Polestar proves flat earth
Flat earthers make the very good point: “It is impossible for heliocentrists to explain how Polaris manages to always remain perfectly aligned straight above the North Pole throughout Earth’s various alleged tilting, wobbling, rotating and revolving motions.”
And they make the observation that the polestar could not be seen from south of the equator on a ball earth. That may or may not be true but certainly is a good point and merits further research.
Flat earthers fail to mention that if the earth was flat we could see the polestar all the way down to Antarctica. On a flat earth you should be able to see the polestar from everywhere.
Flat earthers can’t explain why there would be a southern polestar around which the southern stars rotate. Some deny this occurs, and suggest it is different to what happens in the northern sky.
There is a need for research in this area and as I am living in the southern hemisphere I plan to do some work in this area and post my conclusions in the near future.
Conclusion: Interesting points are raised that deserve further research and investigation. Certainly it is very difficult to believe the earth is moving the way the globe earth model suggests and at the same time is able to always keep the north pole pointing directly at the polestar. And we need to further investigate exactly what is happening in the southern sky.
Supporting Flat Earth Proofs
- 98) NASA and modern astronomy say Polaris, the North Pole star, is somewhere between 323-434 light years, or about 2 quadrillion miles, away from us! Firstly, note that is between 1,938,000,000,000,000 – 2,604,000,000,000,000 miles making a difference of 666,000,000,000,000 (over six hundred trillion) miles! If modern astronomy cannot even agree on the distance to stars within hundreds of trillions of miles, perhaps their “science” is flawed and their theory needs re-examining. However, even granting them their obscurely distant stars, it is impossible for heliocentrists to explain how Polaris manages to always remain perfectly aligned straight above the North Pole throughout Earth’s various alleged tilting, wobbling, rotating and revolving motions.
- 99) Viewed from a ball-Earth, Polaris, situated directly over the North Pole, should not be visible anywhere in the Southern hemisphere. For Polaris to be seen from the Southern hemisphere of a globular Earth, the observer would have to be somehow looking “through the globe,” and miles of land and sea would have to be transparent. Polaris can be seen, however, up to over 20 degrees South latitude.
- 100) If Earth were a ball, the Southern Cross and other Southern constellations would all be visible at the same time from every longitude on the same latitude as is the case in the North with Polaris and its surrounding constellations. Ursa Major/Minor and many others can be seen from every Northern meridian simultaneously whereas in the South, constellations like the Southern Cross cannot. This proves the Southern hemisphere is not “turned under” as in the ball-Earth model, but simply stretching further outwards away from the Northern center-point as in the flat Earth model.
- 101) Sigma Octantis is claimed to be a Southern central pole star similar to Polaris, around which the Southern hemisphere stars all rotate around the opposite direction. Unlike Polaris, however, Sigma Octantis can NOT be seen simultaneously from every point along the same latitude, it is NOT central but allegedly 1 degree off-center, it is NOT motionless, and in fact cannot be seen at all using publicly available telescopes! There is legitimate speculation regarding whether Sigma Octantis even exists.
- 103) There are several constellations which can be seen from far greater distances over the face of the Earth than should be possible if the world were a rotating, revolving, wobbling ball. For instance, Ursa Major, very close to Polaris, can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude (the North Pole) all the way down to 30 degrees South latitude. For this to be possible on a ball-Earth the Southern observers would have to be seeing through hundreds or thousands of miles of bulging Earth to the Northern sky.
- 104) The constellation Vulpecula can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude, all the way to 55 degrees South latitude. Taurus, Pisces and Leo can be seen from 90 degrees North all the way to 65 degrees South. An observer on a ball-Earth, regardless of any tilt or inclination, should not logically be able to see this far.
- 105) Aquarius and Libra can be seen from 65 degrees North to 90 degrees South! The constellation Virgo is visible from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, and Orion can be seen from 85 degrees North all the way to 75 degrees South latitude! These are all only possible because the “hemispheres” are not spheres at all but concentric circles of latitude extending outwards from the central North Pole with the stars rotating over and around.
- 102) Some heliocentrists have tried to suggest that the Pole Star’s gradual declination overhead as an observer travels southwards is proof of a globular Earth. Far from it, the declination of the Pole Star or any other object is simply a result of the Law of Perspective on plane (flat) surfaces. The Law of Perspective dictates that the angle and height at which an object is seen diminishes the farther one recedes from the object, until at a certain point the line of sight and the seemingly uprising surface of the Earth converges to a vanishing point (i.e. the horizon line) beyond which the object is invisible.
59 Replies to “Polestar proves flat earth”
We know that in the flat earth model, the south pole star gets ignored. The flat earthers acknowledge that the north star exists but they refuse to admit that there is a south pole with a south star and their model leave that completely out. Flat earthers cant explain away the south star.
This may be the first time I’ve heard anyone claim the existence of the “South Star.” People have claimed the existence of the “Southern Cross,. Please provide evidence of this supposed Southern Star, photographic images might help if you can prove their of the southern sky and identify the source.
Thanks for all your effort in this regard.
There is no star in the exact position of Southern Celestial Pole. But there is a Southern Celestial Pole. A constant point in the sky around which all the luminaries in the Southern sky rotate.
They also don’t explain why Polaris can’t be seen from the southern hemisphere.
“They also don’t explain why Polaris can’t be seen from the southern hemisphere.“
It can be seen South of Equator.
Yes, On the Level, from the top of a mountain a few hundred miles South of the Equator…
If you were honest you would admit that Polaris is directly above, in the center of the sky, at the North Pole, and it descends in the sky one degree down for every degree of latitude as you travel towards the equator. So you can tell your latitude by measuring the number of degrees above the horizon Polaris is. It is 90 degrees above the horizon at the North Pole, so latitude is 90 degrees and it is on the horizon at the equator, so latitude is zero.
This is EXACTLY what we would expect to experience if we were traveling around the surface of a globe. But this behavior of Polaris is very very difficult to explain if we were on a flat plane.
Take your dinner plate. Stick a straw in the middle and stick Polaris on the top of that. Move anywhere on your dinner plate and look up. Polaris will always remain up there. It will never come down to the horizon. But try on a balloon, then you will see you are getting the same effect as we actually experience.
This is why in some places I say flat earthers do not look at the sky. Because if you understand what is happening in the sky, then it is very difficult to understand how we could be seeing this manifestation from a flat plane.
