North - South

[aljhoa]

This is two-dimensional thinking in the Milky Way Galaxy traveling through the universe where the planets go around the stars and the solar systems move around the galaxy as a unit generally tipped by some angle. Because of this angle the planets at times are ahead of their star and sometimes behind as the solar systems move in the galactic orbit and travel in the universe.

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
SparkNotes: 1984: Important Quotations Explained


Al

[cikljamas]

This is two-dimensional thinking in the Milky Way Galaxy traveling through the universe where the planets go around the stars and the solar systems move around the galaxy as a unit generally tipped by some angle. Because of this angle the planets at times are ahead of their star and sometimes behind as the solar systems move in the galactic orbit and travel in the universe.

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
SparkNotes: 1984: Important Quotations Explained


Al

Al, don't be silly, here is very simple calculation, you can't escape from the strength of this argument, there is no way to overpower it, NO WAY!!!

And remember, it is just one among many arguments of that kind!

If the Earth were a globe there wouldn't be SINGLE serious argument against "the fact" of Earth's rotundity, NOT SINGLE ONE!!!

Question: How many irrefutable arguments against the Earth's rotundity i have already presented to you in this thread?

You think you can escape from this argument by mumbling about "two-dimensional thinking", and the ultimate irony is that you say that to me, instead vice-versa...

I repeat:

Let's make it more plausible by making this simple calculation:

150 000 000 millions km : 3200 km (distance from equator to north pole) = 46875...

Now, all you have to do is to imagine that the source of the heat is 46. 875 km which is 29mi 223.12yd remote from you and you enjoy benefits of summer season, and guy who is placed just 1 m behind you is freezing?!?!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?!?

Who is crazy here?

Answer it, fight it directly, speak clearly - distinctly - understandably, do not use mumbling technic, it can't help you, believe me, you just bury yourself deeper and deeper...

[aljhoa]

What keeps these satellites in orbit? Isn't that practically the same question as this one: "how the earth is circumnavigated" (on a flat surface of the Earth)?

This is how:

In the following diagram, fig. 86, let N, represent the. northern centre, near to which lies the "magnetic pole." Then



the several arrows marked A, S, are all pointing northwards; and those marked E, W, are all due east and west. It is evident from the diagram, that A, S, are absolute directions--north and south; but that E, W, east and west, are only relative, that is they are directions at right angles to north and south. If it were not so then, taking the line N, A, S, as representing the meridian of Greenwich, and W, E, on that meridian as due east and west, on moving due west to the meridian 3, 4, N, it is evident that a vessel represented by the arrow 1, 2, would be at angle with the meridian 3, 4, N, much greater than 90 degrees, and if it continued to sail in the same straight line 2, 1, 5, it would get farther and farther away from the centre N, and therefore could never complete a path concentric with N. East and west, however, are directions relative to north and south. Hence, on a mariner arriving at the meridian 3, 4, N, he must of necessity turn the head of his vessel in the direction indicated by the arrow 6, 7, and thus continuing to keep the vessel's head square to the compass, or at right angles to north and south, he will at length arrive at 90 degrees of meridian from N, A, S, when the head of the vessel will be in the direction of E, W, 8. Continuing his course for 90 degrees more his path will be E, W, 9. The same course continued will in the next 90 degrees become E, W, 10, and on passing over another 90 degrees the ship will have arrived again at the meridian of Greenwich N, A, S, having then completed a circle.

South Pole Star Trails

Explanation: No star dips below the horizon and the Sun never climbs above it in this remarkable image of 24 hour long star trails. Showing all the trails as complete circles, such an image could be achieved only from two places on planet Earth. This example was recorded during the course of May 1, 2012, the digital camera in a heated box on the roof of MAPO, the Martin A. Pomerantz Observatory at the South Pole. Directly overhead in the faint constellation Octans is the projection of Earth's rotational axis, the South Celestial Pole, at the center of all the star trail circles. Not so well placed as Polaris and the North Celestial Pole, the star leaving the small but still relatively bright circle around the South Celestial Pole is Beta Hydri. The inverted umbrella structure on the horizon at the right of the allsky field of view is the ground shield for the SPUD telescope. A shimmering apparition of the aurora australis also visited on this 24 hour night.
APOD: 2012 August 2 - South Pole Star Trails

Are the following photos taken from the one sided Earth?




