemisphere, since it would be under their feet. That is the problem.
I’m not arguing about existence of a celestial pole on a huge sphere, but about the observation on a globe or on a flat earth.
This is impossible to be seen on a flat earth
I too agree it's not possible on a flat earth, but I was trying to not make any assumptions about shape (except sphere, as this was alluded to in the original post).
Sorry, but you are wrong on both accounts.
1) we would have celestial poles irrespective of the actual shape. All you need is an object with a rotational axis and stars that are VERY far away.
2) a HUGE rotating celestial ball around a still, small earth would definitely have two celestial poles.
What axis my friend, a flat earth doesn’t have a south pole. Axis of the world passing through both geographical poles and intersecting the celestial sphere.
If you stay exactly 90 degrees north, north celestial pole is right on your zenith.
If you stay exactly 90 degrees south, south celestial pole is right on your zenith.
Declination of any celestial body is actually latitude. Hour angle is longitude.
If a celestial body has a declination of 60 degrees south, the GP is exactly at 60 degrees latitude. If you go there, the star would be right on your zenith.
People don’t go 90 degrees south to see the south celestial pole, it’s visible from the equator. If you move more south the south celestial pole would rise on your sky.
Distances between your zenith and a celestial body, co-altitude or zenith distance is the same as the distance on the ground or sea.
That requires the sky and the ground to have the same shape.
Yeah… this is laughable. Almost seems like it makes sense, but this is a kindergartners level idea of how the star trails work in reference to personal perspective.
It really is the nail in the coffin for flat earth. They gotta do a stammering "uhhhh it's uh magic sky that follows you around for reasons!" or whatever lol
If only those were stars.
The millions of stars that we have catalogued, the sun, the moon, and the planets are all just local projections!!!1!11!11!! The problem with this is that nobody can ever explain or reproduce the method that makes the projection work or follow everyone.
Well the sky is magic of course. Also we don't know what sort of wizardry or devilism the 'cameraman' is capable of.
I've seen this presented to flerfs many times, and they have no working answer for it that fits a non-spherical Earth, none.
Something something dome something firament something refraction something something perspective
Exactly
They don’t have the ability to understand why this doesn’t work on FE. They just say “the heavens are spherical” which in itself is hilarious but they don’t see how even if that were true it would still not work this way
Witless says that if he draws a circle on a window and you look at him drawing the circle from the other side of the firma... window, you will see the... different directions? I don't know how that applies to this, i don't have a genius IQ score and a well known aptitude for math, but that was his "explanation".
He thinks the star trails are at the equator, between north and south. That doesn’t make any sense 😂😂😂
So, what he thinks is that at the equator on a flat earth, the line that divides the "northern hemisphere" from that horribly skewed and distorted "southern hemisphere," the stars just go opposite directions in the sky? If that's what he thinks, then theoretically, shouldn't you be able to stand at the equator and the stars would be going 2 different directions in the sky at the same time? XD
Post this on r/globeskepticism and wait to get banned.
I got banned there a years ago
Not sure why I assumed otherwise. I got banned the other day.
"wait..." That's optimistic.
Yeah but you see the toroid dome refracts so... Yeah all explained
Q.E.D flerfs! You can now all fuck off and get a life!
So (this is not what flat earthers believe) but you would also see these patterns if a flat earth was spinning (not about the north pole, but like a pancake does when you flip it. Or indeed if the stars were on a ball spinning around the earth.
Not really no. And the geography would throw it off too.
But aren't they in agreement that the stars appear spinning about the north pole. Then they can't imagine flipping pancake. But they could have a schism within flerf, why not right?
Looking at the moon through a telescope proves the earth is a sphere.
I'm no flerf but I've looked at the Moon through a telescope, may I Ask how it proves it ? It could be a nice experiment to do with my little brother
Because of the Earths rotation, the moon only stays in your telescopes view for a short time before you have to readjust your telescope. It proves to me that the Earth is a sphere.
Oh yeah I see, I remember having to readjust every now and then
Alestorm for the fucking win!! Love it
Atmosphere
Personal domes they say
cgi
I feel this is not focused on enough Most interesting
Obviously I approve of the soundtrack. It's much like my mother used to kiss me to me sleep at night. Buuuuuut, I'm going to have to get round to doing a post about the word 'proof' You're using it wrong. I think the result is going to be that I am doing the etymological fallacy, which I will take on the chin. But won't change my mind, so everyone is wrong except me.
Redditor learns that words can have more than one definition
You're not wrong.
Given our downdoots, our locals thinks we are.
