A circumpolar star is a star that never sets because it is near a poll, (this is relative, as you get closer to the equator more stars never set).
Here is an animation that shows how circumpolar stars work in RET http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion2/animations/ce_hc.html (http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion2/animations/ce_hc.html) (turn all the checkboxs on)
In FET you woudn't get stars that never set in the south poll, how come you do?
On a related note, how can star maps like this, http://www.astroviewer.com/index.php (http://www.astroviewer.com/index.php) , work when they "wrongly assume" that the earth is round.
poll
pəʊl/
noun
noun: poll; plural noun: polls; plural noun: the polls
1.
the process of voting in an election.
"the country went to the polls on March 10"
synonyms: vote, ballot, show of hands, straw vote/poll, referendum, plebiscite, election
"the electoral rules provided for a second-round poll"
In FET you woudn't get stars that never set in the south pole, how come you do?
So you were unable to know which one Imentmeant from context, maybe you need to use your brain more.
But back on topic,
The second app I linked can predict where the stars will be in advance, how does it still work if the earth is flat.
But by main question is thisQuoteIn FET you woudn't get stars that never set in the south pole, how come you do?
You are out because you can't explain it, don't try lying, your bad at it.
Also it's funny that someone who says that following the rest of society is bad, complains that I don't follow the spelling that said society created. You appear to be indoctinated to have to spell correctly.
Can anyone answer how you get stars that never set in the southen hemisphere.
BumpI hope you have more luck this time. I got virtually accused of being subversive for pushing the obvious answer in a similar thread.
Is this celestial sphere's axis parallel with the surface of Earth? How would a celestial sphere result in polar stars being seen at angles ranging from the horizon to directly overhead if Earth is flat? Also, if the axis is parallel with the surface, one would go to the north pole and see polaris to the south, and around the southern rim looking south the star rotation would be that as seen from the equator with only one spot looking toward the southern polar stars, which will again be on the horizon instead of overhead. Another point along the southern rim would be looking south toward the north star.You are out because you can't explain it, don't try lying, your bad at it.
Also it's funny that someone who says that following the rest of society is bad, complains that I don't follow the spelling that said society created. You appear to be indoctinated to have to spell correctly.
Can anyone answer how you get stars that never set in the southen hemisphere.
I would have preferred a flat earther to do this, but they aren't around much all we seem to get is youtube bunnies.
Imagine you are standing on a fixed flat earth, and the earth is surrounded by a sphere, the celestial sphere containing the fixed stars is rotating on an axis which has the north pole at one end and the south pole at the other ( please don't ask me for a map ). That will satisfy the SCP observations without requiring the earth to be a globe. Then add extra celestial spheres for each of the planets and a few for comets. What do you get... you get the Ptolemaic system. which is of course geometrically equivalent to the Copernican system.
You'd still have to explain why you can't see the SCP from north of the equator, but given they can't explain sunsets, I'd not be too fussed,
The FE has no south pole?
Also I still don't get how a star can never set in the south. The most southern stars would travel around the edge of disk disk, so over the night the star will go from one side of the disk to the other side, wouldn't the stars get further that the northern star over the night.
Also if the earth is flat and the stars are in a rotating sphere, why is the celestial equator at a different angle to the ground depending on your location.
I have a thread offering a cash prize to anyone who can answer this.
I have a thread offering a cash prize to anyone who can answer this.You never said anything was wrong with my entry on page five, so I won ;D
I have a thread offering a cash prize to anyone who can answer this.
The earth is a globe, how do I collect my money?
I have a thread offering a cash prize to anyone who can answer this.You never said anything was wrong with my entry on page five, so I won ;D
So the only response from a FEer is a spelling correction. wowWell maybe not a FEer?
3. I am not a flat earther. Just because I'm on this site does not mean I am. Or if it does, then you must be one as well.What then? Don't ask me, I just remembered an earlier quote!
It turns out that I found a wizard, and asked him to demonstrate magic, and he couldn't. Sorry. ;)
It turns out that I found a wizard, and asked him to demonstrate magic, and he couldn't. Sorry. ;)
But how did you confirm they were in fact a wizard? :o If they can't demonstrate magic, they don't sound like much of a wizard to me.
The magic theory remains the only working FE answer for circumpolar stars. Well, that and JRowe, but hey, no one cares about him.
That explains how a star can be south of two people on opposite sides of the planet how?
Though I am not an expert in this field, I would humbly draw your attention to refraction, reflection and all other kinds of optical distortions and atmospheric effects, alone or combined. RET widely uses this explanation, in combination with innuendoes on individual or collective hallucination and/or impaired vision, if necessary. I'm surprised I have to remind you that.Though I too am not an expert in this field, I would humbly draw your attention to the fact that the "Miracle_of_the_Sun" was an extraordinary event, it would hardly have made the news otherwise.
