Explain circumpolar stars in the southern hemisphere.

Your either a troll  or a retard. My bets on troll, you don't actually think the earth is flat, so when someone brings up a point that disproves it, you star derailing the thread. There is nothing that important about the southern most points of a continent, it's just that "a triangle drawn from all three points will contain the north pole", I was using them because they fulfilled the condition, the new points I am using still fulfill it, plus they can all be dark at the same time.

Does this statement not apply to the three points I started using (the three ones from the daylight map which are all at night at the same time) after you wouldn't accept stars during the day.

BTW

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 22, 2016, 04:55:24 PM

  By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

We are still waiting on this bit of geometry.

Quote from: rabinoz on January 23, 2016, 10:25:19 PM

BTW

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 22, 2016, 04:55:24 PM

  By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

We are still waiting on this bit of geometry.

It is very simple, dear rabinoz. These locations are on different continents at the opposite sides of the globe (in RET terms). It is impossible you can be simultaneously in all three places.

It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously.

And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.

Prove I'm wrong. Go there, to all three places simultaneously, and bring back your pictures and videos.
 

Quote from: Empirical on January 24, 2016, 12:09:32 AM

Your either a troll  or a retard. My bets on troll, you don't actually think the earth is flat, so when someone brings up a point that disproves it, you star derailing the thread. There is nothing that important about the southern most points of a continent, it's just that "a triangle drawn from all three points will contain the north pole", I was using them because they fulfilled the condition, the new points I am using still fulfill it, plus they can all be dark at the same time.

Does this statement not apply to the three points I started using (the three ones from the daylight map which are all at night at the same time) after you wouldn't accept stars during the day.

You got me confused now,  didn't you mean SOUTH pole,   why bring the NORTH pole into it?

Quote from: rabinoz on January 23, 2016, 10:25:19 PM

BTW

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 22, 2016, 04:55:24 PM

  By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

We are still waiting on this bit of geometry.

It is very simple, dear rabinoz. These locations are on different continents at the opposite sides of the globe (in RET terms). It is impossible you can be simultaneously in all three places. It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously. And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.

Prove I'm wrong. Go there, to all three places simultaneously, and bring back your pictures and videos.
 

The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.

Quote from: Empirical on January 24, 2016, 09:46:53 AM

The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.

you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
At the same time?

Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.
Now you got me confused. What do you mean by that?
And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?

The question of who "discovered" Crux, the Southern Cross, is complex. The Southern Cross would have been familiar to the Ancient humans who lived in Africa, before they expanded out of Africa and in to the rest of the World. Some modern South African groups see the Southern Cross as part of a group of giraffes.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Australia, where the Southern Cross takes pride of place in the sky. The Karuna people of the Adelaide Pains, where I live now, saw the Southern Cross as the footprint of the Wedge Tailed Eagle, Wilto. The Boorong Peoples of the Western Victorian Plains, where my spouses family live, see the Southern Cross as a ring tailed possum. Other indigenous groups see it as part of a larger constellation of an eagle, or as a stingray.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Humans had colonised South America, where the cross is also prominent, the descendants of the Incas see the Southern Cross as part of a constellation the represents a Llama. Up until 3000 years ago, the Southern Cross could be seen low in the sky from Ancient Greece. It formed part of the constellation of the Centaur.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It was first sighted by Europeans when Portuguese and Spanish explorers entered the Southern seas. Amerigo Vespucci mapped the stars of the constellation during his expedition to South America in 1501, depicting Crux as an almond! It then appeared as "Crux" on star charts from Petrus Plancius and Jodocus Hondius in 1598 and 1600.

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 24, 2016, 10:45:06 AM

Quote from: Empirical on January 24, 2016, 09:46:53 AM

The map I linked showed full night and twilight, If you look at the link you can see that a part of South America and Australia are in night, not twilight, so you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.

you will be able to see the stars at all three continents.
At the same time?

Stop shouting, I can read!

Yes at the SAME time!

Quote from: Humble_Scientist

Also the burden of proof is one you to show that the southern cross will be in the north of the sky, since there is a lot of evidence that modern star maps are accurate, you can just look at the sky at night to check a lot of it.
Now you got me confused. What do you mean by that?
And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?

Oh, stop the funny faces (yes I copy yours a bit) and fancy colours - we can read without being shouted at - it makes you seem so childish
So, you don't accept that the Southern Cross (Cruz) can be seen from all southern continents, yet you probably expect us to believe that Polaris is visible from all norther continents - sounds a bit suss to me!

