Polaris

New here. Watched an 8 hour documentary yesterday.  Interesting. But I have a question. If the earth is flat why do folks in the southern hemisphere not see the North Star?

Cheers.

New here. Watched an 8 hour documentary yesterday.  Interesting. But I have a question. If the earth is flat why do folks in the southern hemisphere not see the North Star?

Cheers.

Documentary which?

In the bipolar model, the North Pole has never actually been discovered.


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/contents.htm

It is well known that the North and South Magnetic Poles do not coincide with the geographical poles, as they should were the Earth a solid sphere, convex at its poles. The reason why the magnetic and geographical poles don't coincide is because, while the magnetic pole lies along the rim of the polar opening.

In support of the above conception regarding the magnetic pole being situated in the rim of the polar opening, Palmer refers to the following facts: Between each magnetic pole around the Earth pass magnetic meridians. In contrast with geographical meridians, which measure longitude, the magnetic meridians move from east to west and back again. The difference between the geographical meridians, or true north and south, and the direction in which a magnetic compass points, or the magnetic meridian of the place, is called the declination. The first observation made was in London in 1580 and showed an easterly declination of 11 degrees. In 1815 the declination reached 24. 3 degrees westerly maximum. This makes a difference of 35. 3 degrees change in 235 years, which is equal to 2,118 miles. Now if we make a circle around the Pole, with a radius of 1,059 miles, so that it is 2,118 miles in diameter, this would represent the rim of the polar opening along which, in this case, the North Magnetic Pole traveled from one point to its diametrically opposite point on the circle, 2,118 miles away, in 235 years.

According to Marshall Gardner, the rim of the polar opening, which is the true magnetic pole, is a large circle 1,400 miles in diameter.

No one has ever discovered either the North or the South Pole:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter5.htm


No one has managed to travel inside this large circle which measures some 1,400 miles in diameter.

The orbits of most the northern circumpolar stars are inside this large right cylinder.

No one has ever visited this area to actually verify that the Polaris will be observed at an exact 90 degree angle overhead.

This is how the northern star trails looks like from Alaska:






While seen from the equator they look like this:




That's about as far as the optical devices in use today will take you.

 

It is well known that the North and South Magnetic Poles do not coincide with the geographical poles, as they should were the Earth a solid sphere, convex at its poles.

No, it shouldn't.
And that has nothing at all to do with what was asked.

That's about as far as the optical devices in use today will take you.

Why?
What magic stops us seeing them from further away?
What magic causes Polaris to appear so close to the horizon, and that if we continue to project its apparent location vs the latitude of the observer, it goes below the horizon in the south pole?

New here. Watched an 8 hour documentary yesterday.  Interesting. But I have a question. If the earth is flat why do folks in the southern hemisphere not see the North Star?

Cheers.

To anyone who believes in science and math, this is proof that the earth is not flat, but rather a globe.  But I'm sure there are very complex and arcane reasons provided by flat earth believers.  I glanced at the one in this thread, and it makes very little sense to me.  It starts with a contradiction that the magnetic poles can be anywhere other than at the rotation poles on a globe earth, but fails to try to explain this.  I've never heard of any reason why this would be and why would anyone care in this context? 

Then he starts talking about the "polar opening"...  what is that?

I actually came here to read about what the flat earthers believe is the real model of how a flat earth would operate.  So far, I've not found that.  Mostly the posts are about individual details that have more to do with disproving a globe earth. 

That's about as far as the optical devices in use today will take you.

What's the elevation of Polaris in that shot?  Also, how is there a southern celestial pole in the opposite direction, and is always south?

In the bipolar model, the North Pole has never actually been discovered.


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/contents.htm

"The first verified expedition to the North Pole was conducted by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen in 1926."

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/north-pole/

You seem to be alone in thinking no one has ever reached the North Pole.

It is well known that the North and South Magnetic Poles do not coincide with the geographical poles, as they should were the Earth a solid sphere, convex at its poles. The reason why the magnetic and geographical poles don't coincide is because, while the magnetic pole lies along the rim of the polar opening.

Go on.  I'm waiting to hear the rest of this dog and pony show.  Why would the magnetic poles have to be at the rotational poles in a globe earth?

Perhaps you can explain why Uranus has magnetic poles 60 degrees askew from the rotational poles?

In support of the above conception regarding the magnetic pole being situated in the rim of the polar opening,

Can you explain what you mean by "polar opening"?  This is new to me.

Oh, with enough searching, I finally found some stuff talking about the earth being hollow (the globe earth) and having massive openings at the two poles.  I don't get how this connects to the earth being flat.  But, whatever.

Palmer refers to the following facts: Between each magnetic pole around the Earth pass magnetic meridians. In contrast with geographical meridians, which measure longitude, the magnetic meridians move from east to west and back again. The difference between the geographical meridians, or true north and south, and the direction in which a magnetic compass points, or the magnetic meridian of the place, is called the declination. The first observation made was in London in 1580 and showed an easterly declination of 11 degrees. In 1815 the declination reached 24. 3 degrees westerly maximum. This makes a difference of 35. 3 degrees change in 235 years, which is equal to 2,118 miles. Now if we make a circle around the Pole, with a radius of 1,059 miles, so that it is 2,118 miles in diameter, this would represent the rim of the polar opening along which, in this case, the North Magnetic Pole traveled from one point to its diametrically opposite point on the circle, 2,118 miles away, in 235 years.

According to Marshall Gardner, the rim of the polar opening, which is the true magnetic pole, is a large circle 1,400 miles in diameter.

No one has ever discovered either the North or the South Pole:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter5.htm

Well, that's wrong.  It completely ignores the actions of several other explorers.  See my info above.

No one has managed to travel inside this large circle which measures some 1,400 miles in diameter.

You mean other than the several explorers who have reached the North Pole? 

The orbits of most the northern circumpolar stars are inside this large right cylinder.

No one has ever visited this area to actually verify that the Polaris will be observed at an exact 90 degree angle overhead.

Good thing then, that it is not required to travel to the North Pole to verify that!

This is how the northern star trails looks like from Alaska:






While seen from the equator they look like this:




That's about as far as the optical devices in use today will take you.

Not sure what your point is about these pics.