Thank you Flat Earth Facts for clarifying your claim that Flat Earthers don’t look at the sky. You state:
“ If you were honest you would admit that Polaris is directly above, in the center of the sky, at the North Pole, and it descends in the sky one degree down for every degree of latitude as you travel towards the equator. So you can tell your latitude by measuring the number of degrees above the horizon Polaris is. It is 90 degrees above the horizon at the North Pole, so latitude is 90 degrees and it is on the horizon at the equator, so latitude is zero.”
If in fact, Earth were a ball as described Polaris should in fact be at the horizon near the equator as you claim. Yet you list the following as a Flat Earth supporting proof:
“ 99) Viewed from a ball-Earth, Polaris, situated directly over the North Pole, should not be visible anywhere in the Southern hemisphere. For Polaris to be seen from the Southern hemisphere of a globular Earth, the observer would have to be somehow looking “through the globe,” and miles of land and sea would have to be transparent. Polaris can be seen, however, up to over 20 degrees South latitude.”
You also list the following:
“103) There are several constellations which can be seen from far greater distances over the face of the Earth than should be possible if the world were a rotating, revolving, wobbling ball. For instance, Ursa Major, very close to Polaris, can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude (the North Pole) all the way down to 30 degrees South latitude. For this to be possible on a ball-Earth the Southern observers would have to be seeing through hundreds or thousands of miles of bulging Earth to the Northern sky.“
For Polaris to be seen 20 to 30 degrees South of the equator it could not have sunk to horizon level at the equator. 20 to 30 degrees South of the equator is far more than a few hundred miles, more like 2500-3750 miles. These proofs have been attested to by mariners, navigators and many others. As Mr. William Carpenter states :
“The astronomers’ theory of a globular Earth necessitates the conclusion that, if we travel south of the equator, to see the North Star is an impossibility. Yet it is well known this star has been seen by navigators when they have been more than 20 degrees south of the equator. This fact, like hundreds of other facts, puts the theory to shame, and gives us a proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (71)“
On the website below bloggers posted videos showing Polaris apparently to be significantly above the equator from Malaysia and Indonesia. The Malay location was apparently North of equator and the Indonesian location approximately at the equator.
It’s not that Flat Earthers don’t look at the sky as your post erroneneously asserts. They obviously do and observe completely different phenomenon than claimed by globists. Your own list of “Flat Earth” proofs show that to be the case.
If you’re honest you’ll admit the claims Made by both camps in this regard conflict. No model can resolve the conflict only facts and repeated observation can.
Hi On the Level
Yes. You know I am independent. I am not on your side and I am not on the globe earth side. So you are correct. There is a very strong bias towards the globe earth model and there is a very strong tendency to ignore any evidence that may contradict the globe earth model.
So if you look at the sky how do you explain this, that Polaris descends one degree in the sky as you move one degree in latitude towards the equator?
That is exactly the behavior we would expect on a globe, but seems impossible on a flat plane?
As far as observations from points very close to the equator, that is not very relevant. From points very close to the equator, if you are above sea level, you will be able to see Polaris for some time. So if you get on top of a big mountain quite a distance north of the equator, you may be able to see Polaris. But this is the exception, not the rule.
If you are at sea level at the equator you will see Polaris on the horizon. So this behavior is totally consistent with moving about on the surface of a globe and totally inconsistent with moving about on a flat plane. It is for this reason I suggest that flat earthers do not look at the sky.
Flat Earth Facts please note what Eric Dubay observed regarding the globe model’s failure to account for the many Polaris and other star observations from 20-30 degrees and more South of the equator. It was in the late 19th century that Heliocentrists contrived the idea that the Earth tilted 23.5 degrees to attempt to account for these observations. In additional, remember Foucalt even used electromagnets to fake pendulum oscillations supposedly mirroring Earth’s supposed rotation.
“To account for this glaring problem in their model, desperate heliocentrists since the late 19th century have claimed the ball-Earth actually tilts a convenient 23.5 degrees back on its vertical axis. Even this brilliant revision to their theory cannot account for the visibility of many other constellations though. For instance, Ursa Major, very close to Polaris, can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude (the North Pole) all the way down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation Vulpecula can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude, all the way to 55 degrees South latitude. Taurus, Pisces and Leo can be seen from 90 degrees North all the way to 65 degrees South. Aquarius and Libra can be seen from 65 degrees North to 90 degrees South! The constellation Virgo is visible from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, and Orion can be seen from 85 degrees North all the way to 75 degrees South latitude! An observer on a ball-Earth, regardless of any tilt or inclination, should not logically be able to see this far.“
The globe/heliocentric theory despite your claims never held up to factual analysis. That’s why so many mutations were Made to make it appear that it someone could. Note also globists have a tough time locating precisely where the Celestial poles are there said to be moving all the time. The globular theory appears unable to cope. As a globist noted:
The great tragedy of science, the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly
— Thomas Henry Huxley
Yes, On the Level, it was a fantastic idea, brilliant, to tilt the spinning globe on that 23.5 degree tilt. Truly a stroke of genius, it works so well. But I am not sure that this will help in seeing Polaris from the south. Because no matter how they tilt it they still have to have Polaris directly above the North Pole. So you still should not be able to see Polaris south of the equator. Unless I am missing something here?
The reason they tilted the spinning globe 23.5 degrees is to explain the different lengths of the days during the year and to explain the 24 hour sun and 24 hour darkness days on North and South poles. It is really brilliant and does really work, in the sense that it predicts very accurately what we experience in the various places on the ‘globe’.
But titling the spinning ball like this is not going to help you see Polaris in the South. I think better not to rely on observations from the 19th century. You need to have a look today, now, and see the situation. I think you will find that Polaris is down at the horizon on the equator at sea level. If not please let me know. You can see it, from the top of a mountain, south of the equator, but not at sea level. So check it out. If you find Polaris 30 degrees above the horizon at sea level on the equator then the globe earthers have a problem, but I don’t think you will find this.
Yes. Of course, I agree, globe earth model has been patched together and adjusted to suit the observations, however the resulting model they have is really a very good predictive scientific model. They have a logical idea they can explain which could work. And the point I am trying to make is the flat earth people do not have a model they agree on, they do not even have a map of the flat earth that could work, and they can’t explain what is happening in the sky. Like this behavior of Polaris, dropping down one degree in the sky as you move towards the equator by one degree of latitude. That is what would happen if you were moving on a ball, its hard to imagine how this could happen if you were moving on a flat plane…
Yes. Foucault’s Pendulum, I think it is real. But just because the pendulum rotates does not mean it is the earth that is rotating. There is a rotation in the system, we all agree on that. Either it is the earth that is rotating or it is the system that is rotating around the earth. So in either case, the rotation of the earth or the rotation of the system around the earth, that could cause the pendulum to rotate.
