Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: dragonridr

Like how the elevation of Polaris corresponds to one's latitude. That's a tough one on a flat world.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Phage

Does it matter flat earth has a problem it cannot explain everything in one cohesive model. There is so much that round earth explains from the Auroras to the green flash I mentioned. On a flat earth, you can not explain any of these features. Even the tides themselves don't work on flat earth this is why sailors were smart enough to figure out the earth is round.

This is why flat earthers are careful about what they discuss.

you can hardly say they discuss... at least not this one...

just lie and deny... standard procedure

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

Like how the elevation of Polaris corresponds to one's latitude. That's a tough one on a flat world.

It's much tougher to explain why Polaris has never moved it's position, at the exact north point above a speeding ball world!
A ball that speeds randomly through space, same as all the stars speed randomly through space, for thousands and thousands of years, and have the same, single star, at the exact north point of Earth, the whole time!

It cannot be from stars being trillions of miles away, which is another lie, with no proof at all, and even if it WERE true, stars would NOT remain in place, for thousands of years, assuming that stars and Earth were randomly speeding through 'space', which is yet another lie. Two points on Earth show stars in different RELATIVE positions, so they'd always look different if they, and Earth, were speeding through space. This is pure nonsense.


Latitude of a ball Earth doesn't work on the real, flat Earth. They are imaginary lines, not real lines. Polaris would obviously fit the ball Earth lines of latitude, and would fit lines of latitude on a flat Earth, because they would be different lines, and would also match up to Polaris's elevation, just the same.

Not difficult at all, so move along now.

a reply to: turbonium1

Except Polaris hasn't always been the pole star, will not always be the pole star, is not the star around which others rotate in the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere, and is just not visible below the equator. Explan that instead of trying to deflect.

Latitude is just an equal division perpendicular to the axis of rotation, so they would be exactly the same distance on a disk. It's longitude that just doesn't work on a flat Earth. Your claims about latitude and polaris again illustrate the paucity of your spatial reasoning.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

Except Polaris hasn't always been the pole star, will not always be the pole star.

Wrong, it has always been at the exact north point of Earth, proven by people seeing it there, for thousands of years. You have no proof it has EVER moved - just a ridiculous claim.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

Except Polaris hasn't always been the pole star, will not always be the pole star.

Wrong, it has always been at the exact north point of Earth, proven by people seeing it there, for thousands of years. You have no proof it has EVER moved - just a ridiculous claim.

Well no it hasnt in fact during the building of the great pyramid it would have been a star called Thuban. To ancient egyptians there north star was diferent from ours. Please give me an example of a flat earth model that explains how the stars rotate counterclockwise above the equator, and clockwise below the equator. You cant say this doesnt happen we have video on a round earth its easy to explain on a flat earth id say its impossible to explain.






PS havnt you given up yet? Even you must see a round earth explains all this stuff that flat earth cant. Here is a tough one a brit is complaining she cant see the center of the milky way. Weird on a flat earth she should see it. Whats happening?

a reply to: turbonium1

As dragonridr points out, it is (and I know you'll struggle with the concept) you that is wrong.

earthsky.org...

a reply to: dragonridr

I'll explain it for you on behalf of Capt Turbo... just to save some time

the milkway doesn't exist... and that video showing the stars rotating is just CGI

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: dragonridr

I'll explain it for you on behalf of Capt Turbo... just to save some time

the milkway doesn't exist... and that video showing the stars rotating is just CGI

So now we have cgi stars at night I guess like watching a movie theater they are projected into the night sky. Man they are sneaky imagine being the guy that has to set that up every night for millions of years.

a reply to: dragonridr

nah...

apparently we don't actually know what the "lights" in the sky are... Just that video was CGI

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

Like how the elevation of Polaris corresponds to one's latitude. That's a tough one on a flat world.

Polaris maintaining its same coordinate position in the sky is a wonder for any model. Especially if we are supposedly a chaotic cosmic accident, there shouldn't be a consistent celestial sphere coordinate system. Rather, it behaves like clockwork, being so predictable that the Mayan were able to presuppose cycles over 2000 years long. As we all know, Every clock needs a clockmaker

a reply to: cooperton

Since you didnt bother to read this thread apparently you dont know about polaris. Go back it was discussed and it isnt always there.

Now you can use it to determine your latitude. Which proves the earth has to be round or it wouldnt work. But you now whats fun if you live in the northern hemisphere you can make your own sextant (or astrolabe)and figure out what your latitude is. Then maybe just maybe when doing the math you will firure out the earth is round.

It's pretty funny watching flat-earthers debunk themselves.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: cooperton

Since you didnt bother to read this thread apparently you dont know about polaris. Go back it was discussed and it isnt always there.

Stop being condescending. Just post like a normal human that isn't lord over all.

Although night-to-night Polaris appears to be in the same point in the sky, it also moves predictably with the precession of the equinox over longer periods. This too shows that the clockwork is even more intricate than what we see with daily cycles. I'm pretty sure this is what the Mayans used to predict 2000+ year cycles. The universe is not a chaotic mess as the nihilists want us to believe, instead it is intricate clockwork.

a reply to: cooperton

Except when stars explode......

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: cooperton

Except when stars explode......

explosions occur in the mitochondria to produce energy, yet that is a very ordered reaction. We don't fully understand the implications of what is happening with the observations we have from deep space telescopes. As we can see from earth, all stars have maintained their same coordinate system throughout known history. We are living in clockwork.

a reply to: cooperton

Mitochondria?? Really??

Stars have changed position through history and I don't know which astronomers you have been talking to but I doubt you'll find any describing it as a chaotic mess. Chaotic messes aren't totally predictable. Our universe is.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: cooperton

Mitochondria?? Really??

Stars have changed position through history and I don't know which astronomers you have been talking to but I doubt you'll find any describing it as a chaotic mess. Chaotic messes aren't totally predictable. Our universe is.

The mitochondria example I was referring to the ability to control explosions (technically the combustion occurring in mitochondria is a mini-explosion)

But Yeah that's what I'm saying is that it is not a chaotic mess. It is a predictable clockwork. You're saying a star in the celestial sphere has changed its coordinate? Genuinely curious. I know they go through cycles but I thought they all maintained their relative position to eachother. A clockwork universe shows to me there is intelligent design involved.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: cooperton

Mitochondria?? Really??

Stars have changed position through history and I don't know which astronomers you have been talking to but I doubt you'll find any describing it as a chaotic mess. Chaotic messes aren't totally predictable. Our universe is.

The mitochondria example I was referring to the ability to control explosions (technically the combustion occurring in mitochondria is a mini-explosion)

But Yeah that's what I'm saying is that it is not a chaotic mess. It is a predictable clockwork. You're saying a star in the celestial sphere has changed its coordinate? Genuinely curious. I know they go through cycles but I thought they all maintained their relative position to eachother. A clockwork universe shows to me there is intelligent design involved.

No stars change their relative position to each other it just takes time, Having said that the universe has been around for a long time. Tracking these movements is called astrometry.

originally posted by: dragonridr

No stars change their relative position to each other it just takes time

Are you saying this by belief or is there actual historic documents that proves this? I can only think of one example of a new star forming visibly in our sky and it was meant to emphasize the importance of the Day which it appeared. It was the clockmaker's signature