The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: mattc867 on February 05, 2008, 07:24:13 PM

Title: South Celestial Pole
Post by: mattc867 on February 05, 2008, 07:24:13 PM
How could you observe both a north and a south celestial pole from a flat surface?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 07:47:53 PM
According to this websites wack theory that the earth is flat it states the south pole does not exist
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Dead Kangaroo on February 05, 2008, 07:58:43 PM
According to this websites wack theory that the earth is flat it states the south pole does not exist
Incorrect, the south pole is infact the outermost known edge, with the north pole residing in the center.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 07:59:42 PM
According to this websites wack theory that the earth is flat it states the south pole does not exist
Incorrect, the south pole is infact the outermost known edge, with the north pole residing in the center.

Oh ya I forgot it's the giant ice wall ooooh!
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: mattc867 on February 05, 2008, 08:03:22 PM
Right, but im not talking about a geographic south pole on the earth.  Im talking about celestial poles, or the points above the earths axis of rotation.  If you watch the north star at night, you will notice that the other stars appear to move around it.  Here's a pic http://www.astronomy.org/programs/seasons/pictures/08shi-ncp-1988-sm.jpg. 

There is also an observable south celestial pole, although no star lies on it.  It is near the constellation Crux, which can be seen from the southern hemisphere.  Here's a pic of that one http://www.assa.org.au/gallery/miller/scptrail.jpg

How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 05, 2008, 08:19:05 PM
Quote
How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?

There are multiple swirling stellar systems which sit over the Flat Earth. The Flat Earth Society has found that there is one over the North Pole, one over Australia, and another over South America. Each stellar system is unique in its composition and density.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 08:31:02 PM
Quote
How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?

There are multiple swirling stellar systems which sit over the Flat Earth. The Flat Earth Society has found that there is one over the North Pole, One over Australia, and another over South America. Each stellar system is unique in its composition and density.

So ur Tom Bishop the famous guy who can make things go faster than the speed of light show me how
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 05, 2008, 08:31:53 PM
Quote
How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?

There are multiple swirling stellar systems which sit over the Flat Earth. The Flat Earth Society has found that there is one over the North Pole, One over Australia, and another over South America. Each stellar system is unique in its composition and density.

So ur Tom Bishop the famous guy who can make things go faster than the speed of light show me how

What?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 08:33:03 PM
Quote
How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?

There are multiple swirling stellar systems which sit over the Flat Earth. The Flat Earth Society has found that there is one over the North Pole, One over Australia, and another over South America. Each stellar system is unique in its composition and density.

So ur Tom Bishop the famous guy who can make things go faster than the speed of light show me how

What?

NVM I think ppl have been making fun of u on thee web recently they said something about going faster than light with the sinking ship experiment
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: TheEngineer on February 05, 2008, 08:33:53 PM
According to this websites wack theory that the earth is flat it states the south pole does not exist
Really?  Where does it state that?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 08:34:50 PM
According to this websites wack theory that the earth is flat it states the south pole does not exist
Really?  Where does it state that?

Um I'm not quite sure but give me a few secs and I'll find it
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: einstien on February 05, 2008, 08:38:03 PM
Ya srry I can't find it maybe I was just imagining things
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 06, 2008, 05:31:27 AM
Quote
How could you observe both of these points from a flat surface?

There are multiple swirling stellar systems which sit over the Flat Earth. The Flat Earth Society has found that there is one over the North Pole, one over Australia, and another over South America. Each stellar system is unique in its composition and density.
Oh Tom, no gravitational Gears? Oh, and why is there only one south celestial pole, instead of multiple which would fit with this description.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 06, 2008, 09:24:22 AM
Quote
Oh Tom, no gravitational Gears? Oh, and why is there only one south celestial pole, instead of multiple which would fit with this description.

People think that there is only one South Celestial Pole because the majority of our Star Charts for the Southern Hemisphere originate from Australia.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Loard Z on February 06, 2008, 09:27:11 AM
false - most of the data comes from antarctic research stations. Do they exist?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: James on February 06, 2008, 10:32:02 AM
false - most of the data comes from antarctic research stations. Do they exist?

"Antartic research stations" is basically a synonym for "Conspiracy's military bases".
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Loard Z on February 06, 2008, 10:34:12 AM
My best friend from University is studying for his phd in Antarctica. He even has an online blog that I'll link you to if you wish. Is he a member of the conspiracy? He stays in a research station.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 06, 2008, 11:22:25 AM
My best friend from University is studying for his phd in Antarctica. He even has an online blog that I'll link you to if you wish. Is he a member of the conspiracy? He stays in a research station.
Yes. I know him, I broke his will.

Quote
Oh Tom, no gravitational Gears? Oh, and why is there only one south celestial pole, instead of multiple which would fit with this description.