“But titling the spinning ball like this is not going to help you see Polaris in the South. I think better not to rely on observations from the 19th century. You need to have a look today, now, and see the situation. I think you will find that Polaris is down at the horizon on the equator at sea level. If not please let me know. You can see it, from the top of a mountain, south of the equator, but not at sea level. So check it out. If you find Polaris 30 degrees above the horizon at sea level on the equator then the globe earthers have a problem, but I don’t think you will find this.”
Next time I’m South of the equator I’ll have a look myself. It’s been over a decade since the last opportunity.
Have a Great day!
Actually it can, to the southern tropic line because of the axis of the earth.
On the level… Eric Dubay is outright lying. You cannot see polaris more then a couple degrees south of the equator due to refraction, if it wasn’t for refraction Polaris wouldn’t be visible south of the equator at all. I live at 12°S in Darwin, Australia and Polaris is never visible at anytime of the year. Any claim otherwise is blatant lies
we are living in a time like no other time like today but then again yesterday was like no other day like yesterday Nicky Minaj.
Basically, if you are stretching out the south pole that means you are seeing the high number of north degree before the equator to the south, after the equator, but you are not seeing the southern stars, but north stars that stretch out and counter-rotate that is beyond the horizon but do not go down but counter-rotate, so it is not south stars, but still north star which we can see Southern Cross in the north when should be southern cross or Midpoint Cross. So, but too south you can’t see it because it will go to horizon, but less than the horizon, it is counter-rotate to the north direction, not southern direction. The further to the south the less you will see which you should see that is equal to the north, but not, right.
That is on way to proof flat earth so it is not the same equal of degree for north and south, but higher in north for north pole and little lower in south for north pole, but not opposite for south pole which can’t be seen in north and south, so it is a very low range of south degree to see south stars. The range of south stars is lower than range for the north star.
What a load of derp. Polaris cannot be seen at “over 20 degrees south latitude” The rest of this stuff is just fantasy wish fulfillment . For instance: Vulpecula is a seasonal constellation. Visible in northern hemisphere in the summer, and winter in the southern hemisphere. Funny how you forgot to mention that – and the reason why it is so. Hint: earth is a spheroid and is tilted on its axis. The rest of your astronomy is equally derp ridden. Flat earth fail.
The reason why the pole star is not visible from points in the Southern Hemisphere is clearly because the light from the pole star passes through too much of the atmosphere and is all absorbed. The atmosphere IS NOT perfectly clear. There is a slight opacity to it which increases with distance. Hence you cannot see the PS from, for example Australia.
……well. no. It’s because you don’t have vision that goes on forever. You can only see so far. Image a giant room. A hallway going o. Forever, it’s going to look like a pin point at some point. Same thing, just on a larger scale. The distance convergaces. We have circle vision. You can’t see on forever. Solo the whole flat earth can see on forever thing is stupid
And yet you can see other stars just above the horizon -how is this possible, yet not seeing Polaris?
For all the amount of time you have taken to think about this point, it is a pity that you didn’t look for information sources about the main concern: how does Polaris remain aligned with the Earth’s North Pole?
The first assumption is simply wrong: Polaris is currently but has not always been nor it will be forever the Pole Star. Just like Einstein introduced his cosmological constant to allow his theory to match what he thought he was observing (that the Universe didn’t change) here it is assumed that Polaris has always been in the North direction. Well that is not true.
In reality, the rotation axis of the Earth precesses in a cycle that lasts 26000 years, this is the tilt that was asked for above.
As is taught in every school in the World, the Earth is affected by two movements, one of which is the orbit around the Sun. It needs to be stated here, that the whole Solar System does. Every planet except Pluto (is it a planet? yes? no?) follows the same (very similar) path as seen from the Earth. This is because the whole Solar System is moving within the same plane. Motion around the Sun is done in the Ecliptic plane. There is the Sun, then there is this tablecloth around it. The planets are moving in circles within this cloth to a very good approximation.
Picture a marble moving through the tablecloth. At the same time the marble is spinning with its axis pointing towards the room’s ceiling (Polaris).
Some information about the Pole Star including equinox’s precession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_star
Information about the Ecliptic Plane: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecliptic
We know that some stars that can be seen from the Northern Hemisphere cannot be seen from the Southern Hemisphere. There are some stars that can be seen in the Southern Hemisphere that cannot be seen from the Northern Hemisphere. When Magallanes started his voyage around the globe 500 years ago (which was completed by Elcano) he discovered some stars no one (in Europe) had ever seen before. Nebulae that today we name after him (like both Magallanic clouds). Sailors used the stars to guide them and they knew them very well…. in the Northern Hemisphere!!!! The Southern Hemisphere was completely unknown to them and they had a wee bit of issues navigating using those stars. The national flags of several countries (New Zealand, Fiji, Australia…) portray the Southern Cross, which is a constellation that you cannot see from (most places in) the Northern Hemisphere. Likewise, Polaris cannot be seen from the Southern Hemisphere.
What do modern European Astronomy institutions do to be able to watch the stars (and galaxies and blazars, magnetars, quasars, pulsars, clouds, nebulae…) that can only be seen from the Southern Hemisphere? Well, they build the European Southern Observatory in some country in the Southern Hemisphere. The European Southern Observatory bridges a gap for European astronomers. Located in Atacama’s desert in Chile, possibly one of best places in the whole Earth to observe the night sky.
Not only observation is excellent from Atacama, but also, because of its location south of the Equator, it is possible from E.S.O. to have a look at a region of the sky that we normally don’t have access to, from the Northern Hemisphere. The real scientific value of the E.S.O. is that it is one of the very few (and one of the very best) observatories placed in the Southern Hemisphere.
E. S. O: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Southern_Observatory
A picture of the night sky in Atacama: http://cde.peru.com/ima/0/1/2/0/8/1208052/924×530/turismo-atacama-chile-estrellas-cielo.jpg
This is because depending on what Hemisphere on the Earth you are placed, you look towards one part of the sky or the other. Which only happens in a globe.
Yes. Good points. It is hard, if not impossible, to explain what we see in the sky presuming the earth was flat. If the earth was flat and there was a polestar above the North Pole that would be visible all over the flat earth. Think of the earth as a dinner plate and the polestar a light suspended above the centre of the plate. You could see it from everywhere.