I am afraid that the Southern Cross has been know for longer than you and I have been around! Just take a look in http://astroblogger.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/who-discovered-southern-cross.html  where you will find

Quote from: Who discovered the Southern Cross?

The question of who "discovered" Crux, the Southern Cross, is complex. The Southern Cross would have been familiar to the Ancient humans who lived in Africa, before they expanded out of Africa and in to the rest of the World. Some modern South African groups see the Southern Cross as part of a group of giraffes.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Australia, where the Southern Cross takes pride of place in the sky. The Karuna people of the Adelaide Pains, where I live now, saw the Southern Cross as the footprint of the Wedge Tailed Eagle, Wilto. The Boorong Peoples of the Western Victorian Plains, where my spouses family live, see the Southern Cross as a ring tailed possum. Other indigenous groups see it as part of a larger constellation of an eagle, or as a stingray.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Humans had colonised South America, where the cross is also prominent, the descendants of the Incas see the Southern Cross as part of a constellation the represents a Llama. Up until 3000 years ago, the Southern Cross could be seen low in the sky from Ancient Greece. It formed part of the constellation of the Centaur.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It was first sighted by Europeans when Portuguese and Spanish explorers entered the Southern seas. Amerigo Vespucci mapped the stars of the constellation during his expedition to South America in 1501, depicting Crux as an almond! It then appeared as "Crux" on star charts from Petrus Plancius and Jodocus Hondius in 1598 and 1600.

So you ask "And why, if you claim that I "will be able to see the stars at all three continents", I have to prove that?"

Yes, we have evidence that at least the Southern Cross has been observed from Australia, South Africa and South America for thousands of years.

The ignorance of residents of the many northern hemisphere countries of the southern hemishere constantly amazes me! 

I live here, I do know a bit about it. And no I personally have not seen the Southern Cross from South Africa and South America, but I am quite prepared to believe the copious evidence available.

Really, it's about time you changed your name.  You have proved over and over that you are neither Humble nor a Scientist.

True scientists would look a available evidence, and then base their belief on that.  Your approach seems to be "The earth looks flat, so it must be, then you try to force all other evidence to fit!  It doesn't work!

True scientists would look a available evidence, and then base their belief on that.

All right, this time I shall not draw a funny face, if it makes you feel better. Though this would be such a perfect occasion for that...

If my posts for any reason make you so uncomfortable, just stop reading them, what's the problem. I definitely do not want you to get a stroke. C'mon, man, relax... We are here for friendly chat, fun & pleasure - and seeking the truth, of course.
 

maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.

Dear rabinoz,
I've seen too many cases when the opposite is true. And, by the way, I've already said I uploaded to Youtube my view of Toronto, enjoy it. Decide yourself if it is a reliable evidence.

As a brief offtopic, just one of such cases, closer to my field. I've already mention the book (a great book, I think), written by a Canadian scientist (a great scientist, I think). The book is here, I placed it, so the others could benefit from it:

http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/172/

It says that many, if not most of diseases (including cancer, diabetes, HIV, autism, Alzheimer, infertility etc.) can be cured by using herbs (the formula is given) and/or an electronic apparatus (the circuit and assembly instructions are also provided). All the instructions are given. The author wrote her book as a gift to mankind, in 1993, - 23 years ago. She wrote that before writing the book, she personally cured 100 (one hundred) cases of cancer in about 2 years (so, she was saving one man every two weeks or so), just to be sure she's right. Of course, all the, so to speak, official science are pouring dirt on her name (Hulda Clark), calling her a quack and so on, you may check it yourself, just google, look in Wikipedia etc. So that's about the "evidences" and who knows... how about the conspiracy?
 

Naturally, I was intrigued, assembled the device, played a bit with it to enhance the efficiency etc. Basically, it works as described. I did not have a chance to treat cancer (fortunately, because those who do that end up in jail), but I saw myself how the blood sugar level in a case of officially diagnosed diabetes went back to normal in just 2 hours, from about 11 to 5.3.

Naturally, I was telling people about that interesting story, that she's right, it's working, folks could be healthy and happy and do not have to pay a fortune for that etc. So, recently I was approached by a man from a distant country whose kid (5 years old) was seriously sick for the last 2 years, the physicians could not do much and he was, well, desperate about that. The guy asked me if I could make the device for him but, as appeared, did not have much money. So, I just assembled the main part of the apparatus, he got it and recreated the machine in his country. You know what, the kid became completely healthy on the day 4 after they started to use the device...

And I'm so happy about that.
 