For example, this is how Wikipedia explains the famous Miracle of the Sun:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun
Though I am not an expert in this field, I would humbly draw your attention to refraction, reflection and all other kinds of optical distortions and atmospheric effects, alone or combined. RET widely uses this explanation, in combination with innuendoes on individual or collective hallucination and/or impaired vision, if necessary. I'm surprised I have to remind you that.Though I too am not an expert in this field, I would humbly draw your attention to the fact that the "Miracle_of_the_Sun" was an extraordinary event, it would hardly have made the news otherwise.
For example, this is how Wikipedia explains the famous Miracle of the Sun:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun
Of course there are mirages of various sorts but again they are unusual events. You could also look up the "Fata Morgana".
Also a small amount of refraction for objects (sun or moon) near the horizon (not often over 0.5°) is not that uncommon, but not the massive amount that might explain the "southern circumpolar stars". Even given massive refraction, I still cannot see any possible mechanism!
On the other hand the "circumpolar stars" in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.
Being inspired by such RET creativity, we might, for example, humbly hypothesize that using modern laser projectors, governments of Earth can draw any constellations in the sky and imitate "ISS", "spaceships", "comets", "asteroids"... whatever they please. Or show us some movie. Why not? Use your fantasy, be RE-creative.
"are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough."
You meant latitude, didn't you?
;D
Projecting an image seems to need something to project it on. What do you suggest for that?
Also these southern constellations are visible from Australia, South Africa and South America, and commonly from two of these at the same time. From all of these locations the South Celestial Pole is exactly due south from ALL of these locations!
The suggestion that this might be a projection is pure fantasy! Not the least because these southern constellations have been visible in exactly the way for centuries.
As for the ISS please explain how it appears right "on cue" all over the world. I am sorry we just don't have the imagination you have, but you really need for your flat earth!
And NO, I really did mean exactly what I said "These constellations are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.". That is from Australia, South Africa and South America, though I should have said "whenever night the sky is clear enough"
Once you understand it, believe me, the rotating globe needs a lot less magic than any flat earth model I have seen.Maybe you explain you flat earth model and map, we might learn something!
Being inspired by such RET creativity, we might, for example, humbly hypothesize that using modern laser projectors, governments of Earth can draw any constellations in the sky and imitate "ISS", "spaceships", "comets", "asteroids"... whatever they please. Or show us some movie. Why not? Use your fantasy, be RE-creative.
"are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough."
You meant latitude, didn't you?
;D
Projecting an image seems to need something to project it on. What do you suggest for that?
Also these southern constellations are visible from Australia, South Africa and South America, and commonly from two of these at the same time. From all of these locations the South Celestial Pole is exactly due south from ALL of these locations!
The suggestion that this might be a projection is pure fantasy! Not the least because these southern constellations have been visible in exactly the way for centuries.
As for the ISS please explain how it appears right "on cue" all over the world. I am sorry we just don't have the imagination you have, but you really need for your flat earth!
And NO, I really did mean exactly what I said "These constellations are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.". That is from Australia, South Africa and South America, though I should have said "whenever night the sky is clear enough"
Once you understand it, believe me, the rotating globe needs a lot less magic than any flat earth model I have seen.Maybe you explain you flat earth model and map, we might learn something!
Dear Rabinoz,
If I am not mistaken, your question was, how and why we can see certain stars in the sky. I am just trying to help you, providing useful (I hope) hints. I do not want to exert any intellectual or propaganda pressure on you, for it could hamper and distort your mental development. I mean, if you are really interested in finding a suitable answer to your question, let your brain itself find it in the most natural and least painful way. I am not going to do any harm to you. Just relax and let the truth gradually penetrate your mind.
Please note that the very fact you are here and speaking to me - means you do doubt your current perception of your life and the Universe. You do feel there's something wrong, you are trying to find a solution to your problems, and that is why you are posting here. There is no reason to deny that. There is nothing shameful in that. We all learn.
Projecting an image seems to need something to project it on. What do you suggest for that?
and
The suggestion that this might be a projection is pure fantasy!
Look. First, you in fact admitted the possibility of that and even started to think how it might be done. Then, your internal RE-censor interfered and closed your mind. Relax and try to keep your mind open. Dig yourself in that direction and in the literature you'll find curious descriptions of some peculiar experiments, in which the government agencies were producing fumes, vapours etc. in the upper atmospheric layers, many years ago. How do you think, why they were doing that? Do you think they've stopped doing that? Do you think they're telling the public everything they are doing? Why, for example, noctilucent clouds were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century?
"From all of these locations the South Celestial Pole is exactly due south from ALL of these locations!"