People think that there is only one South Celestial Pole because the majority of our Star Charts for the Southern Hemisphere originate from Australia.
Rubbish. Even if they were, since the whole universe revolves around the Earth, even Australian observers would note a very strange movement which would not suggest one celestial pole.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: jdoe on February 07, 2008, 05:40:39 PM
Quote
Oh Tom, no gravitational Gears? Oh, and why is there only one south celestial pole, instead of multiple which would fit with this description.

People think that there is only one South Celestial Pole because the majority of our Star Charts for the Southern Hemisphere originate from Australia.

There are plenty of astronomers working in the southern hemisphere from Chile to Australia.  I think they would notice if there were multiple celestial poles and their star maps were wrong.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 07, 2008, 06:26:46 PM
Quote
There are plenty of astronomers working in the southern hemisphere from Chile to Australia.  I think they would notice if there were multiple celestial poles and their star maps were wrong.

The Flat Earth Society has found that when you compare starmaps from Chile and starmaps from Australia, the constellations are different.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: jdoe on February 07, 2008, 06:32:25 PM
Quote
There are plenty of astronomers working in the southern hemisphere from Chile to Australia.  I think they would notice if there were multiple celestial poles and their star maps were wrong.

The Flat Earth Society has found that when you compare starmaps from Chile and starmaps from Australia, the constellations are different.

Sources please.

And I simply find it hard to believe that of all RE astronomers working in the southern hemisphere using RE charts, none of them would have noticed any discrepancies.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: mattc867 on February 07, 2008, 11:01:27 PM
He will either tell you that he doesn't have to justify himself to you, or tell you to go read "earth not a globe".

He certainly will not ever post a source for that because he doesn't have one...because no such charts exist.

I don't see how his argument about swirling star clusters makes sense anyway.  Consider the star Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, (there are many stars that would make my point but i'll just pick one).  Sirius is visible from the northern hemisphere during the winter and can be observed moving around the north star.  Sirius is also visible from the southern hemisphere during the fall and can be observed moving around the south celestial pole. 

Tom claims not only two, but three swirling star formations; which begs the question:  How could the same star (sirius in my example) be observed at roughly the same time to be moving in two (or apparently three) different swirling star formations?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 08, 2008, 09:51:47 AM
Quote
Sources please.

Theoretical Astronomy Examined and Exposed (http://www.biblio.com/details.php?dcx=106220855&aid=frg) by Augustus De Morgan

Quote
And I simply find it hard to believe that of all RE astronomers working in the southern hemisphere using RE charts, none of them would have noticed any discrepancies.

How would you know whether they've noticed any differences? Do you know any astronomers in the South American jungles you could call up and ask?

Quote
I don't see how his argument about swirling star clusters makes sense anyway.  Consider the star Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, (there are many stars that would make my point but i'll just pick one).  Sirius is visible from the northern hemisphere during the winter and can be observed moving around the north star.  Sirius is also visible from the southern hemisphere during the fall and can be observed moving around the south celestial pole.

That doesn't make sense. How can a star move around and North Celestial Pole and the South Celestial Pole at the same time?

Quote
How could the same star (sirius in my example) be observed at roughly the same time to be moving in two (or apparently three) different swirling star formations?

It doesn't.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 08, 2008, 11:45:34 AM
Quote
And I simply find it hard to believe that of all RE astronomers working in the southern hemisphere using RE charts, none of them would have noticed any discrepancies.

How would you know whether they've noticed any differences? Do you know any astronomers in the South American jungles you could call up and ask?
Do you?

Sirius could be seen to go around both celestial poles in RE. As long as it can be seen in both the north and the south. In the southern hemisphere, every star appears to go around the south celestial pole.

Just quote a book. There is no evidence on that link. Just a book, a book that could be sheer gibberish.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: John Davis on February 08, 2008, 04:07:26 PM
He cited a source.  Its not his responsibility to procure it for everyone.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: jdoe on February 08, 2008, 04:41:53 PM
Quote
How would you know whether they've noticed any differences? Do you know any astronomers in the South American jungles you could call up and ask?

Do you think the entire southern hemisphere is some sort of unpeopled wasteland?  There are advanced observatories all over the southern hemisphere.  I know many of my astrophysics professors who have worked in the southern hemisphere, one especially in Chile.  If there were massive deviations from RE predictions as you claim, they would be the ones to know about it.  It is their job to know the movements of the heavens to extremely high precision.  Do you claim that they are ignorant of these deviations or hiding them?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 08, 2008, 05:55:49 PM
Quote
It is their job to know the movements of the heavens to extremely high precision.  Do you claim that they are ignorant of these deviations or hiding them?

No. They're not ignorant of the observations.They are are not hiding them either. Astronomers on the three continents of the Southern Hemisphere simply see completely different stars unique to their location.

