The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: cooperedtot on August 03, 2016, 08:47:41 AM

Title: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: cooperedtot on August 03, 2016, 08:47:41 AM
There are 2 celestial poles. The North celestial pole has a bright star very close to the pole. It looks like this:
http://www.twanight.org/newTWAN/guests_photos/5001711.jpg
Notice Polaris making the tight arc just left of center. This is regularly seen by billions of people. You can easily confirm the veracity of this yourself. You can make such star trails images with your own camera - or simply make note of the positions of a few stars and then return some hours later and look again.

The South celestial pole looks very different. There is no bright star near the South celestial pole. It looks like this:
http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos/3003813.jpg
Many millions of people see this different view as their night sky too. It's totally different. I'm sure you can easily call up time lapse videos. You can also make your own observations. Take a trip to Australia or New Zealand or South America or South Africa. Lots of great things to see - include a personal view of a different night sky. Different constellations. Totally different sky. You can never see Northern Hemisphere constellations in the Southern sky and vice versa (although constellations along the ecliptic are visible in both hemispheres).

Now this all makes perfect sense in the spherical Earth model. The rotating ball has two axes pointing out 180 degrees away from each other. But the flat Earth model has a problem. The firmament has a single axis of rotation. How would you jigger two totally different apparent rotation axes for the night sky in a flat Earth view? You could imagine two apparent axes on either side of the disk - but their juncture would be weird - with a lot of stretch and rapid motion on the side away from the juncture seam and a lot of slow motion and apparent contraction of ecliptic constellations on the side where the two spinning sky features meet. None of that is ever seen in any part of the Earth's night sky.  I've personally been on the equator and watched the night sky.  It looks like the normal stately arc you see everywhere else.  This is an easy visual proof which invalidates the flat Earth model and proves the spherical Earth model.

If there is any flaw in this reasoning, please point it out.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: TheRealBillNye on August 03, 2016, 11:41:34 AM
Your reasoning is sound, my friend. Reason, however, has no place here. You are not the first to make this observation. FE supporters will either ignore the question or claim your images have been falsified by THE CONSPIRACY.

I have also heard somebody talk about Celestial Gears, but they failed to explain what they were or how they work.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: Brouwer on August 04, 2016, 12:02:52 PM
I have also heard somebody talk about Celestial Gears, but they failed to explain what they were or how they work.
I've also heard about those gears. Then I realized how stupid that idea was. There are suppose to be few gears, one with north hemisphere stars and few (like 3) with south stars. Then north one rotates and pushes others to rotate in opposite direction. That explains why stars rotate in different directions. All south gears are exact copies so everyone sees the same stars.

You can see how much nonsense that idea has.

But once you apply globe model, everything fits the reality so easily. Those who love Occam's razor (FE seem to like it) would be happy.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: neutrino on August 04, 2016, 04:11:18 PM
Just realize WTF I burn my time on this forum arguing with Flat Earthers instead of watching movie and drink beer...





BECAUSE IT'S SO F***ING AWESOME!!! :)
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 04, 2016, 04:13:15 PM
The Dual Earth model has long since answered this. It's amazing how no round earthers are honest enough to point this out. They've acknowledged it in separate discussions, but they'd never give an accurate depiction of Flat Earth Theory.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: neutrino on August 04, 2016, 04:19:41 PM
May I have a link to the explanation? I'm just curious...
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 04, 2016, 04:20:51 PM
Signature. My model is there for all to see, linked to in every post I make.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: TheRealBillNye on August 04, 2016, 04:45:43 PM
The mental gymnastics required to imagine a working model of Dual Earth theory are staggering.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 04, 2016, 04:50:48 PM
Assertion without substance. Why is that all round earthers are capable of?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: TheRealBillNye on August 04, 2016, 06:01:38 PM
Please keep DET shilling to your containment thread, where I just replied.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: rabinoz on August 04, 2016, 06:27:48 PM
The Dual Earth model has long since answered this. It's amazing how no round earthers are honest enough to point this out. They've acknowledged it in separate discussions, but they'd never give an accurate depiction of Flat Earth Theory.

"The Dual Earth model has long since answered this" and added its own plethora of problems and wild unsubstantiated assumptions.

Is it any wonder Globe supporters don't want to unnecessarily open another "can of worms"?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: Mikey T. on August 04, 2016, 06:34:55 PM
JRoweSkeptic!!!!  Hi buddy. 
No I am not going to belittle DET today. 

Everyone else,
Is there anything that gives any credence to the flat earth notion?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: rabinoz on August 04, 2016, 07:29:28 PM
Assertion without substance. Why is that all round earthers are capable of?

