วีดีโอ

Common misconception: Polaris itself isn't the point of rotation, it just sits very close to it. Also you do know that _Venus_ is the morning star, right?

The north star happens to sit very near the axis of that rotation so it barely moves at all. That's kind of what makes it the north star, dude.

Maybe because it’s above the North Pole, but why would a dumbass flat earther use basic logic

"how do you explain the North Star being stationary and the other stars rotating around it?" Polaris is not stationary at all, since it makes1.5 degrees circle on the sky during 23 hr 56 min 4 sec. "If the Earth were spinning, wouldn't the North Star also be moving across the sky overnight?" That depends. The closed a star is to the axis of Earth's rotation, the shorter circle it makes. If there was star at the axis of Earth's rotation, it wouldn't seem to rotate at all. But not a single naked eye visible star on the sky is that close to axis. "But it doesn't." If you really believe Polaris is not circling on the sky, then you never cared to actually observe it.

​@@peeperleviathan2839Let Go Of The Globe Is Not Guna Get U Anywhere.. But Innerstanding Where U Truly Are Will..🙏🏽💯

The church is in Guernsey, I don't know what your point was supposed to be

@@javierlatorre480 I'll cut through the bull here. The stars rotate around Polaris......and ONLY Polaris. The Antarctic wraps around us. Although there is a group of stars called the Southern Cross, that is not a star like Polaris is; it rotates around Polaris with the rest of the stars. There is plenty of tricks and CGI that will show it being a southern pole star, but it is not that in reality. Navigators only ever used Polaris as a way to navigate. They only ever wrote about Polaris when it came to navigation. I've seen the northern lights. You don't ever hear Australians talking about Southern lights, although the false narratives claim that Southern lights exist. They would all have equal attention if they existed. But the only time those Southern things exist is when they are lied about. The planes that take off for long destinations always travel across the equator to the northern regions before heading back to a distant southern destination. The only map that makes sense on is the map where Antarctica wraps around us; seeming to hold the water in like a cup.....or Holy Grail. It has already been proven to be flat, but how far it goes or even what the hell it is still needs to figured out. I know the group......I know the liars. The enemy is not the mystery here. Whether you have seen the evidence or not yourself, I just wanted to inform you that the Globe is a very old lie. This is why banks and secret societies need to be demolished, and all those involved need to be punished. It's not a ball......and that Austrian painter who became prominent in Germany got the enemy correct.... 💯.

@@michaelglendinning1738do you think it’s banned to go to the southern hemisphere?

@@michaelglendinning1738 I didn't get a notif for this, but to explain all the stuff you're getting wrong here: 1) The stars DON'T rotate around Polaris specifically, Polaris just happens to sit very close to the point of rotation, the north celestial pole 2) This only applies to the stars in the northern hemisphere, 2:43 shows the southern hemisphere stars rotating around a completely different point in the sky, directly opposite the one in the north. It's a totally different set of stars (you can see the Magellanic clouds right there) and they rotate clockwise instead of anticlockwise. No CGI required. 3) Navigators could only use Polaris to navigate north of the equator. Going further south, Polaris is _no longer visible,_ so they use the southern cross, since it points to the south celestial pole. 4) Australia and New Zealand are not as far south as Europe and the US are far north. Learn your latitudes, man. 5) They don't. I have personally flown Sydney - Santiago long haul both ways and can confirm we never had to go north of the equator. The flight that connects in LAX is not the only one that exists. 6) The map is the only one that makes sense to YOU because you STRUGGLE to understand the globe. 7) There is no proof of the Earth being flat, just a bunch of lies you have been fed. You DON'T know who the liars are, and that's the sad part about all this. 8) Aaaaaand you end it with H*tler apologism, okay

What about the SOUTH POLE AXIS? The one you're conveniently ignoring?

"Film the earth from 'outer space' (not from the ground like this) spinning on its axis with the stars in the background." That's physically impossible since start are to faint to record with overexposing the Earth. "And there's not ONE video like that. And I guarantee you we'll never see a video like that." Actually, there is a video showing exactly that (Earth spinning on its axis, and orientation of that axis changing in relation to the Sun during the year) and it was recorded with EPIC camera on DSCOVR satellite.

“I know nothing of what I’m talking about so it’s fake!”

