The Southern Cross as the strongest argument against FE

was Nikola Tesla really trying to prove Einstein wrong about gravity?

Pretty much every physicist at the time General Relativity was first proposed was trying to "prove Einstein wong about gravity".

Plenty of very qualified people have tried to disprove GR the whole way.

Surprisingly enough it's still the accepted model because no other theory better fits our observation of the universe.

I'm going to try to be unbiased because I'm new to all of the flat earth theories but have not yet been convinced.  But the only thing that diagram proves is the location of the southern cross.

Look at your ceiling fan, or anything on your ceiling from a wall.  Now walk to the other side of the room and the image you saw is upside down.  Actually if they can all see it at the same time whatsoever that just makes the earth seem flatter to me.  Please, let me know if and how Im wrong.  I don't mean that sarcastically, I'm trying to learn some shit.

Simply put, the FE sky/heavens are all wrong especially south of the equator.

First, you need to understand geometry and rotating objects as discussed here:
(https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66457.0)


So, the S. Celestial Pole (SCP - center of southern star trails in the image above) is a single point that must be above a single point on Earth. There is no single point on a single sided flat disk/plane that can do this. The single point must be under the N.Pole on the other side of the disk/plane and can not be seen above the disk/plane. There is your first clue.

Next, stars in the sky have celestial coordinates (declination and ascension) that correspond to the Earth coordinates - specifically declination = latitude EXACTLY. This means that if a star is at 40° N declination, it "draws" the 40° N latitude on Earth. This supports the fact that the SCP, being 90° S declination, is a single point above a single point on Earth (the S.Pole).

Next, when you face the SCP you are facing due south, just like facing the S. Pole. If you draw a horizontal line through the SCP in the image above, the stars BELOW the line are on the OPPOSITE side of the Earth (per declination/latitude) 10,000+ mi BEHIND you. How can you see them looking due south at the edge in front of you?

The Southern Cross is just another example you can plug into everything above.

There are also problems with the Sun and Moon, but that is another topic.

Quote from: aisantaros on June 13, 2016, 08:08:38 AM

The total absence of the FE crowd are somewhat telling, where are the youtube top minds those boastful geniuses who are claiming they debunked this long time ago and advice you to come to the conclusion yourself ?

A copy past would do it, thanks, or a less than 4 hour yt video.

Are you expecting someone from youtube to post in this thread?

Actually, Jeranism once confronted me on a similar (or even the same, I don't remember) subject in THIS site, and then ran away. So aisantaros' expectation isn't that absurd.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on June 13, 2016, 08:14:30 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on June 13, 2016, 08:08:38 AM

The total absence of the FE crowd are somewhat telling, where are the youtube top minds those boastful geniuses who are claiming they debunked this long time ago and advice you to come to the conclusion yourself ?

A copy past would do it, thanks, or a less than 4 hour yt video.

Are you expecting someone from youtube to post in this thread?

Actually, Jeranism once confronted me on a similar (or even the same, I don't remember) subject in THIS site, and then ran away. So aisantaros' expectation isn't that absurd.

Well, if you want to talk to youtubers go to youtube, imo. Y'all are all obsessed with people "running away" people post when they have the time, unless you bore the shit out of them, then I suppose they do run away.

Quote from: Definitely Not Official on June 14, 2016, 09:34:02 AM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on June 13, 2016, 08:14:30 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on June 13, 2016, 08:08:38 AM

The total absence of the FE crowd are somewhat telling, where are the youtube top minds those boastful geniuses who are claiming they debunked this long time ago and advice you to come to the conclusion yourself ?

A copy past would do it, thanks, or a less than 4 hour yt video.

If you sum up the evidences in this thread, you could se that the earth is look, smell and feel like a ball, didn't this ring a bell ? And the absence of FE-ers here ?
Are you expecting someone from youtube to post in this thread?

Actually, Jeranism once confronted me on a similar (or even the same, I don't remember) subject in THIS site, and then ran away. So aisantaros' expectation isn't that absurd.

Well, if you want to talk to youtubers go to youtube, imo. Y'all are all obsessed with people "running away" people post when they have the time, unless you bore the shit out of them, then I suppose they do run away.

If you sum up the evidences in this thread, you could se that the earth is look, smell and feel like a ball, didn't this ring a bell ? And the absence of FE-ers here ?

So The Earth is Round and they just dont like the evidence, its simple.

What do balls smell like?


...Now I don't wanna know the answer...

This thread is full of logical fallacies. I think we need to address these before we debate it properly.

• It relies on anecdotal evidence
• It appeals to personal incredulity
• It uses the 'Texas Sharpshooter' fallacy: starting with the conclusion and then trying to find evidence to fit
• It shifts the burden of proof onto the wrong party
• It uses the false cause fallacy
• etc

What do balls smell like?