May I ask you, how do you know that? Have you been there, in ALL those locations, personally, at the same time?
"these southern constellations have been visible in exactly the way for centuries."
How do you know that? Why you're so sure the data could not be falsified? Did you observe the stars yourself, for centuries?
"As for the ISS please explain how it appears right "on cue" all over the world."
For instance, 'cause they are drawing it in the sky, that's how, - using one projector, then switching to another, all over the world. Do you think it's impossible?
And NO, I really did mean exactly what I said "These constellations are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.". That is from Australia, South Africa and South America, though I should have said "whenever night the sky is clear enough"
;D
Then they can not be seen from any longitude.
"the rotating globe needs a lot less magic than any flat earth model I have seen."
Yeah, yeah. Sure. Just one more example of the umost absurdity of that rotating globe, filled with molten dense magma. Let's admit for a brief moment, that RE is right, that globe is rotating and has two tidal bulbs on each side, about 1 meter high or so, as they teach us. The bulbs, filled with hot dense magma at immense pressure, covered with Earth crust made of the solid rock layer 10 to 50 km thick, are, therefore, moving under the surface of the globe with the speed of approximately 500 m/s (at the equator). Interesting, isn't it? You could calculate the volume and mass of those things yourself. Just a few questions:
How that dense magma can travel under the crust at 500 m/s? Otherwise, those tidal bulbs won't be moving.
Why the Earth crust is not cracking and we do not see cheerful fountains of pressurised magma (500 m/s!) at the equator, twice a day?
Why that magnificent process does not influence the acting volcanoes?
Dear Rabinoz,I have never seen a less humble, nor sanctimonious "scientist" than Humble_Scientist. I imagine you did the course on "Humility and how I achieved it!" - I think it was at Pale Hernigy College - something like that, bit hard to remember. I think you must have failed to read the book "How to win friends and Influence People", at least I know that was by Dale Carnegie - obviously I haven't read it!
If I am not mistaken, your question was, how and why we can see certain stars in the sky. I am just trying to help you, providing useful (I hope) hints. I do not want to exert any intellectual or propaganda pressure on you, for it could hamper and distort your mental development. I mean, if you are really interested in finding a suitable answer to your question, let your brain itself find it in the most natural and least painful way. I am not going to do any harm to you. Just relax and let the truth gradually penetrate your mind.
Please note that the very fact you are here and speaking to me - means you do doubt your current perception of your life and the Universe. You do feel there's something wrong, you are trying to find a solution to your problems, and that is why you are posting here. There is no reason to deny that. There is nothing shameful in that. We all learn.The real psychoanalyst aren't we! And, no that I am certainly not looking for a "solution to my problems". I am trying to get some answers from you about the OP of this thread!
Projecting an image seems to need something to project it on. What do you suggest for that?You read far too much into a few words. I guess that is to be expected from an obviously conspiracy fearing mind, always afraid this organisation or that is out to get you.
and
The suggestion that this might be a projection is pure fantasy!
Look. First, you in fact admitted the possibility of that and even started to think how it might be done. Then, your internal RE-censor interfered and closed your mind. Relax and try to keep your mind open.
Dig yourself in that direction and in the literature you'll find curious descriptions of some peculiar experiments, in which the government agencies were producing fumes, vapours etc. in the upper atmospheric layers, many years ago. How do you think, why they were doing that? Do you think they've stopped doing that? Do you think they're telling the public everything they are doing? Why, for example, noctilucent clouds were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century?As I said a conspiracy here, a conspiracy there, conspiracies, conspiracies everywhere! You claim that "for example, noctilucent clouds were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century?". Well, firstly a bit of evidence that "noctilucent clouds " even exist and secondly how do you know that "were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century", I suppose you were old enough to observe them first hand before 1900!
"From all of these locations the South Celestial Pole is exactly due south from ALL of these locations!"No, I have not been there, but neither have you! I have read reports from observers in both places, and I have seen video of stars rotating about the South Celestial Pole from both Sydney Australia and from Chile.
May I ask you, how do you know that? Have you been there, in ALL those locations, personally, at the same time?
"these southern constellations have been visible in exactly the way for centuries."No, I am not going to claim that I was there! And yes, there are reports from explorers going back centuries. Falsified? Why? Oh, sorry, it must have been another conspiracy to hide you precious Pepperoni Pizza Planet!
How do you know that? Why you're so sure the data could not be falsified? Did you observe the stars yourself, for centuries?
"As for the ISS please explain how it appears right "on cue" all over the world."And are you really suggesting that as possibility? Just how many millions of these projectors must there be around the earth.
For instance, 'cause they are drawing it in the sky, that's how, - using one projector, then switching to another, all over the world. Do you think it's impossible?