But on a globe, you would be looking in a different direction into the sky from the Southern Hemisphere than you would be looking from the Northern Hemisphere, thus seeing a different part of the sky, different stars, etc, which is exactly what we experience.
So what we observe in the sky, that is confirming the globe earth model, and contradicting the predictions of the flat earth model.
If the earth were a globe Polaris should not be visible from most if not all the southern hemisphere. In fact, people claim to see it from Australia.
It can also be seen from south america.
Yes. I am in Australia and if the earth was flat I would most certainly be able to see Polaris. Just take a dinner plate and imagine it is the flat earth and put a stick in the middle and put Polaris on the top of that stick and imagine where Australia would be on the flat earth map and imagine you were a little ant and stand there and look up. Can you see Polaris. Of course you can. But I am here in Australia and I can’t see Polaris. It is below the horizon here. Way below the horizon. Of course Australia is big. So if you went very far North, like Darwin, we have even got more North possible than that, you are getting up close near the Equator. So maybe in some cases way up there close to the equator you may see it. But if you could it would be way down near the horizon, not up in the center of the sky as we would expect it to be on a flat earth.
Same story of course. South America. You can’t see it from Argentina for example. But Equator goes through South America around Bogata so you can be in South America but North of the equator. You can see Polaris there, but again near the horizon, not up in the middle of the sky as we would expect on a flat earth.
It would be possible to get this effect on a flat plane but you would have to bring down the stars very very very low…
If you have a light in the middle of your room and walk from one side of the room to the other in the middle of the room it is above your head and on either side it goes down, if your room was big enough it would go down to the horizon.
But for this to work with polaris you are talking of having it thousands of miles up, not light years up….
Anyhow my point is globe earthers have got their story straight. They have a model, which every globe earther accepts, and which is a logical reasonable story that explains what we see happening in the sky. It may or may not be a true story. But it is a logically consistent and believable story. But flat earthers do not have any agreed upon model and can not explain how any of the details work.
It may be possible to construct a valid predictive scientific model based on the premise that the earth is flat. I don’t know. But flat earthers so far have not done this and scientifically inclined people can not take it seriously unless you can present a valid predictive model that explains our observations.
Personally I don’t know. I am not a flat earther and not a globe earther. I see faults in both ideas and suspect the reality is something different.
On the level, Polaris is not visible anywhere in Australia…Polaris is visible no further then 1°S of the equator…and that is only visible there due to refraction. So anyone claiming Polaris is visible anywhere in the southern hemisphere south of 1°S is blatantly lying.
No, not lying. It depends on your altitude. If you get up on a high mountain you can see Polaris South of the Equator, a bit. But I agree. Not in Australia. I live in Australia and have never seen Polaris from here and would be extremely surprised if I did!
Polaris cannot be seen at 20* South latitude, or 10*, or 5*. As you travel north or south in the northern hemisphere, the angel of Polaris corresponds closely to the latitude from which you observe it. That could only happen if the Earth is a sphere. As you travel south (in the northern hemisphere) Polaris’ relative position in the sky sinks in the sky correspondent with latitude until it disappears below the horizon at about the equator. As you head south in the northern hemisphere, Polaris doesn’t fade away or get dimmer (which would be the case if the light were “absorbed”) but sinks below the horizon. This would not happen with a “flat earth”.
What I’m talking about is illustrated here: https://flatearth.ws/polaris-angle
You can prove this fact for yourself by measuring the angle of Polaris from the horizon with a protractor as you travel north or south in the northern hemisphere. You don’t need to rely on websites or photos from space. Prove it for yourself based on your own observations. It is observable, verifiable, irrefutable proof the earth is a sphere.
And then maybe you’ll start to wonder if believing junk theories and assertions from untrained people is really the best way to live life.
This reply is also for flatearthfacts who posted this same point. The distance between each degree of latitude is the same. What you are describing is a linear falloff as the law of perspective prescribes on a flat surface. A curved surface is not a linear equation but exponential. The amount of change increases more and more, not at a constant rate. In order to explain how a curved surface has a linear falloff rate they must say the light is so far away, plug in nearly infinity, so that the shape of the surface doesn’t matter. Ok, that works in theory but the other way shows closer stars and a flat surface. A more understandable universe because we can easily triangulate their positions, instead of relying on the color of a pixel to tell us everything about composition and distance
But! If earth was flat then polaris would be visible everywhere instead of up to 20 degrees south
So riddle me this Batman…
I like the distance proof of flat with telemetry. I think one of the best examples is standing on the shore of Lake Michigan at Cook Nuclear/St. Joseph and looking across the 70 or so miles at the Sears Tower in Chicago on a relatively clear morning. Half of the tower is visible. I was flabbergasted when I discovered this when I was working on a repair job there in 1981. I can now understand the compression of the atmosphere (prism effect) and sight convergence of distance not allowing me to see the bottom half. According to flat earthers, I should be able to see the whole thing with a telemetric device of sufficient power. If that is correct, then at the same Latitude of 43N, I should be able to see the Southern Cross anytime of the day or night and vice versa regarding viewing Polaris from Sydney.
Those three things would be the coolest things to prove. What kind of telescope is needed to see the Crux from that vantage point?
Why can’t we get through the dome? Or is there a door in the floor? (Interdimensional means?)
Let me explain what flat earthers fail to comprehend with respect to the motion of the planet around the sun. If you are in a car travelling at speed in a straight line, the nearby objects appear to fly by, whereas objects farther away ‘move’ more slowly. If you focus your attention on the moon, there is no apparent movement because the distance you move is negligible when compared to the distance of the moon (large change in angle compared with negligible change in angle). Similarly, the orbit of the Earth is negligible compared with the distance to the nearest star – let alone all the others. Actually, comparison of photographs taken 6 months apart do show tiny ‘movements’ of the nearest stars, but these are not apparent to most observers. Doing simple trig using Earth’s orbit (149.6 millionkm) and distance to nearest star (40.678 billion km) we get an angle of only 0.00021 deg. If you travelled across the WHOLE solar system, there would still only be a change of 0.0128 deg for the NEAREST star.
That’s a start to help free people from the grip of pseudoscience and conspiracy. Think about the fact that scientists are, by their very nature, curious, imaginative and analytical. They don’t just accept the status quo. That’s why we have an abundance of technology, chemistry, medicine, supersonic travel etc. These qualities make them the least likely to be fooled by false concepts. On the contrary, science is the epitome of rational thought and evidence based explanations. Listen to intelligent scientists – not to unintelligent conspiracy theorists.