If that sounds interesting, I briefly summarized some of my findings in those still imperfect, but, hopefully, readable essays:
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/192/
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/193/
Enjoy.
 

Of course, if the moderator thinks it's too an offtopic, feel free to delete.

Quote from: rabinoz on January 24, 2016, 04:45:45 PM

maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.

Dear rabinoz,
I've seen too many cases when the opposite is true. And, by the way, I've already told I uploaded to Youtube my view of Toronto, enjoy it. Decide yourself if it is a reliable evidence.

As a brief offtopic, just one of such cases, closer to my field. I've already mention the book (a great book, I think), written by a Canadian scientist (a great scientist, I think). The book is here, I placed it, so the others could benefit from it:

http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/172/

It says that many, if not most of diseases (including cancer, diabetes, HIV, autism, Alzheimer, infertility etc.) can be cured by using herbs (the formula is given) and/or an electronic apparatus (the circuit and assembly instructions are also provided). All the instructions are given. The author wrote her book as a gift to mankind, in 1993, - 23 years ago. She wrote that before writing the book, she personally cured 100 (one hundred) cases of cancer in about 2 years (so, she was saving one man every two weeks or so), just to be sure she's right. Of course, all the, so to speak, official science are pouring dirt on her name (Hulda Clark), calling her a quack and so on, you may check it yourself, just google, look in Wikipedia etc. So that's about the "evidences" and who knows... how about the conspiracy?
 

Naturally, I was intrigued, assembled the device, played a bit with it to enhance the efficiency etc. Basically, it works as described. I did not have a chance to treat cancer (fortunately, because those who do that end up in jail), but I saw myself how the blood sugar level in a case of officially diagnosed diabetes went back to normal in just 2 hours, from about 11 to 5.3.

Naturally, I was telling people about that interesting story, that she's right, it's working, folks could be healthy and happy and do not have to pay a fortune for that etc. So, recently I was approached by a man from a distant country whose kid (5 years old) was seriously sick for the last 2 years, the physicians could not do much and he was, well, desperate about that. The guy asked me if I could make the device for him but, as appeared, did not have much money. So, I just assembled the main part of the apparatus, he got it and recreated the machine in his country. You know what, the kid became completely healthy on the day 4 after they started to use the device...

And I'm so happy about that.
 

If that sounds interesting, I briefly summarized some of my findings in those still imperfect, but, hopefully, readable essays:
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/192/
http://3annep.prostosite.org/filemanager/download/193/
Enjoy.
 

Of course, if the moderator thinks it's too an offtopic, feel free to delete.

Wow so you're a faith healer with a prop.  happy days!

Quote from: rabinoz on January 24, 2016, 04:45:45 PM

maybe you could simply accept the overwhelming evidence till you have some reliable evidence to the contrary.

Dear rabinoz,
I've seen too many cases when the opposite is true. And, by the way, I've already said I uploaded to Youtube my view of Toronto, enjoy it. Decide yourself if it is a reliable evidence.

• The Southern Cross and South Celestial Pole can be seen from all southern continents
• On the most accepted flat earth maps the shapes of southern hemisphere countries are grossly distorted (true, I have only measured Australia)
• On the most accepted flat earth maps the east-west dimensions of southern hemisphere countries are grossly exaggerated, these dimensions have been determined be geodetic surveying - going to say all that is faked too?
• The distances between Australia, South Africa and South America are very grossly exaggerated.

By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

If you do not mind, let us start with the expedition proposed by 29silhouette. There are already three of you, Empirical, 29silhouette and rabinoz, who already lives in Australia, if I'm not mistaken. Only Africa and South America are left. Go there, why not, and tell and show us what you see in the sky at the same moment of time, on all three continents. Wonderful, isn't it? Then we will gladly discuss your findings.
 
[/size][/font]

By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 22, 2016, 04:55:24 PM

By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

At the risk of being diagnosed with "Obsessive Curiosity Disorder", please tell:

Just what is this "bit of geometry"?

It is very unlikely that the weather conditions would allow you to conduct your astronomical observations, at all three locations simultaneously. And the time right after sunset or just before dawn is not good for the observations, either.

By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

By the way, a bit of geometry also tells us we can not observe a star from Africa, South America and Australia at the same time.

Funny that no FEer can answer a simple question about the stars, it's probably because they have no model of the stars.

Quote from: Empirical on January 30, 2016, 03:42:42 AM

Funny that no FEer can answer a simple question about the stars, it's probably because they have no model of the stars.

Some have literally said "They are just little lights in the sky, I don't care about them" and "We are not meant to ask about them".