Constellations?

Just a question for FE believers: if the Earth is flat, then why do we only see certain constellations at certain times during the year? If the Earth were flat, wouldn't every constellation in the sky be visible year round? Just wondering...

The stars are moving Northward and Southward over the course of the year, just like the sun.

Since when does a compass work in space to determine direction? northward and southward... FAIL
What makes them move northward and southward?

The stars are moving Northward and Southward over the course of the year, just like the sun.

How do you know that?

What makes them move northward and southward?

The mechanism is unknown.

How do you know that?

It's what is observed.

Quote

How do you know that?

It's what is observed.

How do you know it's not an "optical illusion?"

Quote

What makes them move northward and southward?

The mechanism is unknown.

Quote

How do you know that?

It's what is observed.

I put a pen in a glass of water.
The pen appears to bend.
Has the pen actually bent? No, it's an illusion. Any evidence that doesn't rely on the highly unreliable source that are the human senses?

I put a pen in a glass of water.
The pen appears to bend.
Has the pen actually bent? No, it's an illusion. Any evidence that doesn't rely on the highly unreliable source that are the human senses?

"It's an illusion" is neither evidence or an explanation.

The stars are moving Northward and Southward over the course of the year, just like the sun.

So where's the Southern Cross, Tom?

So where's the Southern Cross, Tom?

Southward, obviously.

Quote from: Rjinswand on June 11, 2009, 10:28:00 PM

So where's the Southern Cross, Tom?

Southward, obviously.

Who's Southward?

For example, On the FE map, Southward for New Zealand is not the same as Southward for Australia. Yet both our countries see that set of stars toward the south (we even have it on both our maps, because it's such a familiar symbol)

Quote

What makes them move northward and southward?

The mechanism is unknown.

Quote

How do you know that?

It's what is observed.

Again with FE not being able to explain things, so just stating it is "unknown" God damn that pisses me off. Sure there are RE things that arent explained about the universe mainly, but they are not fundamentals like this. And also at least scientists are attempting to explain them.
If you cant provide a mechanism as to how north and south can exist in space then your argument is flawed and not valid. North and south exists on earth because of magnetic poles etc etc but this cannot exist in space

Who's Southward?

Whoever is seeing it.

Again with FE not being able to explain things, so just stating it is "unknown" God damn that pisses me off. Sure there are RE things that arent explained about the universe mainly, but they are not fundamentals like this. And also at least scientists are attempting to explain them.
If you cant provide a mechanism as to how north and south can exist in space then your argument is flawed and not valid. North and south exists on earth because of magnetic poles etc etc but this cannot exist in space

Northward is towards the North Pole and Southward is towards the Antarcitc Rim.

Yes and how can that possibly work in space?

Yes and how can that possibly work in space?

Why can't something move towards or away from the North Pole in space?  

Quote from: frostee on June 12, 2009, 01:05:32 AM

Yes and how can that possibly work in space?

Why can't something move towards or away from the North Pole in space? 

Well, because you are talking about stars which are thousands of light years away, somehow I dont think they would be affected at all by the magnetic poles of earth. When talking about galactic distances you cant talk about them relative to the North Pole. Thats dumb.
Incase you havent realised we dont use North and South to navigate in space.
IMO magnetic poles of earth cannot affect anything outside the earth

Well, because you are talking about stars which are thousands of light years away, somehow I dont think they would be affected at all by the magnetic poles of earth.

In the Flat Earth model the stars and planets are all within a few thousand miles of the surface of the earth.

Oh but of course.
What did ever happen to the rest of the universe then? Which reminds me, just a question to ask, what universe model does FE believe? Because this can actually be of contention in RE too. Is it constantly expanding or what?

Oh but of course.
What did ever happen to the rest of the universe then? Which reminds me, just a question to ask, what universe model does FE believe? Because this can actually be of contention in RE too. Is it constantly expanding or what?

The entire universe is accelerating, growing outwards like an expanding balloon with the coin earth on the surface. Everything we see above us is accelerating out and away from itself. This observation is known as the accelerating universe.

Quote from: mazty88 on June 11, 2009, 01:10:36 PM

I put a pen in a glass of water.
The pen appears to bend.
Has the pen actually bent? No, it's an illusion. Any evidence that doesn't rely on the highly unreliable source that are the human senses?