I thought "assertion without substance" was a prime requirement of one's acceptance of DET.

By definition, aether is defined to have any properties required of it to support DET.

If that "property of aether" is accepted then everything else falls into place.
If that "property of aether" is false then everything falls to pieces.

Yet, no aether with the properties you require has ever been proven[1], so is it any wonder that both Flat Earth and Globe supporters avoid it like the plague.

[1] Or even postulated by anyone but you - though, maybe Sandokhan's ideas are getting close.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 03:07:54 AM
Rabinoz, your refusal to learn the model has no impact on DET. Aether is well-defined and reasonable, and your insistence that it is somehow unjustified is plainly false as you remain unable to provide any evidence beyond a misrepresentation.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 03:52:15 PM
Or, maybe your theory doesn't make sense. I mean, look at this:

(http://i.imgur.com/udJzK5B.jpg)
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 03:54:23 PM
Wow, guess what? POSTING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT IS COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY FUCKING MISLEADING. WHO WOULD EVER HAVE GUESSED. GROW UP. THE MODEL WORKS. The fact you're too lazy to mount an informed or logical argument says it all.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 03:56:28 PM
Please explain WTF is going on in that picture then, or make a picture that makes sense.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
LEARN. THE. FUCKING. MODEL. I AM NOT GOING TO WASTE MY TIME REPEATING PAGES OF EXPLANATION TO A MISERABLE penguin TOO LAZY TO FUCKING READ. YOU KNOW WHERE THE EXPLANATION IS. READ IT OR FUCK OFF AND STOP SPEWING YOUR BULLSHIT.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 03:59:54 PM
Read it, doesn't make a lick of sense. Please explain it to me like I'm 5.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:02:41 PM
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?!

Just fuck off. You're wasting my time, everyone can see it. You lie about the contents of the model, you spew bullshit, you rip diagrams out of context, and now you are just blatantly wasting my time expecting me to take hours walking your ignorant little mind through a detailed model as though you'd pay any attention and as though you care at all, and you do nothing to justify your ridiculous demands beyond asserting "Oh, it doesn't make sense," without giving the slightest reason why this is the case, and so utterly preventing me from clarifying any aspect whatsoever.

So, no. You're wasting time, it's clear to literally everyone, go fuck yourself.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:04:23 PM
Can't fuck myself. Unlike your world, the real world doesn't have teleportation. Can't teleport my dick into my butt.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:05:15 PM
No teleportation involved fuckwit. Look, more lies. Why is that all you can do?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:06:41 PM
I didn't lie. I literally cannot teleport my dick into my butt.

Why do you think I lied?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:13:34 PM
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67601.msg1806613#msg1806613
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:19:05 PM
OH WAIT! Fucking yourself would actually prove your theory, since that would mean that teleportation was possible, which Round Earth can't explain!

Perfect experiment: fuck yourself.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:22:39 PM
Look at that. The round earther's a troll. Who'd have thought.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:23:44 PM
Well, at least it is better than your experiments that you conveniently cannot carry out.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:25:05 PM
Nothing stopping you carrying them out. And of course, as you're so keen to learn the model you could always spot potential experiments I've missed.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67601.msg1806613#msg1806613
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:31:57 PM
Other people have done your "gravity jump" experiment.

It doesn't work. It doesn't jump.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Erdgvarp.png/220px-Erdgvarp.png)
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: neutrino on August 05, 2016, 04:33:07 PM
But there is aether!!! Jumping in aether is different!!!
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:34:47 PM
No, they haven't. I've looked it up. If you look at how those experiments are done, they take discrete measures at various intervals, and construct a smooth line between them assuming smoothness. No one has actually tested to see if the change is indeed continuous. Most of those graphs just come from plotting the function given for gravity, with no care spent on whether it's accurate physically.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:40:05 PM
So why is yours better than RE?

RE explains everything I need to know.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:44:03 PM
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67601.msg1806613#msg1806613
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 04:47:28 PM
Ah. I see you've taken the PapaLegba approach of copy+paste your way into humiliation.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 05, 2016, 04:49:27 PM
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67601.msg1806613#msg1806613
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 05:19:12 PM
If you do it 100 more times, I think I'll finally get it.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: Aliveandkicking on August 05, 2016, 11:02:43 PM
Or, maybe your theory doesn't make sense. I mean, look at this:

(http://i.imgur.com/udJzK5B.jpg)

I was looking at that yesterday.   

A better drawing would help motivate the reader to explore what dual Earth theory was describing
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 05:37:07 AM
I can't improve my artistry skills that quickly just because it'd make things easier. If you want to find an illustrator who'd copy out those images more neatly, be my guest.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 08:09:33 AM
I don't care about neatness, but I do care about it being to scale.

