Star motion

  • 18 Replies
  • 1050 Views
Star motion
« on: November 02, 2015, 11:29:52 PM »
Hi.

I can't find any reasonable explaination of star motion on the sky in FE model.

I find this a bit dissapointing, as FES wiki/faq don't have any proper answer to this.  If I am wrong and there is an explaination, can you share one with me?

Reasonable = no hand waving, speculations, drawings that explain partial movement, animations showing something different than actually seen on the sky, unsupported claims or pseudo-scientific speech.

Re: Star motion
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2015, 12:49:00 AM »
You are lucky you didn't ask "why does the northern and southern hemisphere see distinctly different constellations in the sky" because the best answer for that is usually "have you personally seen those different constellations ...".

You must understand, Australia is in on the conspiracy ...

 ;D

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Star motion
« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2015, 03:21:59 AM »
Brouwer, one theory about the motion of the stars is called the Celestial Gears Theory.  Don't bother asking about the mechanics of this theory, as we can only observe its effects and speculate about the hows and whys.

Soulblood, it is against the rules to post in the Q&A forum unless you have a bonafide question or answer about the discussion at hand.  This is a serious forum and it is not your playground to run around in doing what ever you want. 

Re: Star motion
« Reply #3 on: November 03, 2015, 05:43:08 AM »
Don't bother asking about the mechanics of this theory, as we can only observe its effects and speculate about the hows and whys.
A bit dissapointing :( So this is just a claim, based on nothing but observation.

I did some searching based on Gears Theory and found few talks here on the forum. None of them is reasonable (see 1st post), which is unfortunate. I find it extremely odd: motion on the northern hemisphere is simple, but on the northern it is not. Yet it appears, based on multiple photos/time laps from random people, that the motion on the sounthern hemisphere should somehow follow analogous idea as the northern hemisphere shows.

One more thing is also quite dissapointing: one talk go back to 2008. In 7 years time noone was able to create any theoretical fundaments for this theory? You want to keep that as just a claim with no proof? Or, someone already did this and my digging skills are bad.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Star motion
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2015, 05:50:23 AM »
One more thing is also quite dissapointing: one talk go back to 2008. In 7 years time noone was able to create any theoretical fundaments for this theory? You want to keep that as just a claim with no proof? Or, someone already did this and my digging skills are bad.


Your own scientists invent theories to explain things that can only be observed but never tested.  Why are we held to a different standard?  Do you think we are Omnipotent? 

*

chtwrone

  • 443
  • Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again
Re: Star motion
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2015, 10:11:02 PM »
One more thing is also quite dissapointing: one talk go back to 2008. In 7 years time noone was able to create any theoretical fundaments for this theory? You want to keep that as just a claim with no proof? Or, someone already did this and my digging skills are bad.


Your own scientists invent theories to explain things that can only be observed but never tested.  Why are we held to a different standard?  Do you think we are Omnipotent?



Oh, so you point out that 'your own scientists invent theories'?

You say this, as though there is something in FE theory that disputes RE fact (theory)?

Really, what?
Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again.

Re: Star motion
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2015, 02:15:22 PM »
If anything not based on a round Earth is something you're going to declare is pseudoscience, you have an unanswerable question.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Star motion
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2015, 03:17:43 PM »
The stars rotate above earth centered on the north pole. Could you be more specific above the type of motion you're questioning?


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Star motion
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2015, 05:13:54 AM »
Your own scientists invent theories to explain things that can only be observed but never tested.  Why are we held to a different standard?  Do you think we are Omnipotent?
I do not own any scientist, as owning a person (sounds like a thing) is called slavery.

You don't need to be Omnipotent to solve a problem. You just need to be creative and be able to create a logic reasoning.

Within 7 years a process, that "looks" fairly simple, has not been touched. Why? Ignoring this works against FET as it just creates another hole people from outside can stick too and point out over and over. This is why I see many videos trying to explain that in FET, but they all fail to do it. Seeing yet another wrong explaination decreases creditibility of FET science and people, who claim they understand the theory and want to share their models and explainations.

This is true that scientists often create theories, but they think of experiments and other things, like
theoretical apporach, that can help understaning and explaining things. They don't leave them in sketch for the rest
of eternity.

The stars rotate above earth centered on the north pole.
With proper meaning that is correct.

Could you be more specific above the type of motion you're questioning?
I am not questioning anything (this is Q&A section, not discussion), I am looking for a model in FE that explains why stars move like we observe. Like the legendary, 1000 asked, motion around the south pole (of the sky).