That's not a spiral, and they may have chosen moonless nights for these.

What about the south celestial pole?

What does sky does above doesn't prove what the ground is.​@@javierlatorre480

​@@shamaYahu8635 Yes it does, especially the way your _specific location_ changes the sky in some way. Like, for example, heading south until Polaris is below the horizon.

@@shamaYahu8635make a coherent sentence please

@@peeperleviathan2839 I don't understand.

Two different celestial poles. The pole stars are just the bright stars that happen to be closest to each pole. In the north that's Polaris, and in the south the best we got is Sigma Octantis

I think those are long exposure shots

@@FFC231 like solargraphy?

You can achieve this with lots of patience, if your phone has pro option in camera app it allows shutter to stay open for 30secs, or actually has a star trail option. Time-lapse will work, but no trail. You will atill see the stars spinning circular.

I've never seen that many stars and galaxies in the sky

​@@shamaYahu8635 Light pollution is a thing. You need to go out into the countryside to see all those stars.

Willst du damit sagen, dass sich der Nachthimmel nicht bewegt? Oder glaubst du nicht, dass sich der südliche und nördliche Nachhimmel nicht in zwei verschiedene Richtungen drehen? Weil das ziemlich einfach selber zu Filmen ist. Die Drehung des Himmels lässt sich als einzelne Momentaufnahme vielleicht noch mit einer flachen Erde erklären, aber mehrere simultane Beobachtungen des Himmels auf Nord-, Südhalbkugel und am Äquator mit den entsprechenden Sternenbewegungen... das macht leider nur auf einer Kugel Sinn.

"There was and is no proof of the globe!" Sure.. sure... try to navigate around the world using your flat map of your flat world, and a compass, and tell us what happened... if you succeed to find your way back home.

Read the description of the video Unless you meant when in the video and not where on Earth, in which case listen for the kookaburra calls lol

2:44 Are you sure about that

@@javierlatorre480 since the video doesn't indicate in words which one is north and south I don't really know anymore but it all works on a flat earth

​@@FlatEarthJayNo it doesn't. The Flat Earth can't have two celestial poles. It 's not geometrically possible. And sure, the video itself doesn't specify filming locations, but it does name them in the description, and it changes the ambient noise from one location to the other to let you know when it has changed. Do note that the one in the north is the one that rotates anticlockwise, and the one in the south is the one that rotates clockwise.

@@javierlatorre480 you don't have to believe me, but I've seen it done in stellarium. The stars will rotate different directions based on perspective and maybe dome perspective and which direction you're looking while on each side. Have a nice day

@@FlatEarthJay The Flat Earth dome is ill-defined in how it looks, in any case, but it is pretty telling that it has to be incredibly complicated for the Flat Earth to replicate something that's much simpler on a globe. Either way, the south celestial pole always looks the same to everyone south of the equator and it's always due south. I really don't see how this could be replicated with a simple hemispherical dome, especially if the north celestial pole is at the very centre, and the dome rotates around THAT.

Nope

Why would they be oval?

@@JohnHazenhousen Well, they'd be oval if they were on a ceiling a few thousand miles up. Unless you were directly underneath them, you'd be looking up at them at an angle. The fact that they are not oval suggests that they aren't on a ceiling, but in space.

Still to complicated for your two working brain cells to understand we area not living on a pizza?!

Man you are fucking lazy, both if you're for real and if you're a troll

Yeah southern stars don't really move like that. Every astronomy book ever written is lying. It's obvious the entire southern hemisphere is in on a huge conspiracy. And anybody who has ever visited the southern hemisphere and looked at the stars is also in on the conspiracy. And nobody has ever taken video footage of what southern stars really do, either. You flatties really amuse me.

What about the south celestial pole? It shouldn't exist if the Earth is flat.

Dumbass

Nope, roof that the earth rotates. No matter how often and desperately you flattards claim otherwise. Earth is a globe, was a globe, and will be forever a globe. You can't change reality.

To answer your questions: - no it wouldn't, you're just facing the other way. - no it wouldn't, clocks don't magically mirror when you cross the equator - yes that is what you would see

🤡🤡

Show your work.

What is supposed to be happening in the sky under the heliocentric model is a tiny amount of stellar parallax throughout the year. Which is exactly what we observe

What would "falling backwards on a spinning ball" look like to you?