Hi. There is absolutely no argument that scientists are, by their very nature, curious, imaginative and analytical. They are also, generally, quite intelligent. Which means they do have a great ability to tell a very believable story. The greatest scientific minds on the planet, over hundreds and hundreds of years in the Western world, have come up with their story of creation, their story of the cosmos and our position with it, the nature of our existence, etc.
Because they are curious, imaginative, analytical and intelligent they have crafted a very consistent persuasive scientific predictive model which does a very good job of explaining our observations.
And the globe earth model is certainly the best model we have.
My point, and the purpose of this site actually, is just because you have a good model, does not necessarily mean your model is correct. It may be your model can make accurate predictions but actually the system is working differently from your model’s assumptions.
My interest in this is sparked by my exposure to a much older, much more elaborate and complete model coming form the ancient books of knowledge in India. That model is based on different assumptions, still, that model can be used to make accurate predictions of solar and lunar eclipses, etc.
So the same observations can also be explained convincingly and scientifically using a model based on different premises than the current Western model.
Now I know globe earth model is very strong and very convincing and as far as I am concerned, with what I know now, it is most likely correct. However I am interested in exploring the other possibilities to see if we can actually construct a valid predictive scientific model based on different assumptions as to how the universe works.
Now here is where your scientists fall apart, most of them at least, because they mistakenly accept their theories as facts, will get very upset and demand that no one can question their model and will just totally refuse to consider any possibility outside their accepted doctrine. Heliocentric model for example, it is a theory, geocentric model also works, but our scientists have arbitrarily chosen, with no strong proof, of course they give retrograde motion of the planets as proof, but it is not proof, they have been able to construct a very good explanation for the retrograde motion of the planets using heliocentric model, still that is not proof. So they have chosen arbitraryly to believe the Solar System rotates around the sun, but there are other possibilities, which they completely ignore and refuse to consider. They have their doctrine, they have their story and they are sticking to it, and they will get very very angry at anyone who refuses to accept their story. This is more like blind faith in a religious dogma than science.
So the point is with these cosmic things is we have very little ability to observe and no ability to make any significant experiments. So really the cosmos is outside the grasp of the ‘scientific method.’ So they have developed a very good story for sure, and they are very intelligent for sure. But still the possibility exists that there story is not a truly accurate representation of the reality.
“If you focus your attention on the moon, there is no apparent movement because the distance you move is negligible when compared to the distance of the moon (large change in angle compared with negligible change in angle). Similarly, the orbit of the Earth is negligible compared with the distance to the nearest star – let alone all the others. Actually, comparison of photographs taken 6 months apart do show tiny ‘movements’ of the nearest stars, but these are not apparent to most observers. Doing simple trig using Earth’s orbit (149.6 millionkm) and distance to nearest star (40.678 billion km) we get an angle of only 0.00021 deg. If you travelled across the WHOLE solar system, there would still only be a change of 0.0128 deg for the NEAREST star.”
Flat Earthers do understand these claims. That’s the problem for you and any ignorant followers. We’ve all read and understand this. The problem is your apparent willingness to present these unsubstantiated conjectured astronomical distances as fact. You know they are not. Neither you nor anyone fraudulent enough to present such assertions as fact has any clue how to measure or support such fantasms. If you don’t know this in the 21st century something is seriously wrong with your education.
BTW, none of this claims will explain how Polaris always remains fixed over the North pole while the Earth supposedly orbits a 584+ million mile ellipse around the sun. Mutating Earth’s fixed multi-dimensional position alter it’s angle relative to Polaris, and it’s not insubstantial. Merely tilting Earth 23 degrees may convince the gullible but not the rational.
On the Level you are constantly showing us that flat earthers have no idea about how the globe earth model works. It could be explained as ignorance, stupidity, etc. But, with all due respects, if you are going to discuss the globe earth model and try and say your non-existent flat earth model is better, you have to try to understand the globe earth model, otherwise, like virtually all the flat earthers, you come across as as stupid fool, with all due respects.
Try to understand the globe earth model in this regard, earth pointing to Polaris constantly, I agree, it is a very unlikely thing, actually they say earth does not always point at Polaris, it is just a coincidence that it is pointing there now…
Anyhow, yes it would be a problem but try to understand the earth is always pointing in the same direction. Yes. It is tilted. But North pole is always pointing to Polaris and south pole is always pointing to southern celestial pole. Your arguement would be valid, but to avoid this argument the globe earth people have put the stars so so so far away, light years away. And as they are trying to explain to you the stars are so so so far away that the tiny movement of the earth from one side of the sun to the other is completely irrelevant.
And the earth is always pointing in the same direction. The tilt it is on is always the same, not that it is titling in different directions. So earth is always pointing in the same direction, only it is moving almost 200 million miles from one side of the sun to the other. But because the stars are so so so many light years away, this 200 million miles is nothing, makes no difference.
Yes. I agree, sounds totally unlikely. I guarantee if the stars actually were light years away we could not see them. There are so many possible problems with this explanation. But it is a fact. If you put the stars far enough away, so so so far away, light years away, that 200 million miles the earth moves becomes nothing and makes no difference.
And of course all the other movements they have got of sun, of the solar system around the center of galexy, you know. It takes a long time actually. And when we move then Polaris will no longer be the north star.
They are telling a story, they have no idea actually if it is correct or not. And I am sure in so many ways globe earth story is incorrect. But they have got their story and it has been thought out by very intelligent and thoughtful scientists and philosophers down through the ages. So we have to give them credit that their story does make sense and is logical. But they do not know if it is actually correct or not. It is just a story.
The globe earth model is a story, nothing more than a story which happens to accurately predict and explain our observations. It is a world-view they have constructed based on observations and it is feasible, logical, possible, and for the most part works as a predictive model.
So what you need to do is create a feasible logical possible working model of the universe based on the premise that the earth is flat that works just as well as the globe earth model.
Then if you can tell your story in a way that is as logical and convincing as the globe earth story, we may be able to come to the conclusion that actually we don’t know how the universe is organized, we don’t know how it works.
That is the truth.
Unless we can find out from someone who knows how it works we can not know. Because our ability to observe it is so limited.
“Try to understand the globe earth model in this regard, earth pointing to Polaris constantly, I agree, it is a very unlikely thing, actually they say earth does not always point at Polaris, it is just a coincidence that it is pointing there now…”
Thank you Flat Earth Facts for the reply. Old Musician ( aka Same Old Song ) and you do not quite understand what I claim and it’s in part my fault for not spelling it out clear enough. Allow me to explain.