And NO, I really did mean exactly what I said "These constellations are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.". That is from Australia, South Africa and South America, though I should have said "whenever night the sky is clear enough"I gave those countries because that is where most observers are! But, how do you infer from "Then they can not be seen from any longitude." from that. No, you can't see the stars on a cloudy night, and no you cannot see the stars in daytime ::)(well occasionally Venus is visible near sunset or sunrise - but that "little light in the sky" is a planet, not a star! ::) ).
Then they can not be seen from any longitude.
"the rotating globe needs a lot less magic than any flat earth model I have seen."
Yeah, yeah. Sure. Just one more example of the umost absurdity of that rotating globe, filled with molten dense magma. Let's admit for a brief moment, that RE is right, that globe is rotating and has two tidal bulbs on each side, about 1 meter high or so, as they teach us. The bulbs, filled with hot dense magma at immense pressure, covered with Earth crust made of the solid rock layer 10 to 50 km thick, are, therefore, moving under the surface of the globe with the speed of approximately 500 m/s (at the equator). Interesting, isn't it? You could calculate the volume and mass of those things yourself. Just a few questions:
How that dense magma can travel under the crust at 500 m/s? Otherwise, those tidal bulbs won't be moving.
Why the Earth crust is not cracking and we do not see cheerful fountains of pressurised magma (500 m/s!) at the equator, twice a day?
Why that magnificent process does not influence the acting volcanoes?
Im talking about the FE map, you can't have a star being south of Africa, South America and Australia at the same time, if I am wrong show me a FE map where a star can be south of every point.That explains how a star can be south of two people on opposite sides of the planet how?
From RET, my impression is that explains anything and everything. A truly powerful argument, indeed.
;D
Im talking about the FE map
Dear Rabinoz,I have never seen a less humble, nor sanctimonious "scientist" than Humble_Scientist. I imagine you did the course on "Humility and how I achieved it!" - I think it was at Pale Hernigy College - something like that, bit hard to remember. I think you must have failed to read the book "How to win friends and Influence People", at least I know that was by Dale Carnegie - obviously I haven't read it!
If I am not mistaken, your question was, how and why we can see certain stars in the sky. I am just trying to help you, providing useful (I hope) hints. I do not want to exert any intellectual or propaganda pressure on you, for it could hamper and distort your mental development. I mean, if you are really interested in finding a suitable answer to your question, let your brain itself find it in the most natural and least painful way. I am not going to do any harm to you. Just relax and let the truth gradually penetrate your mind.
And, no I don't need any assistance from you to find these answers.Quote from: Humble_ScientistPlease note that the very fact you are here and speaking to me - means you do doubt your current perception of your life and the Universe. You do feel there's something wrong, you are trying to find a solution to your problems, and that is why you are posting here. There is no reason to deny that. There is nothing shameful in that. We all learn.The real psychoanalyst aren't we! And, no that I am certainly not looking for a "solution to my problems". I am trying to get some answers from you about the OP of this thread!Quote from: Humble_ScientistProjecting an image seems to need something to project it on. What do you suggest for that?You read far too much into a few words. I guess that is to be expected from an obviously conspiracy fearing mind, always afraid this organisation or that is out to get you.
and
The suggestion that this might be a projection is pure fantasy!
Look. First, you in fact admitted the possibility of that and even started to think how it might be done. Then, your internal RE-censor interfered and closed your mind. Relax and try to keep your mind open.
Sorry, I was just assuming that you would see this whole idea of a "projection is pure fantasy!" was purely fantasy!Quote from: Humble_ScientistDig yourself in that direction and in the literature you'll find curious descriptions of some peculiar experiments, in which the government agencies were producing fumes, vapours etc. in the upper atmospheric layers, many years ago. How do you think, why they were doing that? Do you think they've stopped doing that? Do you think they're telling the public everything they are doing? Why, for example, noctilucent clouds were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century?As I said a conspiracy here, a conspiracy there, conspiracies, conspiracies everywhere! You claim that "for example, noctilucent clouds were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century?". Well, firstly a bit of evidence that "noctilucent clouds " even exist and secondly how do you know that "were so seldom, if ever, noticed before the 20th century", I suppose you were old enough to observe them first hand before 1900!Quote from: Humble_Scientist"From all of these locations the South Celestial Pole is exactly due south from ALL of these locations!"No, I have not been there, but neither have you! I have read reports from observers in both places, and I have seen video of stars rotating about the South Celestial Pole from both Sydney Australia and from Chile.
May I ask you, how do you know that? Have you been there, in ALL those locations, personally, at the same time?Quote from: Humble_Scientist"these southern constellations have been visible in exactly the way for centuries."No, I am not going to claim that I was there! And yes, there are reports from explorers going back centuries. Falsified? Why? Oh, sorry, it must have been another conspiracy to hide you precious Pepperoni Pizza Planet!