Your dwawing clearly shows a gap between the two disks, yet you say that they are actually touching with the sun and moon squished inside the earth. And instantaneous travel 180 degrees without any knowledge. And the sun and moon somehow shine through the earth, and appear above.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 10:30:02 AM
It is physically impossible to draw to scale a model where space is a variable. The diagrams are to demonstrate the layout and path of aether, not to standalone independent of the explanation.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 11:35:12 AM
So it is impossible to replicate it. Shouldn't that be a warning bell to you? It can't happen in this universe.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 11:37:06 AM
No, it just means it's not a 2-D environment, moron.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 11:38:15 AM
Build a 3-D model then and take a picture of it. I can produce a 3d model of the earth (a basketball).
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 11:41:04 AM
No, because it would not provide any help to people trying to understand the model. I am not going to waste time just because you want everything to bow to your whims.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 11:44:21 AM
Why wouldn't a 3-D model help anybody visualize your model?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: TheRealBillNye on August 06, 2016, 11:46:07 AM
Please keep DET shilling in the containment thread. JRowe please stop derailing threads with your hogwash.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 12:46:23 PM
Just go fuck yourself OSG, you know you're just wasting time. There is a diagram. use your brain. a 3-D model is going to be little more than an hourglass with the same conventions and lines using in the 2-D diagram. just look at yourself. You're too lazy to even attempt my challenge of actually saying why the model's unclear or what's wrong with it, despite repeatedly claiming it, and yet you want me to build quite a substantial thing for no actual purpose.

I will respond when people address me. Common sense. But no, you'd never criticize the round earther who's causing this, would you?
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 12:50:52 PM
As I've said before, in the real world, there is no "aether" to allow my dick to teleport into my butt.

I literally cannot fuck myself.

If you can prove that it is actually possible to teleport someones dick into their butt, then that would be definitive proof of DET.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 12:51:49 PM
No, it'd be proof you have no ability whatsoever to honestly respond to DET, so due to cowardice you resort to clearly false statements.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 12:52:56 PM
If you think this is a false statement:
I literally cannot fuck myself.
Then prove it.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 12:54:25 PM
Witness: the REer responding with clear straw men, because he knows he has no honest arguments to make. You really have to wonder why REers resort so quickly to wasting time and trolling and misrepresenting if FET is as easily debunked, or RET as strong a model, as they claim.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 12:57:31 PM
You were the one that told me to fuck myself.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 06, 2016, 01:00:53 PM
Witness: the REer responding with clear straw men, because he knows he has no honest arguments to make. You really have to wonder why REers resort so quickly to wasting time and trolling and misrepresenting if FET is as easily debunked, or RET as strong a model, as they claim.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: origamiscienceguy on August 06, 2016, 01:12:09 PM
99 more times and I'll finally get it.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: TheRealBillNye on August 06, 2016, 10:48:49 PM
JRowe I have no idea why the mods allow you to derail every thread you come across with your DET harping. Keep it to your containment thread, please. While you're at it please address the very long post I painstakingly typed out, just for you to ignore it  :'(
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: Wowureallybelievethis? on August 07, 2016, 05:44:23 AM
Or, maybe your theory doesn't make sense. I mean, look at this:

(http://i.imgur.com/udJzK5B.jpg)

I was looking at that yesterday.   

A better drawing would help motivate the reader to explore what dual Earth theory was describing


Hahahaha, oh wow I can't believe this is a real "scientific document." I can't wait to show my friends, we all get a kick out of FE's.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: Brouwer on August 07, 2016, 08:32:43 AM
I've just noted one thing... In order to see one star in a specific location on the sky, it would have its own flow of aether transporting the light. But there are thousands of stars, so thousands of flows. Flows that don't interact one with another. That makes even less sense than my previous arguments.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: JRoweSkeptic on August 08, 2016, 07:02:08 AM
Billnye, I answer the questions proposed in the OP with a Flat Earth model. Why do you object to answers being provided?

Brouwer, i'm not sure what you're saying. The flow of aether isn't needed to transport light, aether is just space. So long as space exists, even if it isn't flowing, light would move through it.
Title: Re: Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.
Post by: 29silhouette on August 08, 2016, 09:06:54 AM
Ah. I see you've taken the PapaLegba approach of copy+paste your way into humiliation.
Meh... wait for Cikljamas to make a re-appearance.  The master of copy pasta of links to previous posts/threads of his own copy pastas to other copy pasta posts, and in the end he loses in every one (all while derailing his own threads in multiple directions at the same time)