What fist hand accounts do you have for us demonstrating that astronomers form South America and Australia see the same stars?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: fshy94 on February 08, 2008, 07:19:42 PM
He cited a source.  Its not his responsibility to procure it for everyone.

Well, it is his responsibility to quote it. For example:

Unicorns exist. You want a source?

http://www.amazon.com/Principia-Shoulders-Giants-Isaac-Newton/dp/0762420227/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202527160&sr=8-2

Get where I'm going? ;D
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: John Davis on February 08, 2008, 09:01:25 PM
I agree it would be a courtesy.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 09, 2008, 02:01:36 AM
Quote
It is their job to know the movements of the heavens to extremely high precision.  Do you claim that they are ignorant of these deviations or hiding them?

No. They're not ignorant of the observations.They are are not hiding them either. Astronomers on the three continents of the Southern Hemisphere simply see completely different stars unique to their location.

What fist hand accounts do you have for us demonstrating that astronomers form South America and Australia see the same stars?
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2008, 01:04:06 PM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Moon squirter on February 09, 2008, 01:22:35 PM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?

A can't help thinking the Southern Hemisphere has a bit of a bad deal in FE theory.  In the north, everything in neatly explained in terms of the pole-centered rotating heavens.  In the south they have to put up with patchy star systems which rotate here and there (and everywhere).

Tom, why don't you take a star map and visit these places?

BTW you're the best troll in the business (I think?!?)
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 09, 2008, 01:22:43 PM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?
Oh of course. Just like how we can't collaborate with the French, Italian or Spanish, or the Chinese or Japanese.
FAIL (http://www.youfail.org)
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: jdoe on February 09, 2008, 02:07:26 PM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?

What century are you from Tom?  English is the language of science nowadays.  Astronomers publish their discoveries in scientific journals and talk at conventions.  Plain and simple, scientists always share their results.  I assure you that the discovery of separate star systems across the southern hemisphere would be the greatest discovery in their field; they would definitely share it.  My original point still applies.  Are you telling me that all astronomers who have ever worked in the southern hemisphere are ignorant of these multiple star systems or hiding them?  You must have an explanation.

In addition, I would like to point out the existence of software that gives the exact location of the stars and planets for any time and any location in the world.  I own one called Starry Night.  You simply type in your longitude, latitude and time, and the a map of all stars and planets with their names labeled appears on screen.  I've tried, and I assure you that the same stars appear no matter where in the southern hemisphere you are.  Both professional and amateur astronomers use software like this.  They would undoubtedly notice if this software was not giving them the correct stars in the sky.  After all it is a commercial product, and no one wants to buy a product that doesn't work.  What is your explanation for this?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on February 09, 2008, 02:10:05 PM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?

A can't help thinking the Southern Hemisphere has a bit of a bad deal in FE theory.  In the north, everything in neatly explained in terms of the pole-centered rotating heavens.  In the south they have to put up with patchy star systems which rotate here and there (and everywhere).

Tom, why don't you take a star map and visit these places?

BTW you're the best troll in the business (I think?!?)
I tend to agree. The southern Hemisphere in FET is a bit of an anomaly.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: 3 Tesla on October 02, 2008, 07:43:04 AM
Quote
There are plenty of astronomers working in the southern hemisphere from Chile to Australia.  I think they would notice if there were multiple celestial poles and their star maps were wrong.

The Flat Earth Society has found that when you compare starmaps from Chile and starmaps from Australia, the constellations are different.

I have friends who live in Chile and Australia.

If Tom would like to give me copies of these star maps my friends can corroborate the claim that "the constellations are different".

This would provide independent evidence to support the "multiple, counter-rotating Southern Hemidisc star systems" thoery.

Which would be of great benefit to Flat Earth science, no doubt!

So Tom: are you game/up for this little experiment?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: trig on October 02, 2008, 09:25:18 AM
Quote
There are plenty of astronomers working in the southern hemisphere from Chile to Australia.  I think they would notice if there were multiple celestial poles and their star maps were wrong.

The Flat Earth Society has found that when you compare starmaps from Chile and starmaps from Australia, the constellations are different.

I have friends who live in Chile and Australia.

If Tom would like to give me copies of these star maps my friends can corroborate the claim that "the constellations are different".

This would provide independent evidence to support the "multiple, counter-rotating Southern Hemidisc star systems" thoery.

Which would be of great benefit to Flat Earth science, no doubt!

So Tom: are you game/up for this little experiment?

Please sign me up for this experiment. Since I live 4.5 degrees North of the Equator, I can see the whole sky, except for the stars with declination between -90 and -84. This means I can see every constellation except Octans.

And Tom Bishop can also help himself, with his two computer-guided telescopes. Without moving from his place of residence, somewhere in California if I remember correctly, he can see the whole sky except for declinations from -90 to -56 degrees. That is most of the Southern sky, more than enough to see if stars appear to move as if they are placed in a giant sphere, centered on Earth, or not.

