RJC- put it this way, some achievements made 1000's of years ago cannot be duplicated today despite "technological advancements" e.g. they are still debating how the great pyramids were built and why, great stones carved into intricate designs with only a hammer and chisel etc.
Man has never gone to the moon nor will man ever go to the moon. NASA is for entertainment purposes only
Elroch - What do you mean by "Where is the north star(Polaris)?
It certainly is not 434 light years away. The constellations are just above us just as they appear and are observed just as they have been for 1000's of years, yesterday and today.
You cannot tell me the north star is observed to be 434 light years away! Light years ONLY exist within the imagination...not observation. And that also goes for the Sun/Moon. The sun is not observed to be 93 million miles away and 400 times larger than the moon nor is the moon observed to be 239,000 miles away and 400 times smaller than the sun.
It is so very simple if one actually does use observation because if the earth was actually traveling in all the heliocentric directions at all the heliocentric speeds, then the constellations would/could never be in the same place 2 nights in a row...much less for 1000's of years. They would be Helter-Skelter daily/nightly.
By "where is the North star?" I mean "where is the North star?". Everything has a location, right?
To make the question simpler, we know that the North star is always straight overhead when you are near the North Pole, so all that you need to decide is how high it is above the North Pole.
It's not a difficult question, just one more observation should be enough to triangulate its location. For example, from a location at latitude 45 degrees, the North Star is 45 degrees above the horizon. See my earlier post.
So at what height above the North Pole is the North star, assuming (as you personally do) that the Earth is flat?
I don't know the exact altitude of the north star. I also do not know the exact height of the sun or moon. I know some have stated distances that are in the few 1000's of miles but I can't say I believe it one way or the other.
I do not think the exact distances are needed/relevant/important if they are indeed fixed and just above the face of the earth as they are observed to be.
What difference would it make if the sun/moon were between 3000 and 4000 miles above the earth and the stars and so-called planets were between 5000 and 7000 miles above the earth?
They are all luminaries in their own right.
Did not the constellations provide navigation on both land and sea for 1000's of years? I do not know if they were required to know the distances of the stars etc.?
The point is that there is no distance for the North star that is consistent with the Flat Earth hypothesis. See diagram and explanation at the end of this post.
This is how scientific hypotheses are rejected - inconsistency with the facts. It is similar to the way the hypothesis was rejected over 2000 years ago (using a slightly more complex method) and has never been valid (to well-informed people) since then.
I understand that this is uncomfortable to read, probably to the degree of causing you to wish to ignore it. I invite you to either try and show my reasoning is invalid or to ask someone who you believe is competent and who shares your incorrect (I assert) belief to do so.
If you can't and you can't find such a person you cannot justify believing the Earth is flat.
The diagram above shows the angles of observed lines of sight to the North star from three different latitudes, assuming the Earth is flat. For the hypothesis to be correct, the lines would need to cross at a single location, not three. A little discrepancy could be put down to experimental error, but this is an ENORMOUS discrepancy.
....there's more than the CLAIMED nine planets, over forty in our solar system. That's coming from a former CIA pilot, now a whistle-blower.
There are only 8 known planets according to the current definition. There are huge numbers of minor planets and asteroids (over 600,000 recorded!).
There is significant evidence that there is at least one more large planet past Pluto, but it is not entirely conclusive and it is extremely difficult to find the hypothesised planet.
Elroch - As far as the north star visibility is concerned, why would anyone claim to see it well south past the equator? I have never been south of the equator so I don't rely on what others claim to observe, only what I observe.
We can debate the constellations but more than an abundant amount of evidence for a nonrotating stationary flat earth is right here on earth. As far as the constellations go, they are observably fixed and that is empirical & observed evidence by everyone on earth contrary to any/all heliocentric theoretical speeds/movements of a globular earth. There is simply zero chance the constellations would remain fixed day in and day out much less for 1000's of years with a ball earth zipping around and around and around in different directions at a myriad of incomprehensible speeds. That is just not possible.
Furthermore, if the north star is just above the north pole than it would be ludicrous to believe that it would be visible from every direction/location on the face of the earth.