How do you know that? Why you're so sure the data could not be falsified? Did you observe the stars yourself, for centuries?Quote from: Humble_Scientist"As for the ISS please explain how it appears right "on cue" all over the world."And are you really suggesting that as possibility? Just how many millions of these projectors must there be around the earth.
For instance, 'cause they are drawing it in the sky, that's how, - using one projector, then switching to another, all over the world. Do you think it's impossible?Quote from: Humble_ScientistAnd NO, I really did mean exactly what I said "These constellations are seen any time from any longitude whenever the sky is clear enough.". That is from Australia, South Africa and South America, though I should have said "whenever night the sky is clear enough"I gave those countries because that is where most observers are! But, how do you infer from "Then they can not be seen from any longitude." from that. No, you can't see the stars on a cloudy night, and no you cannot see the stars in daytime ::)(well occasionally Venus is visible near sunset or sunrise - but that "little light in the sky" is a planet, not a star! ::) ).
Then they can not be seen from any longitude.Quote from: Humble_Scientist"the rotating globe needs a lot less magic than any flat earth model I have seen."
Yeah, yeah. Sure. Just one more example of the umost absurdity of that rotating globe, filled with molten dense magma. Let's admit for a brief moment, that RE is right, that globe is rotating and has two tidal bulbs on each side, about 1 meter high or so, as they teach us. The bulbs, filled with hot dense magma at immense pressure, covered with Earth crust made of the solid rock layer 10 to 50 km thick, are, therefore, moving under the surface of the globe with the speed of approximately 500 m/s (at the equator). Interesting, isn't it? You could calculate the volume and mass of those things yourself. Just a few questions:
How that dense magma can travel under the crust at 500 m/s? Otherwise, those tidal bulbs won't be moving.
Why the Earth crust is not cracking and we do not see cheerful fountains of pressurised magma (500 m/s!) at the equator, twice a day?
Why that magnificent process does not influence the acting volcanoes?
I don't think I mentioned tides. It's not a simple topic - and there's no way I am going to try to cover it here, like 2 tides a day and they lag the overhead moon, etc!
Maybe the Humble_Scientist can give some logical explanation.
Just remember that the Heliocentric Globe Model took around 2,000 years to "come to fruition", and many details much longer than that.
You will find that the real humble scientists will concede that there are still many details being determined - weather systems and under the oceans to name just a couple.
BTW if you do chance to reply:
- Leave the psychoanalysis gobbledygook out.
- Leave the conspiracy gobbledygook out.
- Present some evidence you have for what you claim.
- If you are going to criticise aspects of the globe model, get an understanding of if first.
- Possibly present just what your alternative to the Heliocentric Globe might be, with shape of your earth, paths of sun, moon, planets and stars
- It would be good to have a map for this, because mariners for over 600 years have been navigating the globe and the maps they produced fitted on a globe - that's why many ancient mariners actually took a large globe with them - gave them a better understanding of where they were on the earth's surface!
Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.
Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.
A bit of geometry tells us we can not see a piece of paper just above water 6 km away on a round Earth. Yet that was reported.
You are also perfectly welcome to enjoy the view of Toronto 50 km away that I recorded myself. It's in my Youtube collection. Or make your own footage. Toronto is still there, as far as I know.
;D
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
What makes you think you can see stars from all three of those locations at the same time?
Maybe not the southernmost points, but a part of each continent can be dark at the same time. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
What makes you think you can see stars from all three of those locations at the same time?
Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
What makes you think you can see stars from all three of those locations at the same time?
Geometry. I'm still waiting for H_S to show his "bit of geometry" that tells us why this is not possible. Remember, that's what his claim is.
Seeing stars in daylight is obviously more difficult than seeing them at night, but still possible with a telescope if its mount is accurately aligned and calibrated and the star is bright; I suspect this is probably where you're going with this. Alpha Centauri or Canopus would be easier than Acrux because they're much brighter.
Maybe not the southernmost points, but a part of each continent can be dark at the same time. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Exactly, if the earth was flat you wouldn't see the same star from all three points, yet you do, you can see the southern cross from all of them.Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
What makes you think you can see stars from all three of those locations at the same time?
The southern cross will be south of all three continents.
Why? You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
I gave a link to a daylight map a few posts ago, http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Why? You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
But they can't all see it at the same time. Are you even reading the thread?
Well, there you go!I gave a link to a daylight map a few posts ago, http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Why? You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
But they can't all see it at the same time. Are you even reading the thread?
A small part of Australia and South America are at night at the same time as Africa.
Is it dark in all three of these locations at the same time?Apparently it can be. Good find, Empirical!