Still waiting for an answer

the sky literally rotates in the opposite direction in the south than it does in the north. makes no sense on a flat earth. makes perfect sense on the ball earth.

What is this, 15th century?

There is absolutely 0 proof of any sort of god existing lol Cant believe we still have cultists go this day

I mean, if you sit on an office chair and spin yourself around, you'd be seeing pretty much the same thing.

Where does the Bible say we are at the center of the universe with everything orbiting around us?

The bible is a fairy tale book of absolute fantasy. Whoever believes this book has lost every grasp of relaity.

Nah, thats just what it appears to be when u r constantly spinning. The universe has no real center.

True... although nobody is allowed on Antarctica... how the f did this person make a timelapse as if it was all rotating around a single point like polaris... and when he does that there are trees in front of it? Is this what it looks like in Australia or Argentina then?

@@ieder1een175 you don't have to be in Antarctica to see the south pole. you can simple be on a boat facing the "ice wall". if you are on the "east" side of the flat earth you would see the south pole on top of the "ice wall" rotating to the right. If you go on the west side, you would still see it on top of the "ice wall" rotating in the same direction... but you are facing in the complete opposite direction having a flat earth point of view... so they would appear to rotate in opposite directions if you are looking at things from above the dome, which is impossible with any kind of projections.

Basically you can have an infinite amount of locations along the "ice wall" and have an infinite amount of locations for the south pole on top of the "ice wall" around which the stars are rotating. So basically it's check mate FE.

false, this actually proves it's flat. if the Earth is moving thousands of kilometres per second through the universe as you guys claim this means we should be seeing new stars everyday and not the same ones

@@abcdefxyz1239 you only see stars in the local cluster which are pretty close, and they move together in the same direction just like a stream in a river. They do tend to move slowly apart, but you need thousands of years to see a difference.

The stars appear to remain where they are in the celestial sphere because they are really far away. But the reality of the situation is that they have parallax throughout the year, and we can measure that parallax to determine how far away they are. We also have ways of determining how fast they move in space. And this is not mentioning supernovae, in other words, the fact that stars can die.

When stuff is so far away, it doesnt appear to move. If that effect is visible on mere mountains here on earth, itll be much stronger on stars that are literal lightyears from us

@@doodoo2065 Nonsense because they have not changed one iota for millennia. That's why we still have multiple temples in perfect alignment with stars and people still practising astrology. The stars are for signs and seasons says God. Nothing changes. Believing you can see something measured by light years just proves your imagination has been cast into outer darkness by the mass weapon of deception that is NASA. Which means to deceive or lead astray.

@@PropertyofJesus777 People knew all this stuff way before NASA was established in 1958. Barnard's star, discovered in 1916, moves so fast you can see the change in position every year. The pole star in the time of ancient Egypt was Thuban, not Polaris. In the centuries before and after the birth of Christ, there was no pole star. This was documented by the Greek navigator Pytheas in 320 BC, and later by the Romans. NASA has nothing to do with any of this.

@@stephenh5944 The 5 armed services pillars say you're wrong. And there are people still alive who were taught flat earth in school. Before the occult came along and rolled out their past perversions into mainstream. If you are COVID jabbed then don't argue about anything. It sounds like you only believe the narrative.

Nope. Der Himmel sieht aus wie eine Kugel, und dreht sich wie eine Kugel

Die zwei verschiedenen Nachthimmel werden durch holographische Interferometrie dargestellt. Diese hat Dennis Gabor entdeckt. Polaris gegen den Uhrzeigersinn direkt über der Axis Mundi und durch die holographie in Afrika, Amerika und Australien im Uhrzeigersinn.

​@@johnpurefeeling6258 Dennis Gabor würde sich im Grab umdrehen, wenn er wüsste, dass seine Entdeckung von Flatearthern verschwurbelt werden würde... Einfach mal "holographische Interferometrie" sagen und ab dem Zeitpunkt ist jede normale Person aus der Diskussion ausgestiegen, was ihr dann für einen klaren Sieg haltet. Nur erklärt das genannte Phänomen leider genauso wenig die Beobachtung vom Nachthimmel wie die Erklärung "Salatdressing".

Where though

​@@javierlatorre480Under your feet