Due to perspective.
Elroch - As far as the north star visibility is concerned, why would anyone claim to see it well south past the equator?
I don't know why they would. It's not visible in the Southern hemisphere. It is easily seen in the entire Northern hemisphere.
The difference is that it is always below the horizon in the Southern hemisphere.
I have never been south of the equator so I don't rely on what others claim to observe, only what I observe.
No, you don't. You believe unreliable youtubers.
We can debate the constellations but more than an abundant amount of evidence for a nonrotating stationary flat earth is right here on earth. As far as the constellations go, they are observably fixed and that is empirical & observed evidence by everyone on earth contrary to any/all heliocentric theoretical speeds/movements of a globular earth. There is simply zero chance the constellations would remain fixed day in and day out much less for 1000's of years with a ball earth zipping around and around and around in different directions at a myriad of incomprehensible speeds. That is just not possible.
Furthermore, if the north star is just above the north pole than it would be ludicrous to believe that it would be visible from every direction/location on the face of the earth.
Due to perspective.
That is an attempt to distract from the question.
One reason why intelligent people understand the Earth is not flat.
Elroch - When did you research the FE model? Funny how most globe believers actually think flat earthers believe in an edge falling off into outer space. Most globe believers have no clue what the flat earth model is. They have been conditioned to not think and only to emotionally react!
Intelligent people question things..., more especially things they were NEVER meant to question. Like heliocentrism or NASA!
Heck, the globe formula itself for the alleged curvature of 8" per mile squared is how many discovered it was erroneous. Objects visible that ought not be visible according to the formula is why so many began questioning the entirety of heliocentrism itself. Many first discovered NASA faked the moon landing and then went a step further and asked Why would they do that? Then they discovered there exist not one authentic photo of the earth from space. They are admittedly composites and photo-shopped.
I empathize with those who have the courage to challenge their core beliefs i.e. worldview. For it is probably one of the most difficult endeavors they will ever undertake.
Most avoid it like the plague!
NameofNames - I do not put much credence in theoretical thinking/imaginations.
In case you did not know it, heliocentrism as well as gravity are theories. Nothing more!
You can believe them to be facts all day long. Changes nothing.
Actually, they are not even good theories. They are so easily disproved. Countless millions worldwide are disproving them everyday!
Denser/Heavier than air. What makes a helium balloon rise? Lighter than air.
Density/Buoyancy scientifically explain why objects ascend/descend and have for 1000's of years.
The theory of gravity was necessary to attempt to validate & explain the theory of heliocentrism.
Without the theory of gravity, heliocentrism falls apart.
The theory of gravity was not required to explain why objects ascend/descend for 1000's of years. Scientists today don't use it due to its convoluting nature.
The theory of gravity is easily disproven. It is a countless contradiction theory.
It was necessary to explain why people were not flying off the spinning ball. Actually Newton did not come up with the theory. He retrieved it from the Kabbalah's Tree of Life. The big bang also comes from the Kabbalah.
The things they don't teach in the government indoctrination centers called schools could fill many libraries.
shangtsung111 - Many of so-called planets appear circular but that does not necessarily mean spherical. NASA is the propaganda tool that provides all the planets as spherical and terra firma. But read the fine print and you'll see even NASA admits they are CGI/composites/photo-shopped.
But I will concede for argument sake they are spherical. But they are luminaries just as the stars and that is why past astronomers referred to them as "wandering stars".
Electromagnetism exists and some believe that plays a significant role in up/down/sideways etc.
I don't know. I have seen electromagnetic experiments that show how the sun/moon could traverse inward/outward over a level plane/surface.
Levitation disproves gravity.
@noodles, you have failed to respond to the point that observations of the location of the North Star refute the possibility that the Northern hemisphere is flat.
This is how science works. It requires that beliefs are compatible with ALL facts, and discards beliefs that are not.
Anything else is living in a fantasy world, which is what you (presumably) will continue to do.
You want something new in cosmology well here it is. I hope noodles doesn't have a heart attack.