Perhaps you can see stars during the day with your magical gravity telescope?Yes. It's optics, not magic, though.
So, I suppose the whole premise of this argument was BS then?
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.That part appears to be, unless H_S can provide something more than an empty claim. I'm still waiting for that "bit of geometry ;D". I'm anticipating a long wait.
;D
I gave a link to a daylight map a few posts ago, http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Why? You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
But they can't all see it at the same time. Are you even reading the thread?
A small part of Australia and South America are at night at the same time as Africa.
Read the thread.I gave a link to a daylight map a few posts ago, http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Why? You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
But they can't all see it at the same time. Are you even reading the thread?
A small part of Australia and South America are at night at the same time as Africa.
But you said the southern most part, which is not at night in your picture. Perhaps you simply change things around to suite your needs? ::)
You still have three points in the southern hemisphere that have a star south if all of them. Which is impossible.
Can you show me a map where it is possible.
That part appears to be, unless H_S can provide something more than an empty claim.
That part appears to be, unless H_S can provide something more than an empty claim.
Well, the simplest explanation of what you & Empirical have written so far is the following:
If you can simultaneously be in South America, Africa and Australia and observe the stars -
you are smoking a really good stuff!
;D
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
I don't smoke either and that particular post may not have been addressed to me but here goes:That part appears to be, unless H_S can provide something more than an empty claim.Well, the simplest explanation of what you & Empirical have written so far is the following: On January 18 Empirical posted: The question the thread asks might to be clear, I give a simpler example.Then Maybe not the southernmost points, but a part of each continent can be dark at the same time. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?iso=20160620T2134)Well Empirical was quite right, though I was looking for the South Celestial Pole. It turns out than on the Southern Winter Solstice (Empirical had 20/June/2016) at 10:00 UTC
In all 3 cases I have added a white cross to show the location of the South Celestial Pole. The green circle marker shows the location of Octans, the closest constellation to the South Celestial Pole. The Southern Cross (Cruz) can readily be seen from Cape Town almost SW and at a slightly elevation than the South Celestial Pole. From Perth the Southern Cross is almost on the horizon and due south. From Urshuaia its elevation is too high to show on this chart. At most times of the year while we could often see the South Celestial Pole from two of these locations, one at least would have too much daylight to see it from all three. I am fully aware that these are computer generated star charts, but if these are not correct then I am sure we would have found out years ago. Astronomers have been studying the stars for millenia and I don't really think they could be fooled that easily! BTW ;D By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time. ;DWe are still waiting on this bit of geometry. | Fremantle (Australia), 21/June at 06:00 or 20/June/2016) at 10:00 UTC (http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/South%20from%20Fremantle%20Australia%20at%2021060620%2022.00%20UTC_zps53pfzoqc.jpg)South from Fremantle (Australia) at 21060620 22.00 UTC (http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/South%20from%20Capetown%20South%20Africa%20at%2021060620%2022.00%20UTC_zpsspfxyzvj.jpg)South from Capetown (South Africa) at 21060620 22.00 UTC (http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/South%20from%20Urshuaia%20Argentina%20at%2021060620%2022.00%20UTC_zpsu8emfyzl.jpg)South from Urshuaia (Argentina) at 21060620 22.00 UTC |
Quote from: jroaBut you said the southern most part, which is not at night in your picture. Perhaps you simply change things around to suite your needs? ::)Read the thread.
Any one where a triangle drawn from the southernmost point of Africa, South America and Australia will contain the north pole. A bit of geometry tells you that this would make it impossible for a star to be south of all three points.
Your either a troll or a retard. My bets on troll, you don't actually think the earth is flat, so when someone brings up a point that disproves it, you star derailing the thread. There is nothing that important about the southern most points of a continent, it's just that "a triangle drawn from all three points will contain the north pole", I was using them because they fulfilled the condition, the new points I am using still fulfill it, plus they can all be dark at the same time.
Does this statement not apply to the three points I started using (the three ones from the daylight map which are all at night at the same time) after you wouldn't accept stars during the day.
BTW;D By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time. ;DWe are still waiting on this bit of geometry.
BTW;D By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time. ;DWe are still waiting on this bit of geometry.
It is very simple, dear rabinoz. These locations are on different continents at the opposite sides of the globe (in RET terms). It is impossible you can be simultaneously in all three places.
It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously.
And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.
Prove I'm wrong. Go there, to all three places simultaneously, and bring back your pictures and videos.