...Now I don't wanna know the answer...

I'm sure he could tell you all about it 

This thread is full of logical fallacies. I think we need to address these before we debate it properly.

• It relies on anecdotal evidence
• It appeals to personal incredulity
• It uses the 'Texas Sharpshooter' fallacy: starting with the conclusion and then trying to find evidence to fit
• It shifts the burden of proof onto the wrong party
• It uses the false cause fallacy
• etc

We are dealing with here hard geometrical connections between the stars apparent position and motion in the sky and the earth shape. And yeah if you live in a box and didnt even look out, its anecdotal evidence, others called it common knowledge

Oh and if is a fallacy here sure you could debunk this thread very easily, My bet you shouting fallacy again then you flee, without any real argument, am I right ?

This thread is full of logical fallacies. I think we need to address these before we debate it properly.

• It relies on anecdotal evidence
• It appeals to personal incredulity
• It uses the 'Texas Sharpshooter' fallacy: starting with the conclusion and then trying to find evidence to fit
• It shifts the burden of proof onto the wrong party
• It uses the false cause fallacy
• etc

Anyway I'm impressed with your looking up logical fallacies skills even if they are the biggest logical fallacies here

And how do you want to debate this properly ? Crying fake for everything and nitpicking on my exact wording ?

This thread is only debatable if you have deep knowledge in n-dimensional geometry and higher math with modified extreme solutions of relativistic space time distortion.

Or you have to accept the simplest solution : The earth is probably round

Sorry

Quote from: Definitely Not Official on June 14, 2016, 09:34:02 AM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on June 13, 2016, 08:14:30 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on June 13, 2016, 08:08:38 AM

The total absence of the FE crowd are somewhat telling, where are the youtube top minds those boastful geniuses who are claiming they debunked this long time ago and advice you to come to the conclusion yourself ?

A copy past would do it, thanks, or a less than 4 hour yt video.

Are you expecting someone from youtube to post in this thread?

Actually, Jeranism once confronted me on a similar (or even the same, I don't remember) subject in THIS site, and then ran away. So aisantaros' expectation isn't that absurd.

Well, if you want to talk to youtubers go to youtube, imo. Y'all are all obsessed with people "running away" people post when they have the time, unless you bore the shit out of them, then I suppose they do run away.

...or they just run away, when they can't defend their position. But I guess flat earthers are honest, genius individuals who would never do that.

This thread is full of logical fallacies. I think we need to address these before we debate it properly.

• It relies on anecdotal evidence
• It appeals to personal incredulity
• It uses the 'Texas Sharpshooter' fallacy: starting with the conclusion and then trying to find evidence to fit
• It shifts the burden of proof onto the wrong party
• It uses the false cause fallacy
• etc

Please be more specific:
(https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67031.msg1790296#msg1790296)

So it is settled , the earth is most possibly a sphere, Thanks for the participation

Playing the devil's advocate here:
Have you performed said experiment yourself? What are your sources that the southern cross is actually visible from these three locations?
Also, this is not the FE map, as there is no FE map and therefore no contradictions of the FE map can be made.

Ummm what do you mean this is not the FE map? This is the FE map that they keep shoving down our throats.

And I agree with the OP. How can 3 people with their backs to each other, all see the same thing?

Quote from: Kami on June 11, 2016, 07:13:47 AM

Playing the devil's advocate here:
Have you performed said experiment yourself? What are your sources that the southern cross is actually visible from these three locations?
Also, this is not the FE map, as there is no FE map and therefore no contradictions of the FE map can be made.

Ummm what do you mean this is not the FE map? This is the FE map that they keep shoving down our throats.

And I agree with the OP. How can 3 people with their backs to each other, all see the same thing?

Sure "This is the FE map that they keep shoving down our throats.", until we come up with some impossibilities with that map, such as sunrise and sunset directions, then suddenly it's "but that isn't the official map, we don't have an official map!"

Have you tried searching for "Map" in the Wiki? You get:

Search 
Found "Map" in 0 "pages"
No pages matched the search criteria

so try "Ice Wall" (that used to get the maps. Now, nothing, no map!

So it is now the "Mapless Earth Society"!

Simply put, there is no FE map because a FE is a FANTASY.

The only thing FEers know - sort of - is the location of the N.Pole (in the middle). This is based on a conspiracy at the S.Pole/Antarctica. No conspiracy - N.Pole in the middle, not necessary. If the S.Pole is in the middle, the FE concept goes to hell really fast:
(http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65369.0)

FEers don't know where the equator is either. Is it half-way to the edge? Are latitude circles equidistant? What makes the equator special (e.g. the star trails in the sky suddenly start shrinking south of it back to a single point when the "S.Pole" is supposedly a circle 50,000+ mi in circumference - really it should be the Celestial Equator - https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66457.0)?

