Apparent motion of the stars

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction. If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction. If I stand on the equator and look both directions, I can observe both apparent motions simultaneously. How can a flat earth model explain this apparent motion of the stars?

For that matter, how can a flat earth model explain the differences in the night sky of the northern and southern hemispheres?

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction. If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction. If I stand on the equator and look both directions, I can observe both apparent motions simultaneously. How can a flat earth model explain this apparent motion of the stars?

For that matter, how can a flat earth model explain the differences in the night sky of the northern and southern hemispheres?

Ever looked at a bi-polar model as Tom Bishop and Sandokhan claim?

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction. If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction.

If your toes are pointing North stars appear to travel right to left.
If your toes are pointing South stars appear to travel left to right.
If your toes are pointing East stars appear to travel up.
If your toes are pointing West stars appear to travel down.

It doesn't matter where you are standing.

Because of the glass dome, celestial bodies lights are reflected. There is no regularity even if it is viewed in globe model.
Equinox shall destroy the globe model.

What you see is mostly wrong directions from the true positions of the bodies.

'The Sun' in Arabic means "not seen as it is" or 'hoax'.
Sun overhead positions ain't what we see from the distance. Those positions might appear due east, in fact it's due south eastwards.

Flight reality is more trustworty than just eyesights.

If your toes are pointing North stars appear to travel right to left.
If your toes are pointing South stars appear to travel left to right.
If your toes are pointing East stars appear to travel up.
If your toes are pointing West stars appear to travel down.

Not all.
If you are in the northern hemisphere, pointing north, a lot of stars do appear to travel right to left. But some, close to the horizon, travel in the opposite direction. The stars appear to circle a point due north.
Likewise, for those in the southern hemisphere facing south, the stars appear to travel in a circle around a point due south.

Because of the glass dome, celestial bodies lights are reflected. There is no regularity even if it is viewed in globe model.
Equinox shall destroy the globe model.

You mean there is very significant regularity and predictability, where the main issue that arises is a small offset when near the horizon; with the equinox solidly confirming the globe and destroying all FE models which have the sun always above Earth?

'The Sun' in Arabic means "not seen as it is" or 'hoax'.

Bull.

Flight reality is more trustworty than just eyesights.

And they likewise confirm the globe and destroy FE models.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on September 06, 2018, 10:39:41 PM

If your toes are pointing North stars appear to travel right to left.
If your toes are pointing South stars appear to travel left to right.
If your toes are pointing East stars appear to travel up.
If your toes are pointing West stars appear to travel down.

Not all.
If you are in the northern hemisphere, pointing north, a lot of stars do appear to travel right to left. But some, close to the horizon, travel in the opposite direction. The stars appear to circle a point due north.
Likewise, for those in the southern hemisphere facing south, the stars appear to travel in a circle around a point due south.

You are adding details not present in his statement in order to argue your point.
If you are going to alter the foundation you need to make your intention known up front
and allow for a response before you present arguments to back up the new premise.

Quote from: JackBlack on September 07, 2018, 12:30:30 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on September 06, 2018, 10:39:41 PM

If your toes are pointing North stars appear to travel right to left.
If your toes are pointing South stars appear to travel left to right.
If your toes are pointing East stars appear to travel up.
If your toes are pointing West stars appear to travel down.

Not all.
If you are in the northern hemisphere, pointing north, a lot of stars do appear to travel right to left. But some, close to the horizon, travel in the opposite direction. The stars appear to circle a point due north.
Likewise, for those in the southern hemisphere facing south, the stars appear to travel in a circle around a point due south.

You are adding details not present in his statement in order to argue your point.
If you are going to alter the foundation you need to make your intention known up front
and allow for a response before you present arguments to back up the new premise.

Read the OP again:

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction.

If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction. If I stand on the equator and look both directions, I can observe both apparent motions simultaneously. How can a flat earth model explain this apparent motion of the stars?

The very terms "counter-clockwise direction" and "clockwise direction" imply not just movement but rotation.
And rotation is certainly what we do see:
     counter-clockwise about the North Celestial Pole in the northern hemisphere and
     clockwise about the South Celestial Pole in the southern hemisphere.

So I see no "the new premise."

Read the OP again:

Let's do that . . .

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, . . .

"Up" and "North" are not the same thing.
The OP said "Up" not "North".

You and JB are so glow-in-the-dark sure of your own superiority that you don't feel any need to pay attention to the actual words the OP used.

You are adding details not present in his statement in order to argue your point.

No I'm not.
In the northern hemisphere, the stars appear to circle a point due north, in a CCW direction.
In the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to circle a point due south in a CW direction.
The important part of this for the most common FE model is the CW and CCW motion.

You were ignoring details present in the OP to oversimplify the point and ignore the point.

Also note that this applies by looking up at the sky, not simply looking north.
So yes, up and north are 2 different things, and the OP is indicating up, not just saying the sky moves right to left vs left to right depending on if you look north or south.

The totality of the night sky for an observer in the respective hemispheres appears to rotate in specific directions.

You and JB are so glow-in-the-dark sure of your own superiority that you don't feel any need to pay attention to the actual words the OP used.

Hi Pot, meet Kettle.

"If you are in the northern hemisphere, pointing north, a lot of stars do appear to travel right to left. But some, close to the horizon, travel in the opposite direction. The stars appear to circle a point due north."