"It's an illusion" is neither evidence or an explanation.

Quote

How do you know that?

It's what is observed.

Thanks for disproving your own point. An observation could easily be an illusion, as what is observed is based on the human senses, which are flawed. Meaning you observation is neither evidence or an explanation, as you need facts, not  what is merely observed.

Does Polaris move as well? Y'see the north star shifts according to the seasons, yet its position relative to all other stars is unchanged.

Of course Polaris moves. It's not even centered in the middle of the North Celestial Pole. Over the course of a night it makes a little circle around it.

Thanks for disproving your own point. An observation could easily be an illusion, as what is observed is based on the human senses, which are flawed. Meaning you observation is neither evidence or an explanation, as you need facts, not  what is merely observed.

You need evidence that what we're seeing is an illusion.

An assumption isn't evidence.

Quote

Thanks for disproving your own point. An observation could easily be an illusion, as what is observed is based on the human senses, which are flawed. Meaning you observation is neither evidence or an explanation, as you need facts, not  what is merely observed.

You need evidence that what we're seeing is an illusion.

An assumption isn't evidence.

...and it's not an assumption, nor is it evidence.  Saying that it "could easily be an illusion" is not assuming anything, it's just stating that "you cannot be sure there aren't other factors involved, for good reasons".

Quote

Thanks for disproving your own point. An observation could easily be an illusion, as what is observed is based on the human senses, which are flawed. Meaning you observation is neither evidence or an explanation, as you need facts, not  what is merely observed.

You need evidence that what we're seeing is an illusion.

An assumption isn't evidence.

Then why do you assume that looking out your window is evidence for a FE?

You need evidence that what we're seeing is an illusion.

An assumption isn't evidence.

Its not an assumption. If there is a possibility that what you're seeing is an illusion, then there's no reason to believe that what you're seeing is real.

An assumption you say?
Similar to looking out your window and assuming the earth is flat?
Or assuming aspects of FE which are stated as unknown

The stars are moving Northward and Southward over the course of the year, just like the sun.

See that's just an optical allusion, though they are constantly moving just like we are and the Sun is, that is actually the Earth rotating on its axis that causes it to appear to be moving.

...and it's not an assumption, nor is it evidence.  Saying that it "could easily be an illusion" is not assuming anything, it's just stating that "you cannot be sure there aren't other factors involved, for good reasons".

The phase "it could be an optical illusion" is not science. There could also be "invisible fairies" in my computer monitor, but saying it does not make or imply that it is so. Phrases like "you're experiencing a massive illusion" with no further evidence is pure pseudoscience and reflects the absurdity of the Round Earth model.

Then why do you assume that looking out your window is evidence for a FE?

I don't assume that I'm experiencing a "massive optical illusion" when I look out my window. You do. More pseudoscience.

Its not an assumption. If there is a possibility that what you're seeing is an illusion, then there's no reason to believe that what you're seeing is real.

There's also a possibility that "god did it" and that "ghosts exist". Possibilities are not evidence. By telling us that "an illusion did it" with no further evidence you are committing a crime against reason. "An illusion did it" is neither evidence or an explanation. It cannot be considered as a serious possibility unless there is actual evidence which demonstrates it to be true.

This is why FET is a solid science and why RET is a bunk science. FET has us proceeding only by inquiry, experiencing and testing for our own selves. RET has us imagining "illusions" everywhere we look.

Quote

Then why do you assume that looking out your window is evidence for a FE?

I don't assume that I'm experiencing a "massive optical illusion" when I look out my window. You do. More pseudoscience.

Looking out my window does nothing at all to contradict RET.

Looking out my window does nothing at all to contradict RET.

Right, because of your "illusion" which you have yet to demonstrate evidence for. It's all one illusion after the next with you guys.

Well, I don't need an illusion to see that the earth exists as a plane when I look out my window.

Quote from: markjo on June 13, 2009, 10:24:54 PM

Looking out my window does nothing at all to contradict RET.

Right, because of your "illusion" which you have yet to demonstrate evidence for. It's all one illusion after the next with you guys.

Well, I don't need an illusion to see that the earth exists as a plane when I look out my window.

When did I say that you saw an illusion.?  When I look out my window, I see a hill.  How does RET claim that it's an illusion?