Heliocentric Globists claim the ball Earth tilts ~23 degrees & simultaneously points in the same direction toward Polaris throughout it’s ~584+ million mile orbit ( not 149.6 million kilometers as bogus Old Musician claims of current heliocentric model delusion ). In fact, I do not disagree with Old Musician’s claim that IF according to heliocentric model you reduce Earth’s orbit enough ( he does way below current heliocentric NASA claims ), conjure some enormous distance for Polaris ( which again he does ) and assume Earth’s gravitational pull has little or no effect either on Earth’s tilt or axial motion then you can make the math prove whatever you like. However, it bears no relation to reality or even current heliocentric drivel. Note: remember Earth Heliocentrists say is ~93 million miles from the Sun, that must produce a circular or elliptical orbit far in excess of 148.6 km and I find it difficult to believe neither of you know this. Do either of you know basic geometry, let alone trig, or the circumference of a circle?
My previous post did not contest Old Musician’s strange numerical claims which in fact remain dubious. I pointed out that if a ball denser than iron, which some Globists claim Earth to be, and ~25 thousand miles in circumference were in point of fact moved through some imaginary space vacuum in a circle over 1/2 billion miles in circumference the Earth’s tilt and axial motion could not be unaffected. The alteration almost certainly produces an angular discrepancy with Polaris that would “not be insubstantial.”
This should be obvious since gravitation is now known to be as Nikola Tesla and others have pointed out lines of electro-magnetic force. That is why unlike Old Musician’s devotion to all things Newtonian later in life Einstein claimed to put greater emphasis and support for James Clark Maxwell. In fact, if Newtonian math worked so well why do modern Heliocentrists distance themselves from arguably Newton’s greatest equation and 2nd Law of Motion F=MA. Today that’s left in the dustbin of history. This despite the fact every mechanical engineer worth his salt uses the equation frequently. Apparently, Newtonian maths don’t work in modern Heliocentric Theory despite the erstwhile curmudgeonly claim of some Old Musician.
Moreover, Flat Earthers know experience with gyroscopes on Earth , show that the nature of a rapidly spinning gyroscope is to maintain their position in spite of motion and changes in the direction of gravitational pull. Curiously, it is Heliocentric Globists who deny this except when it comes to Earth’s slow rotation and orbit around the sun.
Globists use the same supposedly non-interfering gravity to explain how the Earth’s gravitational pull makes the lunar orbit around the Earth show the same Lunar face to the Earth at every point in it’s orbit in what they call an ORBITAL LOCK!!! I kid you not. In addition, Globists use gravities magic inconsistent control properties to attack the Flat Earth observation that navigational gyroscopes in aircraft make a ball Earth impossible.
A gyroscope independent of gravity would maintain an aircraft level consistent with it’s original heading tangent to the Earth circle not along the Earth’s supposedly curved path. Globists deny this claiming gravity in a mysterious and subtile manners alters the gyroscope to automatically adjust it’s level to Earth’s curve.
So Flat Earth Facts and Old Musician please provide an explanation as to how magic gravity can force the same lunar face always to smile on the Earth, force navigational gyroscopes to alter their level indicators to confirm with an imaginary ball Earth surface and simultaneously have zero observable effect on supposed ball Earth’s 23 degree axial tilt toward and rotational motion around Polaris/North Pole.
You both know you can’t and have no clue how it possibly could.
This only further proves the unworkable globe model to be the fraud we all know it is.
Have a great day!
It’s hard to debate with someone who throws out a stream of incorrect statements , such as that Tesla proved gravity was an electro magnetic wave- this is simply wrong. You do not appear to understand basic principles of physics, which makes it hard to grasp where you are coming from, eg I don’t understand why you think gravity should affect the Earth’s axial tilt or why you can’t understand the concept of orbital lock, or don’t realise that NewtonIan physics is good enough, but is not the complete answer. It’s good that you ask searching questions, but a little more study would answer any of your queries.
“I guarantee if the stars actually were light years away we could not see them.” You guarantee? Based upon what? Stars are like the Sun, some are bigger, a lot are smaller. If we put the Sun at a distance of 32.6 lightyears (10pc) it would be about 2 million times as far away. According to the inverse square law its intensity would become 4×10^12 times as weak. That would mean its brightness would become that of a star of magnitude 4.5, still visible with the naked eye.
Yes. All your laws are fudged to fit your assumption that the stars are light years away.
Two of your replies came to me (Old Musician), but may have just been because the dreadfully ignorant FEer mentioned me in his comment, or possibly they are sent to everyone who is part of the discussion. I TOTALLY agree that FEers lack even the most basic understanding of physics, maths or astronomy and are easy prey for anyone spouting stupid conspiracy theories – however irrational. If it weren’t for their irresponsible actions of infecting more educationally and emotionally challenged people, I’d simply pity them. However, they are affecting the development and prospects of susceptible young people who don’t yet possess the knowledge or wisdom to defend themselves against anti-science propaganda.
Problem is science has failed them. Scientists don’t teach science anymore. Scientists are employed and they teach what their employers want them to teach, which generally has no connection whatsoever with science. When “science” is teaching that carbon is poison, and every life form on this planet is carbon based, how stupid is science? When science is teaching that there is no such thing as male and female, how stupid is science? When science is teaching that deadly poison is “safe and effective” how stupid is science?
So how can you expect any young people to think of science as anything but stupid?
I share your amazement, actually it is not just flat earthers who have no idea about science, it is all the younger people, they have no idea, even the globe earthers, they have no idea how the globe earth model works.
So the problem is scientists are sold out and instead of teaching real science they are teaching stupid things because they are being paid to teach stupid things by their masters.
Unfortunately science, at least today, is stupid.
It is a great pity, because real science is a genuine search for the truth, it is material but in actually searching for the truth of how the material world is working, there is a good chance that a real scientist will be able to discern some divine energy behind the workings of material energy…
I thought that you said that FEers understand it all. Clearly not!
If the earth orbits the sun and is far enough away from the distant stars, there will be NO observable change in position. You are also UNAWARE that it DOES in fact rotate by a tiny amount as the earth rotates and the earth’s pressession HAS changed our view of the stars over millennia. Most of our model was a CONCLUSION of the centuries of recorded observations. Now, however, we can analyse the composition of elements in stars and galaxies as well as light sources on earth. We can measure changes in atmospheric pressure in the upper part of the atmosphere. We can observe and measure the jet stream which results from the Coriolis effect. The same \Newtonian maths which works PERFECTLY on earth also describes and predicts the orbits of everything in the solar system. I’m sorry that you aren’t educated enough to understand or even be aware of what scientists, astronomers and mathematicians spend their whole lives analysing.