There is no place on Earth that can only see constellations that Tom Bishop cannot see. If he shows us the stellar charts he has, we can compare them with the "official" charts and with direct observations made from different parts of the world.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Galileo the Great on October 23, 2008, 10:09:00 AM
I might bump this.  Obviously Tom must have forgotten about this topic.  Best remind him, because why wouldn't he want to prove an experiment in the name of FE?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 25, 2008, 07:24:52 PM
I might bump this.  Obviously Tom must have forgotten about this topic.  Best remind him, because why wouldn't he want to prove an experiment in the name of FE?

I don't live in the Southern Hemisphere to participate in such an experiment. But even if such an experiment were performed and the observers looked southward and saw the same stars it would prove nothing about the shape of the earth since there are some maps of the FE where Australia and Argentina are pointing in the same direction.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=544.0
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Rastafarth on October 26, 2008, 02:39:15 AM
I might bump this.  Obviously Tom must have forgotten about this topic.  Best remind him, because why wouldn't he want to prove an experiment in the name of FE?

I don't live in the Southern Hemisphere to participate in such an experiment. But even if such an experiment were performed and the observers looked southward and saw the same stars it would prove nothing about the shape of the earth since there are some maps of the FE where Australia and Argentina are pointing in the same direction.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=544.0

This map doesn't correspond to your theory well, because it doesn't have north pole in centre.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Conspiracy Mastermind on October 26, 2008, 11:53:37 AM
I might bump this.  Obviously Tom must have forgotten about this topic.  Best remind him, because why wouldn't he want to prove an experiment in the name of FE?

I don't live in the Southern Hemisphere to participate in such an experiment. But even if such an experiment were performed and the observers looked southward and saw the same stars it would prove nothing about the shape of the earth since there are some maps of the FE where Australia and Argentina are pointing in the same direction.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=544.0
It's funny how this hasn't got out since the invention of the interweb, you would have thought someone would say "woah, those stars are completely different!" but no, because unlike some people, we do our jobs.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: jargo on November 14, 2008, 09:26:57 AM
I might bump this.  Obviously Tom must have forgotten about this topic.  Best remind him, because why wouldn't he want to prove an experiment in the name of FE?

I don't live in the Southern Hemisphere to participate in such an experiment. But even if such an experiment were performed and the observers looked southward and saw the same stars it would prove nothing about the shape of the earth since there are some maps of the FE where Australia and Argentina are pointing in the same direction.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=544.0

So do you think that map is correct instead of the normal round earth map with the antartic icewall. They both can not be correct at the same time.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: 2pwhitbreadg on February 05, 2009, 03:44:31 AM
i have been over the south pole in a plane and the earth looked pretty round to me.

explain please?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: grogberries on February 08, 2009, 12:08:23 AM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?

Tom, please say you didn't say this! Please!
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: svenanders on February 08, 2009, 04:33:13 AM
HE DID! :D
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: JoshuaZ on February 11, 2009, 02:20:49 PM
HE DID! :D

Yeah, that comment was so ridiculous I joined the forum just to note it. This is aside from the fact that many PhD programs require the people in them to be able to converse in at least one other language that their discipline occurs in. For example, I'm a math PhD student now and I'm going to need to be able to learn probably either German, Russian, or Chinese.

Incidentally, when I was an undergrad I had an astronomy prof who traveled pretty much all over the world. I guess he was part of the conspiracy?
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: Edtharan on February 12, 2009, 05:10:41 AM
Quote
So astronomers in the southern hemisphere are all hermits and don't talk to each other. Else they would have realised their star maps don't match.

The astronomers from South America, Africa, and Australia all speak different languages. How could they collaborate?
Hmm, some people speak more than one language.  ::)

Yet another Tomism.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: grogberries on February 12, 2009, 11:38:47 PM
I think it's one of those witty thing Tom does. He is using a dialectic argument. He is like a wise Socrates.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: trig on February 13, 2009, 05:19:23 AM
I think it's one of those witty thing Tom does. He is using a dialectic argument. He is like a wise Socrates.
Please do not compare Socrates with Tom Bishop. Socrates helped create a whole new approach to knowledge, while Tom Bishop only tries to sound cute.

Would you ever imagine Socrates, for example, citing articles he did not read further than the first paragraph or two? Or purposively ignore and obfuscate the information he did not like?

Socrates was all about letting the exploration lead you closer to the truth. Tom Bishop is about choosing the truth first and force the exploration into that direction with a hammer.
Title: Re: South Celestial Pole
Post by: grogberries on February 13, 2009, 04:05:11 PM
Nonsense! Tom is a lover of wisdom. He shares love and knowledge within every word he writes.