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6114
Re: Star motion
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2015, 05:29:51 AM »
Within 7 years a process, that "looks" fairly simple, has not been touched. Why? Ignoring this works against FET as it just creates another hole people from outside can stick too and point out over and over. This is why I see many videos trying to explain that in FET, but they all fail to do it. Seeing yet another wrong explaination decreases creditibility of FET science and people, who claim they understand the theory and want to share their models and explainations.

Eight years ago, I dismissed the official FE pages on stars/planets as pure fantasy (especially the celestial gear hypothesis).

But the official FAQ cannot be modified, as nobody at the top cares about what is going on.

In my Advanced FET, I have offered the very best facts on the true FE map (northern and southern circumpolar), the correct gravitational theory for the planets/stars, a much better model for the Sun's orbit (eliminating the catastrophic 3000 mile/32 mile data)...but nobody cares.


Re: Star motion
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2015, 05:47:56 AM »
...but nobody cares.
You have a 14 page thread, most of which is irrelevant to FET, and which begins with broken links. What do you expect?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6114
Re: Star motion
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2015, 06:38:10 AM »
Each and every message posted in my AFET is related to FE theory, especially the new radical chronology of history, as it relates to the solar precession question.

I have answered each and every question posed by the RE, which nobody else could answer: the beam neutrinos, the ring laser gyroscope, the amateur radio moon distance, and much more.

Certainly, a signal to let me write the actual FAQ, to redo it.

Now, there are no broken links there: I use the webarchive quite a lot, if that is what you are referring to.


Since this is a thread about star motion...here is the Sirius meridian transit points thread: the earth does not revolve around the sun, or around its own axis.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1718735#msg1718735

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Star motion
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2015, 08:33:21 AM »
Your own scientists invent theories to explain things that can only be observed but never tested.  Why are we held to a different standard?  Do you think we are Omnipotent?
I do not own any scientist, as owning a person (sounds like a thing) is called slavery.

You don't need to be Omnipotent to solve a problem. You just need to be creative and be able to create a logic reasoning.

Within 7 years a process, that "looks" fairly simple, has not been touched. Why? Ignoring this works against FET as it just creates another hole people from outside can stick too and point out over and over. This is why I see many videos trying to explain that in FET, but they all fail to do it. Seeing yet another wrong explaination decreases creditibility of FET science and people, who claim they understand the theory and want to share their models and explainations.

This is true that scientists often create theories, but they think of experiments and other things, like
theoretical apporach, that can help understaning and explaining things. They don't leave them in sketch for the rest
of eternity.

The stars rotate above earth centered on the north pole.
With proper meaning that is correct.

Could you be more specific above the type of motion you're questioning?
I am not questioning anything (this is Q&A section, not discussion), I am looking for a model in FE that explains why stars move like we observe. Like the legendary, 1000 asked, motion around the south pole (of the sky).
What is inconsistent with my explanation? If you don't have a question, you shouldn't be in Q and A.  ???


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Star motion
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2015, 11:21:27 AM »
Why do different constellations rotate on the sky in the southern hemisphere than in the northern one? Shouldn't they be the same over a flat earth?

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Star motion
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2015, 12:29:57 PM »
Why do different constellations rotate on the sky in the southern hemisphere than in the northern one? Shouldn't they be the same over a flat earth?
Again, you seem to be using Round Earth distance figures to come up with this idea.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Star motion
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2015, 01:41:18 PM »
What has distance to do with my question?

People in the southern hemisphere see other constellations (completely different ones) than people on the northern hemisphere (or north and south of the equator, if you want to keep it FE/RE neutral). Why is that when under FÈ they both look up to the same sky/dome?

I can't find any mentioning of "distance" in my question ... are you confused?

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Star motion
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2015, 07:43:12 PM »
What has distance to do with my question?

People in the southern hemisphere see other constellations (completely different ones) than people on the northern hemisphere (or north and south of the equator, if you want to keep it FE/RE neutral). Why is that when under FÈ they both look up to the same sky/dome?

I can't find any mentioning of "distance" in my question ... are you confused?
I was referring to the distances to the stars. Are you saying that people see the same stars on the north and south "poles"? That doesn't seem to be the case regardless of the shape of the earth.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Star motion
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2015, 08:20:26 PM »
I do not own any scientist, as owning a person (sounds like a thing) is called slavery.

You people are always trying to pull the race card.  Perhaps you could try making pertinent contributions to this Q&A thread instead?  That would be great. 

Re: Star motion
« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2015, 02:06:11 AM »
Certainly, a signal to let me write the actual FAQ, to redo it.
Updating FAQ would definitely help resolving even more questions without multiple threads on the forum. Just a link to a proper page.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1718735#msg1718735
Thanks. I will check that once I have a bit more time (I noticed loooong text to read).