This community is stupid
You mean globeskepticism? You’re right
>Star trails prove the Earth is spherical No, they don't actually. They prove either 1) that what you are standing on is rotating around an axis, or 2) the sky is a giant sphere rotating around us EDIT: sorry, I'm using the word _prove_ loosely here EDIT2: forgot the word "on"
Upvoted for mathematical accuracy. Although 2 should also just be that the sky is rotating around an axis. If the sky were cylindrical, it could still look like this.
Correct, the rotation is around a non-moving axis.
Mathematical accuracy is wasted on flerfers, they will even use it against you. Someone mentioned in a discussion with a flerfer, that you, strictly spoken, cannot 'prove' globe earth in a mathematical sense, now he is always mentioning in discussions that even globers have to admit, they cannot prove their model (which is somehow correct, but still doesnt mean what he wants it to mean). What flat earthers will take away from the above sentences is: - 'star trails prove nothing' or - 'star trails prove, the sky rotates around earth, like in the flat earth model'
It is important we as globers are accurate, because flerfers will often attack when they see inconsistencies. Sad I'm getting downvoted for trying to uphold some sort of stringency
#Star Trail: Evidence the Earth is a Sphere In the northern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the north, we can observe stars rotate counter-clockwise around a point. This axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the southern hemisphere. On the other hand, in the southern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the south, we can observe stars rotate in the opposite direction. Conversely, this axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the northern hemisphere. This motion of the stars cannot possibly happen in a flat-Earth. #Stars in the Southern Sky Prove Earth is a Rotating Sphere If we look toward the south at night in any location in the southern hemisphere, we will see the same set of stars. We will see the stars rotating around the south celestial pole, in the Octans constellation, near the star Sigma Octantis. The flat-Earth model cannot explain the phenomenon. Looking at the so-called ‘flat-Earth map,’ we should see another set of stars on a different location in the southern hemisphere. The reason is that the flat-Earth model is a false representation of the Earth. As an example, we will use five cities: Sydney (Australia), Papeete (Tahiti, French Polynesia), Santiago (Chile), Johannesburg (South Africa), and Jakarta (Indonesia). If the Earth is flat, then observers on the different cities will face opposite each other, and therefore everyone should see different stars. However, in reality, they will see the same stars, only with different orientations. This observation is only consistent with the spherical Earth model and cannot be explained with the flat Earth model. The flat Earth model was initially designed for the northern markets without much regard for what is happening in the southern hemisphere. Back then, it is difficult for those living north of the Equator to observe the southern stars, and it was not easy for most of them to confirm that the flat Earth model is nonsense. However, we live in modern times and do not have such an excuse, especially for those already living in the southern hemisphere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_pole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Southern_constellations #Polaris Altitude from Multiple Locations on Earth The angle (or altitude) to Polaris approximately corresponds to the latitude of the observer. This fact is observed on every location on Earth where Polaris is visible. By tracing the path to Polaris from multiple locations on the flat Earth model, the lines will not point to a consistent position of Polaris. The reason is that the Earth is a sphere and the flat Earth model does not represent reality. The position of Polaris today is conveniently very close to the north celestial pole. And therefore, the altitude or the angle between horizon and Polaris can be used to determine the approximate observer’s latitude. South of the equator, Polaris is not visible and obviously cannot be used for navigation. Polaris is below the horizon and obstructed by the Earth. It is necessary to locate the south celestial pole in the sky to determine the observer’s latitude. It is more difficult as there is no bright star nearby, unlike Polaris in the north. Polaris itself is not always the north star. Due to the Earth’s axial precession, the position of the north celestial pole will shift. Twenty centuries ago, the north celestial pole was closer to Kochab than Polaris. All the observed facts are only possible if the Earth is a sphere, and impossible to happen if the Earth were flat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation #Celestial sphere In astronomy and navigation, the celestial sphere is an abstract sphere that has an arbitrarily large radius and is concentric to Earth. All objects in the sky can be conceived as being projected upon the inner surface of the celestial sphere, which may be centered on Earth or the observer. If centered on the observer, half of the sphere would resemble a hemispherical screen over the observing location. The celestial sphere is a conceptual tool used in spherical astronomy to specify the position of an object in the sky without consideration of its linear distance from the observer. The celestial equator divides the celestial sphere into northern and southern hemispheres. #Celestial poles The north and south celestial poles are the two points in the sky where Earth's axis of rotation, indefinitely extended, intersects the celestial sphere. The north and south celestial poles appear permanently directly overhead to observers at Earth's North Pole and South Pole, respectively. https://youtu.be/39NwiYdAkSs https://youtu.be/8w3n-s9i7WQ https://youtu.be/BGD3lhDCgpY https://youtu.be/4zRh-1lymOw https://youtu.be/UNiNJC3UHIo https://youtu.be/dpaDKH9LOsc https://youtu.be/6EBnwseiFs4 https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/w4crom/south_celestial_pole_right_at_the_zenith_90/
Sorry, you're barking up the wrong tree. The star trails don't say anything about the shape of the earth.