;D
The north pole bit is a geometry thing, on a flat earth an object can be south of all of a set points, if you can draw a straight line through the north pole which has all the points on one side. If the triangle created by three points has the north pole inside of it, you won't be able to draw a line through the north pole that had all three points on one side.Your either a troll or a retard. My bets on troll, you don't actually think the earth is flat, so when someone brings up a point that disproves it, you star derailing the thread. There is nothing that important about the southern most points of a continent, it's just that "a triangle drawn from all three points will contain the north pole", I was using them because they fulfilled the condition, the new points I am using still fulfill it, plus they can all be dark at the same time.
Does this statement not apply to the three points I started using (the three ones from the daylight map which are all at night at the same time) after you wouldn't accept stars during the day.
You got me confused now, didn't you mean SOUTH pole, why bring the NORTH pole into it?
The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.BTW;D By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time. ;DWe are still waiting on this bit of geometry.
It is very simple, dear rabinoz. These locations are on different continents at the opposite sides of the globe (in RET terms). It is impossible you can be simultaneously in all three places. It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously. And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.
Prove I'm wrong. Go there, to all three places simultaneously, and bring back your pictures and videos.
;D
The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.
Stop shouting, I can read!The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.
you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
At the same time?
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.Oh, stop the funny faces (yes I copy yours a bit) and fancy colours - we can read without being shouted at - it makes you seem so childish
Now you got me confused. What do you mean by that?
And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?
The question of who "discovered" Crux, the Southern Cross, is complex. The Southern Cross would have been familiar to the Ancient humans who lived in Africa, before they expanded out of Africa and in to the rest of the World. Some modern South African groups see the Southern Cross as part of a group of giraffes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Australia, where the Southern Cross takes pride of place in the sky. The Karuna people of the Adelaide Pains, where I live now, saw the Southern Cross as the footprint of the Wedge Tailed Eagle, Wilto. The Boorong Peoples of the Western Victorian Plains, where my spouses family live, see the Southern Cross as a ring tailed possum. Other indigenous groups see it as part of a larger constellation of an eagle, or as a stingray.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Humans had colonised South America, where the cross is also prominent, the descendants of the Incas see the Southern Cross as part of a constellation the represents a Llama. Up until 3000 years ago, the Southern Cross could be seen low in the sky from Ancient Greece. It formed part of the constellation of the Centaur.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .It was first sighted by Europeans when Portuguese and Spanish explorers entered the Southern seas. Amerigo Vespucci mapped the stars of the constellation during his expedition to South America in 1501, depicting Crux as an almond! It then appeared as "Crux" on star charts from Petrus Plancius and Jodocus Hondius in 1598 and 1600.
Stop shouting, I can read!The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.
you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
At the same time?Yes at the SAME time!Quote from: Humble_ScientistAlso the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.Oh, stop the funny faces (yes I copy yours a bit) and fancy colours - we can read without being shouted at - it makes you seem so childish
Now you got me confused. What do you mean by that?
And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?
So, you don't accept that the Southern Cross (Cruz) can be seen from all southern continents, yet you probably expect us to believe that Polaris is visible from all norther continents - sounds a bit suss to me!
I am afraid that the Southern Cross has been know for longer than you and I have been around! Just take a look in http://astroblogger.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/who-discovered-southern-cross.html (http://astroblogger.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/who-discovered-southern-cross.html) where you will findQuote from: Who discovered the Southern Cross?The question of who "discovered" Crux, the Southern Cross, is complex. The Southern Cross would have been familiar to the Ancient humans who lived in Africa, before they expanded out of Africa and in to the rest of the World. Some modern South African groups see the Southern Cross as part of a group of giraffes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Australia, where the Southern Cross takes pride of place in the sky. The Karuna people of the Adelaide Pains, where I live now, saw the Southern Cross as the footprint of the Wedge Tailed Eagle, Wilto. The Boorong Peoples of the Western Victorian Plains, where my spouses family live, see the Southern Cross as a ring tailed possum. Other indigenous groups see it as part of a larger constellation of an eagle, or as a stingray.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Humans had colonised South America, where the cross is also prominent, the descendants of the Incas see the Southern Cross as part of a constellation the represents a Llama. Up until 3000 years ago, the Southern Cross could be seen low in the sky from Ancient Greece. It formed part of the constellation of the Centaur.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .It was first sighted by Europeans when Portuguese and Spanish explorers entered the Southern seas. Amerigo Vespucci mapped the stars of the constellation during his expedition to South America in 1501, depicting Crux as an almond! It then appeared as "Crux" on star charts from Petrus Plancius and Jodocus Hondius in 1598 and 1600.
So you ask "And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?"Yes, we have evidence that at least the Southern Cross has been observed from Australia, South Africa and South America for thousands of years.The ignorance of residents of the many northern hemisphere countries of the southern hemishere constantly amazes me!I live here, I do know a bit about it. And no I personally have not seen the Southern Cross from South Africa and South America, but I am quite prepared to believe the copious evidence available.Really, it's about time you changed your name. You have proved over and over that you are neither Humble nor a Scientist.True scientists would look a available evidence, and then base their belief on that. Your approach seems to be "The earth looks flat, so it must be, then you try to force all other evidence to fit! It doesn't work!