That will not form a round tailed stars then.
There was such video made at California.
A responder said: If that the case:
1. North star stays overhead at California.
Or
2. The earth ain't rotate from west to east.

Yeah, people make fake videos to 'justify' fake theories.

"If you are in the northern hemisphere, pointing north, a lot of stars do appear to travel right to left. But some, close to the horizon, travel in the opposite direction. The stars appear to circle a point due north."

That will not form a round tailed stars then.
There was such video made at California.
A responder said: If that the case:
1. North star stays overhead at California.
Or
2. The earth ain't rotate from west to east.

Yeah, people make fake videos to 'justify' fake theories.

None of what you just said makes sense.
The stars circling a point due north, does make the "round tailed stars", if I understand what you mean by that.
Such a video from CA would not indicate the north star is overhead Ca unless the stars circled a point straight "up".

Jack... Show me a non fake video, if you dare. 

Jack... Show me a non fake video, if you dare. 

Something tells me you’re gonna yell “fake!” At whatever he shows you.

Also, it’s not about daring.

It will add a sense of normal to the conversation if REers would use the term "hemiplane" in their analysis.

The usage of of hemiplane is already accepted in society to such a level that it is worth 16 points in the game of Scrabble.
   

It will add a sense of normal to the conversation if REers would use the term "hemiplane" in their analysis.

The usage of of hemiplane is already accepted in society to such a level that it is worth 16 points in the game of Scrabble.
   

It should be worth 0 points:

"hemiplane"

The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hemiplane

Jack... Show me a non fake video, if you dare. 

I have already provided you plenty and you just dismiss them all as fake.
I have even used your own videos to show it you have no rational argument against it.
So what is the point?

It will add a sense of normal to the conversation if REers would use the term "hemiplane" in their analysis.

The usage of of hemiplane is already accepted in society to such a level that it is worth 16 points in the game of Scrabble.

And it has a fundamentally different meaning.
A hemiplane is not the result of cutting a circle out of a plane, or cutting off all that is outside the circle.
It is cutting an infinite plane in half by a straight line.

The words hemisphere are already in common usage to describe regions of Earth, and matches the physical shape of Earth.

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction. If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction. If I stand on the equator and look both directions, I can observe both apparent motions simultaneously. How can a flat earth model explain this apparent motion of the stars?

For that matter, how can a flat earth model explain the differences in the night sky of the northern and southern hemispheres?

I see that you're new here. Welcome to the Flat Earth Society. What you might not realize, being new, is that there is not A flat-Earth theory. There is a multitude of flat-Earth theories. Some posit that the stars are merely lights projected onto a dome low enough overhead that at any given point on Earth, if you look up, you will see that "they" want you to see. Others posit that the stars, along with the sun and moon, are simply lights moving on tracks, again moving as "they" have designed them to move. It is futile to use "conventional" astronomy or cosmology to argue against, or ask for explanations of, flat-Earth theories. One must enter the proper mind-set if one wishes to comprehend the flat Earth. It's also useful, though not necessary, to pick a faction. It's much easier to defend one specific flat-Earth theory of your choice than to try to refute all of them in their multitudes and mutual incompatibilities.

It will add a sense of normal to the conversation if REers would use the term "hemiplane" in their analysis.

The usage of of hemiplane is already accepted in society to such a level that it is worth 16 points in the game of Scrabble.
   

Certainly I'll accept that 'hemiplane' is a legitimate English word but please explain how you divide a circular plane into hemiplanes.

What are the two hemiplanes of?

Quote from: rabinoz on September 07, 2018, 04:04:32 AM

Read the OP again:

Let's do that . . .

Quote from: dpeterson157 on September 05, 2018, 05:09:08 AM

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, . . .

"Up" and "North" are not the same thing.
The OP said "Up" not "North".

You and JB are so glow-in-the-dark sure of your own superiority that you don't feel any need to pay attention to the actual words the OP used.

I did not expect this knd of childish wordplay from you.  Looking “up at the nigh sky” includes looking up (above the horizon) at Polaris

Quote from: rabinoz on September 07, 2018, 04:04:32 AM

Read the OP again:

Let's do that . . .

Quote from: dpeterson157 on September 05, 2018, 05:09:08 AM

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, . . .

"Up" and "North" are not the same thing.
The OP said "Up" not "North".

Sure and I never even considered that.
I just took "up" to mean "up" at the night sky and from here I need to look up at about 30° to see the point the stars seem to rotate about.

You and JB are so glow-in-the-dark sure of your own superiority that you don't feel any need to pay attention to the actual words the OP used.

You select a bit of the OP, Mr B Moose! Read it all!

If I stand in the northern hemisphere and look up at the night sky, over the course of several hours the stars appear to move in a counter-clockwise direction. If I do the same thing in the southern hemisphere, the stars appear to move in a clockwise direction. If I stand on the equator and look both directions, I can observe both apparent motions simultaneously. How can a flat earth model explain this apparent motion of the stars?

For that matter, how can a flat earth model explain the differences in the night sky of the northern and southern hemispheres?

Then to clinch matters it asks, "how can a flat earth model explain the differences in the night sky of the northern and southern hemispheres?"

So, maybe, I "and JB are so glow-in-the-dark sure of your own superiority that" we actually read and understand all the actual words the OP used and not just a few.
Though I have not thought of myself as superior, just one who can see first hand and so easily accept that these things are factual.