FEers don't know where or even IF an edge exists (disk vs plane model).

In short, they don't know where they or anything is on their model. As a result, they can't measure distances or tell you what a person would see. So the typical debate tactic is not to prove FE (it is a FANTASY) but to disprove RE (reality (the real world) by rejecting images, math, science and history).

We use the azimuthal equidistant projection (U.N. map) as a reference. But when fallacies are demonstrated, they cry that it is NOT the FE map, just a wrong RE projection. Considering the FE has been around for THOUSANDS of years, longer than the RE globe with its projections and known distortions, this is very surprising. Not being able to map a 2D Earth to a 2D piece of paper for THOUSANDS of years is very telling.

The only place a FE exists is in the minds of the FEers as a FANTASY or here as a debate position whether you believe it or not.

BTW, the strongest arguments against FE are based on amateur astronomy (visual/photographic) in general. Pretty much just pick one.

This argument is based on everyday easily verifiable observations :

1 On date  21:06:2016 and time:  21:41 GMT Australia, South America and South Africa shares night time, you could easily check this even from your FE Day and night calculators or from public databases, or contacting people on those locations.

2 Southern cross is visible at the same time from those locations, this could be checked very easily also from star charts or from testimonies from people.

The argument as follows:

3 guys looking at south at Rio de Janeiro, Cape Town and Augusta Australia at the same time at 21:06:2016 21:41 GMT And they all can see the southern Cross constellation , but they all facing the rim of FE in different directions. How is This possible on Fe ?

here is the diagram, as you can see they dont just see the same constellation but the orientation of the cross is changing by location as expected on a globe geometry

Bump.

Ski is posting again so maybe he will enlighten us. I would love to know the answer.  John and sand already ran away.

Quote from: Kami on June 12, 2016, 03:17:35 AM

Quote from: Blue_Moon on June 11, 2016, 07:58:57 PM

I thought satellites were the strongest argument, but okay.

I might want to disagree with you there.. to prove that satellites really exist you have to put in a little effort (well, look on the internet), while sunsets and the southern cross are visible everytime.
Those are both pretty strong arguments, though.

Yes, I go for the simple things that anyone can see.

I'd say the lunar eclipse being circular every time is the strongest argument

Considering the FE has been around for THOUSANDS of years, longer than the RE globe with its projections and known distortions, this is very surprising. Not being able to map a 2D Earth to a 2D piece of paper for THOUSANDS of years is very telling.

excellent point

Quote from: rabinoz on June 12, 2016, 03:31:44 AM

Quote from: Kami on June 12, 2016, 03:17:35 AM

Quote from: Blue_Moon on June 11, 2016, 07:58:57 PM

I thought satellites were the strongest argument, but okay.

I might want to disagree with you there.. to prove that satellites really exist you have to put in a little effort (well, look on the internet), while sunsets and the southern cross are visible everytime.
Those are both pretty strong arguments, though.

Yes, I go for the simple things that anyone can see.

I'd say the lunar eclipse being circular every time is the strongest argument

Quote from: Jadyyn on June 19, 2016, 08:03:32 AM

Considering the FE has been around for THOUSANDS of years, longer than the RE globe with its projections and known distortions, this is very surprising. Not being able to map a 2D Earth to a 2D piece of paper for THOUSANDS of years is very telling.

excellent point

You are right, but we could say things like that the work of geodetic surveyors, spectroscopy, and radio astronomy are the strongest points, along with lunar eclipse, but they can abuse and bullshit the fuck out of those, as they please, Seeing the stars  as they are is a completely different matter, they cant even start to debate it as you can see.

Funny fact I get banned from EVERY Flat earth group on facebook, for this challenge, even from the dedicated debate ones, the reason is : spreading rumors, disinfo and trolling Crazy right ?

Quote from: aisantaros on June 11, 2016, 05:54:19 AM

This argument is based on everyday easily verifiable observations :

1 On date  21:06:2016 and time:  21:41 GMT Australia, South America and South Africa shares night time, you could easily check this even from your FE Day and night calculators or from public databases, or contacting people on those locations.

2 Southern cross is visible at the same time from those locations, this could be checked very easily also from star charts or from testimonies from people.

The argument as follows:

3 guys looking at south at Rio de Janeiro, Cape Town and Augusta Australia at the same time at 21:06:2016 21:41 GMT And they all can see the southern Cross constellation , but they all facing the rim of FE in different directions. How is This possible on Fe ?

here is the diagram, as you can see they dont just see the same constellation but the orientation of the cross is changing by location as expected on a globe geometry

Bump.