The earth is an oblate spheroid. This was calculated by French and Spanish astronomers in the 1700s.
Stop being an ignorant fool.
Globe earth story, as I say often, and as you point out Old Musician, flat earthers don’t realize, globe earth story is a very good one. And as you say, with all respects to the globe earthers, it is more than a story. It is a vald scientific predictive model which does pass most of the tests when you compare it with our actual observations.
I would be careful with large capital PERFECTLY letters however. It has got some weak points. But it is a beautiful concept. The shiny blue mostly water covered marble spinning on a tilted axis in the sky rotating around the sun. Magnificent, beautiful, awesome.
Globe earth model, it is more than a story, it is our conception of our reality, and it is a story that may well be true. Currently there is nothing that can seriously compete with the globe earth model. It is, as you point out, the conclusion of centuries of recorded observations. But what you don’t realize is we can’t see much of the universe. So what we can’t see, we can’t observe, that is very difficult to understand.
If you are inside a room and you hear some banging on the roof, you can speculate, what is the cause of that banging. You can speculate for centuries. And the great thinkers and scientists can ponder over it and come to a conclusion and declare it to the ignorant masses that they, the great scientists, are sure they know what is the cause of that banging sound. But the reality is they have just speculated and they have no idea, and no way of testing, if their speculations are correct or not.
The only way, actually, they could find out what was causing the banging on the roof is if they could get out of the building and have a look. Or find someone who had been outside and seen it, he could explain it to them.
Then, the person who has actually seen what is causing the banging on the roof, his version is authoritative. His version is real. The scientists who have speculated and pondered on it for centuries, without being able to observe the workings of the system, without being able to see what the cause of the banging actually is, all their speculations, actually, are useless.
So it is with the globe earth model. It is beautiful. It is a fantastic story. It is scientific in the sense that it is a model that explains and for the most part predicts our actual observations, it might even be true. But the reality is we don’t know if it is true or not.
Still it is all we have. Flat earthers have an idea, but no model, they can not explain how their idea could work in reality, they can not give us a model that predicts what we observe.
But if the flat earthers could provide such a model, that works as well as the globe earth model, then that would be equally valid as the globe earth model. They can’t, at least not now, but if they could, then the flat earth idea would be just as valid as the globe earth idea. Neither side would necessarily be correct still… The reality may be different again.
For example since the beginning of time almost all civilizations considered our solar system to be earth centered. And they calculated everything based on that. Everything is rotating around a central earth. And you can do that. If you take that assumption, that the earth is the center, then you can adjust all the globe earth model formulas for it, and they will all work perfectly in your solar system with the earth in the middle. You can adjust it either way. And we can not tell what is the actual fact. Because the relative motion within the system in either case is identical. And we are within the system. So it is just an arbitrary choice of the initial assumption. You can presume the earth is in the center and make your calculations according to that or you can presume the sun is in the center and make your calculations according to that. Both are completely valid predictive scientific models, both models work equally well. So depending on your philosophy, your religion, you can choose if you want to consider the earth the center or the sun the center.
But the reality, we have no way of determining that from within the system. The only way we can determine the reality is if we can find someone who has been outside the system and has observed it, he can tell us. Like all those scientists who were locked in the room postulating on the cause of the banging sound on the roof. It is useless, they will never find the truth in that way. Only when the man from outside comes into the room and explains what he has seen causing the sound on the roof. only then can they know…
If only we had spacecraft like for example Voyager, confirming the story….
If only we could trust NASA. Unfortunately NASA have a history of faking their exploits space. Seeing NASA so obviously faking sending men to the moon, it is very difficult to trust them when they say they have spacecraft like Voyager exploring the universe.
You make the mistake of assuming that the North Star is billions of miles away but if it were close it would be seen more easily the closer you get to the centre or north pole. If you were on the edge of the flat earth the close Northstar would be harder to see as hills and mountains would obscure it …. Flat Earthers ..if the sun and moon arer close why not the Northstar also?
“Flat Earthers ..if the sun and moon arer close why not the Northstar also?”
Agreed, it’s likely not light years or parsecs away.
Except on the ocean, with no hills, but you still can’t see Polaris in the southern hemisphere ( but you can see other stars just above the horizon, so no ‘thick atmosphere ‘ nonsense please.
Do I also make the mistake of ‘assuming’ TWO celestial poles around which the whole sky rotates in opposite directions and with everything upside down in the southern hemisphere?
The PURPOSE of my explanation is to explain how it is POSSIBLE to be on a rotating planet etc., because FEers keep saying that it is impossible.
What IS impossible is ONE flattie model that CONSISTENTLY supports EVERY OBSERVATION made for centuries and predicted perfectly using Newtonian maths. FE has NO model that can predict anything, or even account for eclipses.
If you lack education and intelligence, FE nonsense may seem credible. Otherwise, it REALLY isn’t.
“FE has NO model that can predict anything, or even account for eclipses.
If you lack education and intelligence, FE nonsense may seem credible. Otherwise, it REALLY isn’t.”
Truly, a sad and ignorant comment. Ancient Mayan astronomers accounted for and predicted eclipses hundreds of years in advance without the useless ball Earth model or modern theories about the supposed size and distances of the sun, moon and stars. They used extensive star mapping, recognized patterns and worked it out even better than the ball of Earth idols Copernicus and or Galileo who tried to catch up centuries later.
Their calendars were more accurate.
Even Wikipedia admits this:
Even pop culture science rags confess it:
Mayans curiously believed in a flat earth. It took globalists centuries but they still can’t catch up. They still don’t know where they are. Frankly, your cultural psuedo-scientific arrogance while inexcusable appears defensive because you call people of other ancient cultures ignorant and doing so advertise how small and limited your mind has become.
Flat Earthers also explain lunar phases. Results from the Solar rotation rate exceeding lunar rotation over Flat Earth by 1/2 degree ( approximate angular diameter of sun/moon ) per hour or 12 degrees in 24 hour period. Globe models as usual unneeded.
PLEASE WATCH: The Sun, Moon and Stars EXPLAINED
Honestly, hope there’s enough integrity on this website to include this information and not bury it. Pompous worship of disproven theories at the expense of historical fact and the accomplishments of other cultures seems vile and worthy of a supposed honest search for the Truth.