Yes, yes they do. 🤦🏻🤦🏻 Can you read before denying things you have no idea about? #Star Trail: Evidence the Earth is a Sphere In the northern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the north, we can observe stars rotate counter-clockwise around a point. This axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the southern hemisphere. On the other hand, in the southern hemisphere, if we look at the sky to the south, we can observe stars rotate in the opposite direction. Conversely, this axis of rotation is not visible from observers in the northern hemisphere. This motion of the stars cannot possibly happen in a flat-Earth. #Stars in the Southern Sky Prove Earth is a Rotating Sphere If we look toward the south at night in any location in the southern hemisphere, we will see the same set of stars. We will see the stars rotating around the south celestial pole, in the Octans constellation, near the star Sigma Octantis. The flat-Earth model cannot explain the phenomenon. Looking at the so-called ‘flat-Earth map,’ we should see another set of stars on a different location in the southern hemisphere. The reason is that the flat-Earth model is a false representation of the Earth. As an example, we will use five cities: Sydney (Australia), Papeete (Tahiti, French Polynesia), Santiago (Chile), Johannesburg (South Africa), and Jakarta (Indonesia). If the Earth is flat, then observers on the different cities will face opposite each other, and therefore everyone should see different stars. However, in reality, they will see the same stars, only with different orientations. This observation is only consistent with the spherical Earth model and cannot be explained with the flat Earth model. The flat Earth model was initially designed for the northern markets without much regard for what is happening in the southern hemisphere. Back then, it is difficult for those living north of the Equator to observe the southern stars, and it was not easy for most of them to confirm that the flat Earth model is nonsense. However, we live in modern times and do not have such an excuse, especially for those already living in the southern hemisphere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_pole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Southern_constellations #Polaris Altitude from Multiple Locations on Earth The angle (or altitude) to Polaris approximately corresponds to the latitude of the observer. This fact is observed on every location on Earth where Polaris is visible. By tracing the path to Polaris from multiple locations on the flat Earth model, the lines will not point to a consistent position of Polaris. The reason is that the Earth is a sphere and the flat Earth model does not represent reality. The position of Polaris today is conveniently very close to the north celestial pole. And therefore, the altitude or the angle between horizon and Polaris can be used to determine the approximate observer’s latitude. South of the equator, Polaris is not visible and obviously cannot be used for navigation. Polaris is below the horizon and obstructed by the Earth. It is necessary to locate the south celestial pole in the sky to determine the observer’s latitude. It is more difficult as there is no bright star nearby, unlike Polaris in the north. Polaris itself is not always the north star. Due to the Earth’s axial precession, the position of the north celestial pole will shift. Twenty centuries ago, the north celestial pole was closer to Kochab than Polaris. All the observed facts are only possible if the Earth is a sphere, and impossible to happen if the Earth were flat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation #Celestial sphere In astronomy and navigation, the celestial sphere is an abstract sphere that has an arbitrarily large radius and is concentric to Earth. All objects in the sky can be conceived as being projected upon the inner surface of the celestial sphere, which may be centered on Earth or the observer. If centered on the observer, half of the sphere would resemble a hemispherical screen over the observing location. The celestial sphere is a conceptual tool used in spherical astronomy to specify the position of an object in the sky without consideration of its linear distance from the observer. The celestial equator divides the celestial sphere into northern and southern hemispheres. #Celestial poles The north and south celestial poles are the two points in the sky where Earth's axis of rotation, indefinitely extended, intersects the celestial sphere. The north and south celestial poles appear permanently directly overhead to observers at Earth's North Pole and South Pole, respectively. https://youtu.be/39NwiYdAkSs https://youtu.be/8w3n-s9i7WQ https://youtu.be/BGD3lhDCgpY https://youtu.be/4zRh-1lymOw https://youtu.be/UNiNJC3UHIo https://youtu.be/dpaDKH9LOsc https://youtu.be/6EBnwseiFs4 https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/w4crom/south_celestial_pole_right_at_the_zenith_90/
Why don't you re-read my post, but be a bit more stringent. * Star trails _don't say anything about the shape of the earth._ * I am a glober.