Ski is posting again so maybe he will enlighten us. I would love to know the answer.  John and sand already ran away.

To be honest John really didn't ran away, he gave  us a pretty satisfying answer such as the world is a sphere or more precisely a non euclidean infinite area with higher dimension geometry and monstrous relativistic effects and it could be modeled accurately as a sphere. Thats a very good progress from a FLat earther

Thats a very good progress VIVID IMAGINATION from a FLat earther

this is the best argument, even you can do it in your home.
i'm from indonesia, and most of us are below the equator line, so this experiment will work 100%

 i need to convince my friend to do this experiment

FE answer:

Celestial gears had been suggested to explain the view from three different points as marked on the map.

GE reply:

How many gears does it take to explain the same view (up to rotation) from ANY point on the southern hemisphere? Lets say Captown, Madagascar, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Australia. On of those places would definitely see more than one of those supposed gears.

Dumb imagination is dumb.

Quote from: sokarul on July 20, 2016, 10:29:12 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on June 11, 2016, 05:54:19 AM

This argument is based on everyday easily verifiable observations :

1 On date  21:06:2016 and time:  21:41 GMT Australia, South America and South Africa shares night time, you could easily check this even from your FE Day and night calculators or from public databases, or contacting people on those locations.

2 Southern cross is visible at the same time from those locations, this could be checked very easily also from star charts or from testimonies from people.

The argument as follows:

3 guys looking at south at Rio de Janeiro, Cape Town and Augusta Australia at the same time at 21:06:2016 21:41 GMT And they all can see the southern Cross constellation , but they all facing the rim of FE in different directions. How is This possible on Fe ?

here is the diagram, as you can see they dont just see the same constellation but the orientation of the cross is changing by location as expected on a globe geometry

Bump.

Ski is posting again so maybe he will enlighten us. I would love to know the answer.  John and sand already ran away.

To be honest John really didn't ran away, he gave  us a pretty satisfying answer such as the world is a sphere or more precisely a non euclidean infinite area with higher dimension geometry and monstrous relativistic effects and it could be modeled accurately as a sphere. Thats a very good progress from a FLat earther

Not really. Whatever shape the earth is, it can be modeled in an x,y,z coordinate system. To say otherwise is ridiculous. 

Some news, I get an "answer " and find this spreading in truther and FE sites on facebook :



And even started to receive personal threats to pay, like braking my leg if not LOL

Is this how the whole FE operates ?

It's not supriding people will become hostile when their "theory" is so easily destroyed by such a simple concept.

Some news, I get an "answer " and find this spreading in truther and FE sites on facebook :



And even started to receive personal threats to pay, like braking my leg if not LOL

Is this how the whole FE operates ?

Lol, those lines don't even point south. The Rio line points east while the aussies point west. In the FE model, South is whatever direction will get you to Antarctica the most quickly.

Quote from: aisantaros on August 03, 2016, 06:06:10 AM

Some news, I get an "answer " and find this spreading in truther and FE sites on facebook :



And even started to receive personal threats to pay, like braking my leg if not LOL

Is this how the whole FE operates ?

Lol, those lines don't even point south. The Rio line points east while the aussies point west. In the FE model, South is whatever direction will get you to Antarctica the most quickly.

It looks like they are pointing North to me.  Since in the pic it looks to me the Southern Cross is above the North Pole.

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 03, 2016, 11:27:32 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on August 03, 2016, 06:06:10 AM

Some news, I get an "answer " and find this spreading in truther and FE sites on facebook :



And even started to receive personal threats to pay, like braking my leg if not LOL

Is this how the whole FE operates ?

Lol, those lines don't even point south. The Rio line points east while the aussies point west. In the FE model, South is whatever direction will get you to Antarctica the most quickly.

It looks like they are pointing North to me.  Since in the pic it looks to me the Southern Cross is above the North Pole.

Looking north to see the Southern Cross? How does that make a lick of sense?

Quote from: Woody on August 03, 2016, 12:16:48 PM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 03, 2016, 11:27:32 AM

Quote from: aisantaros on August 03, 2016, 06:06:10 AM

Some news, I get an "answer " and find this spreading in truther and FE sites on facebook :



And even started to receive personal threats to pay, like braking my leg if not LOL

Is this how the whole FE operates ?

Lol, those lines don't even point south. The Rio line points east while the aussies point west. In the FE model, South is whatever direction will get you to Antarctica the most quickly.

It looks like they are pointing North to me.  Since in the pic it looks to me the Southern Cross is above the North Pole.

Looking north to see the Southern Cross? How does that make a lick of sense?

It does not.  Much like much of the FE  hypotheses made to explain things.  I was just pointing out that the picture to me looks like someone would need to look north.