Youtube deleted your video:
If you have some other non-youtube link to it, let me know and I will watch it.
The link below presents a video: Flat Earth – The Moon Explained 100 percent. Some New Jersey guy made it & does a decent job explaining the lunar phases and varying solar/lunar rotation rate. His second video after this one in my opinion is better and somewhat more comprehensive.
There have been made more comprehensive videos, but it seems the best I can quickly find at this time.
Just a point you might find of interest. The selenelion is a common phenomenon where during the hypothesized lunar eclipse, where the Earth supposedly casts a shadow on the moon, both the sun and moon appear in the sky simultaneously. Globist claim refraction explains this apparent contradiction by lifting sun and moon higher. Problem is refraction bends light toward denser mediums not less dense. Should drop appatent solar and lunar positions. From a geocentrist globist website:
Bear in mind that this occurs extremely rarely, which strongly suggests that UNUSUAL conditions are present (ie. unusual layers of air of different densities). As someone who has performed experiments in refraction, diffraction, and optical instrument design, I can assure you that it is not simply whether or not one medium is denser than the other, but the angle of incidence of the light rays. If the sun or moon is lower than the horizon, light rays passing at an upward angle through a dense layer of air WILL refract the rays downward. Selenelion also occurs with astronomical observations of other bodies. It IS consistent with refraction.
I hope this helps.
Ok Old Musician (I am also an old musician) The geocentric understanding of the place we live in was around for much longer than the heliocentric and the idea that one heliocentric model can cover all the bases is equally unlikely. However regarding eclipses there are plenty of possibilities in the Flattie models just as there are in the globie model …. theories abound but proof is harder to pin down. There successfully predicted eclipses and moads of other stuff way before the heliocentric conspiracy theory became popular.
Gentlemen: Nice discourse. Nice to see counterpoints presented rationally and reasonably.
How perfect that God designed a method where we are born from above through the waters of the womb so than we have no recollection of his grand design. We are promised full restoration to our former intellect upon our return to the Father.
Plato gave us the concept of the cave. No earthling knows the size or shape of our cave; however, we do know that powers and principalities control the narrative.
Ezekiel was admonished to stop groveling in fear and stand up and listen as the Lord had many things to impart upon him. He aptly described God’s five-craft squadron based on his technology of a chariot wheel and horses.
The dark forces relish all forms of prostrating worship to the inclusion of of child sacrifice, all slavery, and abject poverty.
Where did the word planet originate? Is it Greek for of or pertaining to a plane? The narrative controllers have corrupted and reversed many of our common terms of understanding over the Millenia to the point of “white knights talking backwards”. The KJV only gives me descriptions of a 3D earth of some form surrounded by heavens. Could it be a fat disc?
Is Elon shooting rockets off into the ocean? The shape and size of the TFRs indicate a huge cone-shaped dog collar that prohibits any mortal man from gaining perspective.
Is NASA really consuming vast quantities of helium? If so, then they are launching from ships and barges far offshore and the rockets are only cover.
Is the cave the planet or the universe? In this realm it is both for we are all slaves on this plantation or rather planetation. God has sequestered us and this earth age for a time as a test for God’s followers so that the rest of his creation is not corrupted by Satan and his followers.
Thank you for reading,
Flat Earth Facts,
Globists miss obvious sky phenomenon that disproves Earth’s supposed rotundity. It’s been apparently observed everywhere on Earth that Zenith stars rise in the North East, reach the Zenith then circle back to set in the North West. This phenomenon has been observed both North and South of the equator consistent with a circuit round the North Star of a flat Earth. Zetetic astronomers noted this a long time ago. Please read attached info below.
However, one would expect in a spinning globe model that stars must always remain at Zenith latitude consistent with spin direction, but is in fact never observed. Again please read more from attachment below.
Yes. This is an interesting point. Something that we should test and prove today, not by referring to books from the 1800’s.
But like most of these flat earth ideas it is based on a misconception. Actually I think you will find what we see happening in the sky is consistent with what we would view from a spinning globe in the middle of a fixed star-field with some planets, sun and moon moving around. Or it is consistent with a stationary earth surrounded by a spinning star-field, with the planets, sun and moon also spinning with the stars but having their own independent movements also, like ants wandering around on a potter’s wheel.
Flat earthers don’t look at the sky… That is the thing. The only place that things work the way you expect them to work is at the equator. There everything rises in the east and sets in the west and goes straight across the sky. Because at the equator there is no effect of the tilt of the earth. But as you go north and south of the equator the earth is tilted, so at one point you are looking up and 12 hours later you are looking down. So because of the tilt, that changes the direction you are looking in the sky, so it appears that stars are not going across the sky in a straight line, like you say.
However, whether it exactly matches what we would expect to see from a globe, I have not really checked. And if you want to prove it you should check it yourself and prove it, rather than just quoting things from some dusty book from the 1800’s.
I would suggest that ‘On the level / Flat Earth Facts’ tries to actually understand what astronomers have understood for centuries about the observed positions of stars, planets, the sun and moon. Buy yourself a book and spend a long time getting to grips with the information. Does it seem remotely plausible that physicists, mathematicians and astronomers (including bona fide geniuses) have got such basic models wrong, and NONE of the thousands and thousands of students studying these subjects has EVER noticed an inconsistency?
Do you have any idea of the sheer volume of work that astronomers carry out every day? They measure emissions of all the EM spectrum from stars, galaxies, pulsars, quasars, nebulae, binary stars etc. which relate to temperature, chemical composition, distance, size, and speed (red shift). The closest stars can easily have their distance measured by comparing their apparent shift in position against the background stars at 6 month intervals. Hundreds have been measured this way. I am an amateur astronomer and have a friend who’s PhD in astrophysics was on the emission geometry of pulsars. Even with a modest telescope anyone can observe the moons of Jupiter orbiting the planet and clearly visible craters casting shadows on the moon. If you have a more expensive telescope, you can capture time lapse imagery of Jupiter rotating. It’s undoubtedly spherical. There are modern telescopes (hydrogen alpha) which enable you to see activity such as looping magnetic fields.
I suggest you spend some time thinking also. No one is saying that the great minds you worship have not observed these things. There is a rotation in the system. But the question is what is rotating. Is it the earth rotating or is it the system rotating around the earth.
Your great minds are incapable of determining what is the actual fact.
Because the observations will be identical in both cases.
So it is impossible for us to know if we are rotating or if the system is rotating around us.