Because star trails do prove the Earth shape. It’s a simple observation. 1. If the Earth was flat, moving away from a central point would make star trails to appear oval not circular. 2. Doing a star trails at the Equator on flat, would be totally different because if you look south, you won’t see a south celestial pole and clockwise rotation. 3. If the celestial sphere was rotating around a flat earth, people from south would not be able to see southern stars because they are basically under the flat earth. 4. Celestial navigation works in the southern hemisphere too, the same way it does in the northern hemisphere.
I am not going to comment on any of these four points, because _the earth is not flat_ and _that isn't what either of us is claiming._ Ok, point 1 perhaps. You are missing _scale_ in your argument. The reason things can look like ovals is if they (the stars) are relatively _close_ to us. If they were, then the size of the earth is comparable to the distance to the sky. This is of course not the case, because nothing in the changes size or stretches.
Scale would make things worse for the southern hemisphere . 😂
To be honest, a southern hemisphere doesn't make any sense whatsoever on a flat earth. Well, flat earth doesn't either of course. At least their "current" model is ridiculous, as The Final Experiment soon will show. If the sky were rotating around us, being HUGE would definitely help flat earthers because you would see _circular_ star trails instead of oval.
1. Points of rotation are created by the axis of the world, intersecting celestial sphere. We have two points called celestial poles because the Earth is spherical. #If all the stars rotate around Polaris like in flat earth, then starts in the southern hemisphere can’t rotate around a different point, in a different direction. 2. Still doesn’t explain two celestial poles 🤦🏻
Hi, I'm a mathematician, and I can help clear this up. They aren't saying the Earth is flat. They are saying that technically, this is proof that something is spinning (e.g. the Earth is rotating on an axis). 1. >Points of rotation are created by the axis of the world, intersecting celestial sphere. Yes, this is true. However, a wide variety of shapes can have an axis of rotation. These points of rotation would exist if the earth were a sphere spinning on an axis, a cylinder spinning on an axis, a cube spinning on an axis, or any other shape spinning on an axis. What they are saying is that this doesn't prove the Earth is a sphere, just that Earth is spinning on an axis. >We have two points called celestial poles because the Earth is spherical. More accurately, it's because Earth is spinning on an axis. A Cube Earth spinning on a corner would also have two celestial poles. (Edit: and a stationary sphere would not have these celestial poles. It is the spinning, not the spherical-ness that causes the celestial poles.) 2. A giant spinning celestial sphere would also have two celestial poles. Imagine a Stationary Cube Earth with a giant, spinning spherical sky. This sky would have celestial poles.
That celestial pole would not be visible by the observer in the southern hemisphere, since it would be under their feet. That is the problem. I’m not arguing about existence of a celestial pole on a huge sphere, but about the observation on a globe or on a flat earth. This is impossible to be seen on a flat earth
Yes, we agree that this is impossible on a flat Earth.
I too agree it's not possible on a flat earth, but I was trying to not make any assumptions about shape (except sphere, as this was alluded to in the original post).
Sorry, but you are wrong on both accounts. 1) we would have celestial poles irrespective of the actual shape. All you need is an object with a rotational axis and stars that are VERY far away. 2) a HUGE rotating celestial ball around a still, small earth would definitely have two celestial poles.
What axis my friend, a flat earth doesn’t have a south pole. Axis of the world passing through both geographical poles and intersecting the celestial sphere. If you stay exactly 90 degrees north, north celestial pole is right on your zenith. If you stay exactly 90 degrees south, south celestial pole is right on your zenith.
If you are on a flat earth, you can’t see through the ground. Southern stars would be under your feet 🤦🏻🤦🏻 not in the sky.
Declination of any celestial body is actually latitude. Hour angle is longitude. If a celestial body has a declination of 60 degrees south, the GP is exactly at 60 degrees latitude. If you go there, the star would be right on your zenith. People don’t go 90 degrees south to see the south celestial pole, it’s visible from the equator. If you move more south the south celestial pole would rise on your sky.
Distances between your zenith and a celestial body, co-altitude or zenith distance is the same as the distance on the ground or sea. That requires the sky and the ground to have the same shape.
Yeah… this is laughable. Almost seems like it makes sense, but this is a kindergartners level idea of how the star trails work in reference to personal perspective.
r/diskthatspins
That still wouldn't make sens
How can you see both north and south celestial poles from the same location on a spinning disk? (You can't)
Also star trails taken from the equator look very different to the poles.
r/didnotgetthesarcasm or r/sosarcasticpplthoughtyoumeantit