True scientists would look a available evidence, and then base their belief on that.
All right, this time I shall not draw a funny face, if it makes you feel better. Though this would be such a perfect occasion for that...No, I'm careful to take all my meds (thers's only one actually).
If my posts for any reason make you so uncomfortable, just stop reading them, what's the problem. I definitely do not want you to get a stroke. C'mon, man, relax... We are here for friendly chat, fun & pleasure - and seeking the truth, of course.
;)
maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.
maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.
Dear rabinoz,
I've seen too many cases when the opposite is true. And, by the way, I've already told I uploaded to Youtube my view of Toronto, enjoy it. Decide yourself if it is a reliable evidence.
As a brief offtopic, just one of such cases, closer to my field. I've already mention the book (a great book, I think), written by a Canadian scientist (a great scientist, I think). The book is here, I placed it, so the others could benefit from it:
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/172/ (http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/172/)
It says that many, if not most of diseases (including cancer, diabetes, HIV, autism, Alzheimer, infertility etc.) can be cured by using herbs (the formula is given) and/or an electronic apparatus (the circuit and assembly instructions are also provided). All the instructions are given. The author wrote her book as a gift to mankind, in 1993, - 23 years ago. She wrote that before writing the book, she personally cured 100 (one hundred) cases of cancer in about 2 years (so, she was saving one man every two weeks or so), just to be sure she's right. Of course, all the, so to speak, official science are pouring dirt on her name (Hulda Clark), calling her a quack and so on, you may check it yourself, just google, look in Wikipedia etc. So that's about the "evidences" and who knows... how about the conspiracy?
::)
Naturally, I was intrigued, assembled the device, played a bit with it to enhance the efficiency etc. Basically, it works as described. I did not have a chance to treat cancer (fortunately, because those who do that end up in jail), but I saw myself how the blood sugar level in a case of officially diagnosed diabetes went back to normal in just 2 hours, from about 11 to 5.3.
Naturally, I was telling people about that interesting story, that she's right, it's working, folks could be healthy and happy and do not have to pay a fortune for that etc. So, recently I was approached by a man from a distant country whose kid (5 years old) was seriously sick for the last 2 years, the physicians could not do much and he was, well, desperate about that. The guy asked me if I could make the device for him but, as appeared, did not have much money. So, I just assembled the main part of the apparatus, he got it and recreated the machine in his country. You know what, the kid became completely healthy on the day 4 after they started to use the device...
And I'm so happy about that.
8)
If that sounds interesting, I briefly summarized some of my findings in those still imperfect, but, hopefully, readable essays:
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/192/ (http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/192/)
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/193/ (http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/193/)
Enjoy.
8)
Of course, if the moderator thinks it's too an offtopic, feel free to delete.
Wow so you're a faith healer with a prop. ::) happy days!
maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.Dear rabinoz,
I've seen too many cases when the opposite is true. And, by the way, I've already said I uploaded to Youtube my view of Toronto, enjoy it. Decide yourself if it is a reliable evidence.
So let's set up a 3 person team, or use cameras streaming live, or a person at each location with a camera streaming, whichever, so that a person can see the view from all 3 continents at the same time (excluding any communication lag of course), with clear skies, and let us now ask the question;
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
;D
That doesn't answer my question though. Yes or no, does the geometry (of a spherical Earth) show it to be possible?
If you do not mind, let us start with the expedition proposed by 29silhouette. There are already three of you, Empirical, 29silhouette and rabinoz, who already lives in Australia, if I'm not mistaken. Only Africa and South America are left. Go there, why not, and tell and show us what you see in the sky at the same moment of time, on all three continents. Wonderful, isn't it? Then we will gladly discuss your findings.
::)
[/size][/font]
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.At the risk of being diagnosed with "Obsessive Curiosity Disorder", please tell:
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.At the risk of being diagnosed with "Obsessive Curiosity Disorder", please tell:Just what is this "bit of geometry"?
It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously. And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.
Funny that no FEer can answer a simple question about the stars, it's probably because they have no model of the stars.Some have literally said "They are just little lights in the sky, I don't care about them" and "We are not meant to ask about them".
"We are no meant to ask about them" that's one of the rules in their shill handbook, yep the FES pays people to make it look like people believe their theory. ;DFunny that no FEer can answer a simple question about the stars, it's probably because they have no model of the stars.Some have literally said "They are just little lights in the sky, I don't care about them" and "We are not meant to ask about them".