software can be faked. and the fact you think regularity is to be expected from the chaos of round earth theories is laughable.
the stars circle around the outer edge of the earth. stars are more like spotlights, remember?
What chaos? The Copernican/Newtonian model of the Solar system is so regulated and predictable it led to the concept of the clockwork universe. It actually gave scientists a false sense of certainty about the universe, a certainty that wasn't shattered until the 20th century.
In what ways are stars like spotlights?
the fact it's that predictable when everything comes from wild spinning is the point.
Wild? A rather stately (and steady) one rotation in 24 hours is wild? You're trying to be funny, right?
you cannot pretend it is likely for the round earth model to work like clockwork.
No need to pretend. It's like a clock accurate to one part in tens of millions. Why do you think the Earth's rotation would be varying?
Stars are like spotlights because light only comes from one side. this is how the moon works.
In the case of the Moon, it's the side illuminated by the Sun.
if you're at the wrong part of the earth, you'll be looking at the 'side' of a star, and won't be able to see it any more than you can a new moon.
try and actually learn the flat earth perspective before you argue against it.
The flat earth perspective is very difficult to understand because so many things don't work. This is another example. Are you suggesting that stars get brighter and dimmer as they traverse the sky because their phase changes like the Moon's does through the month? Do you have any evidence to support this? After innumerable nights under the stars, I can't say I've ever noticed anything like this. Have you ever gone outside and looked at the stars for more than a few minutes at a time?
no, your supposed rotation is not wild. this is the problem, regularity would not result from round earth chaos. try reading what i've actually said. your mechanism does not have the order of the aether, it's a mad rush.
Isn't this what you said:
it's really quite simple, unlike your round earther model where the earth spins on its axis, while spinning around something else, which is in turn spinning around yet another thing, and yet the stars stay visible in each hemisphere with some predictability. does that really sound right to you?
Yes, that really sounds right. It doesn't sound chaotic, either. It may blow
your little mind that several things can happen at once all in an orderly fashion, but that doesn't affect reality at all.
Was there something else?
the moon is not rock. rock is never as bright as the moon. think for yourself.
Some rocks, like, say, white Marble, are
much brighter than the Moon when in bright sunlight because their albeido is higher; rocks with albeido similar to the Moon's surface will have similar brightness in bright sunlight. You can measure this yourself if you have a good camera. I dare you to try.
You seem to be confusing checking ideas against reality with "not thinking for yourself"; that's incorrect. Why don't you try it some time. There's no evidence here that you have done anything of the kind.
the moon's phase changed because it is closer to earth, and caught up in the currents near to us. stars are not, they stay facing us like the sun.
"Caught up in currents"
Sounds chaotic.
If the stars stay facing us why does it matter if they're spotlights?