Star trails create arches over the horizon in a long-exposure picture of the night sky taken from Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania.
Space Photos This Week: Gravity Waves, Chicken Nebula





These star trails are centered on the celestial north pole. They were recorded in a time-lapse photograph over the course of about eight hours.
Open Course : Astronomy : Introduction : Lecture 2 : North Pole Star Trails Photo

Where on your "flat earth navigation chart" the counter rotating South Pole and North Pole star trails can be taken ?


Al

[cikljamas]

Al, why don't you answer to my questions?

Because there is no sane answer to irrefutable facts?

O.K., i understand that.

Let me show you some more irrefutable facts:

NASA And The Masters Of Deception Camera Trickery

THE EARTH ROTATING FROM SPACE?

World nasa space fantasy is falling apart








LIARS:


PREPARE EARTH FLAT CLINTON

PREPARE EARTH FLAT REAGAN

I am not here, what is here isn't here, just there without "T"

[aljhoa]

Al, why don't you answer to my questions?

I have asked you first and you ignore my questions.
So what is the answer:

South Pole Star Trails

Explanation: No star dips below the horizon and the Sun never climbs above it in this remarkable image of 24 hour long star trails. Showing all the trails as complete circles, such an image could be achieved only from two places on planet Earth. This example was recorded during the course of May 1, 2012, the digital camera in a heated box on the roof of MAPO, the Martin A. Pomerantz Observatory at the South Pole. Directly overhead in the faint constellation Octans is the projection of Earth's rotational axis, the South Celestial Pole, at the center of all the star trail circles. Not so well placed as Polaris and the North Celestial Pole, the star leaving the small but still relatively bright circle around the South Celestial Pole is Beta Hydri. The inverted umbrella structure on the horizon at the right of the allsky field of view is the ground shield for the SPUD telescope. A shimmering apparition of the aurora australis also visited on this 24 hour night.
APOD: 2012 August 2 - South Pole Star Trails





Where on your "flat earth navigation chart" the counter rotating South Pole and North Pole star trails can be taken ?


Al

[cikljamas]

You have got the answer in the first link in my previous post: here i adjusted the time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV_MO8uTsHc#t=2m8s

There is no south pole:

You Have NEVER Seen the Sun Do This! Sun Antics from Neumayer Station,Antarctica

100% proof that something is wrong. ANTARCTIC John Gorman

Now you can try to amaze us with impossible (sane) answers concerning irrefutable arguments that i have presented to you in a few last posts...

You still refuse to watch videos that i link to you?

[aljhoa]

You have got the answer in the first link in my previous post:

There is no south pole:

The following image is an unprecedented star trail image taken from the Equator (this imaginary line that splits the Earth into the two hemispheres) in Ecuador (the country).
If you stand on the Equator line you can see the Southern Pole at the horizon to the South (left of the image) and the Northern pole at the horizon on the opposite direction.
The Earth rotation will make all the sky and stars look like they rotate around these two points, making them appear as concentric circles (which look like ellipses on this distorsioning fish eye image). Note that on this image, that cumulates 10 hours of exposure starting 1 hour after sunset and finishing 1 hour before sunrise (nights and days always last 12 hours on the Equator, it is a permanent equinox), more than 90% of the sky is 'visible', this is another particularity of being on the ecuator line : you can observe the largest part of the sky during any night. An extremely bright meteor appeared during that night and seems to be pointing at the Southern Pole (extreme left of the image). Image processing done with Prism software.
Los Cielos del Ecuador, From Southern Pole to Northern Pole






Where on your "flat earth navigation chart" the counter rotating star trails can be taken ?


Al

[cikljamas]

They faked moon landing, why wouldn't they fake one stupid image which proves nothing?

Look at the series of images in my post above, it is good solid proof that they had faked moon landing!

I tell you, there is no south pole whatsoever.

Read this:

IF the earth is a revolving globe, moving rapidly in an orbit round the sun, with its axes of revolution inclined to the plane of the ecliptic, as the Newtonian hypothesis affirms, there may be six months' continued light alternating with six months' continued darkness, at both the northern and southern axial or central points. That such is the case in the northern centre is matter of certainty, but that it is so in the south there is no positive evidence. A few irregular statements have been found in the reports of mariners who have endeavoured to circumnavigate the "antarctic circle," which have been seized upon as proofs, but on careful examination they are found to be neither worthy as evidence nor pertinent to the subject in dispute.

Read more: Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not A Globe: Chapter XIV. Examination of the So-Called ''Proofs'' of the Earth's Rotundity: Continued Daylight in the Extreme South

Antarctica key to flat earth

Weird case: The Case of the Hacked South Pole

[aljhoa]

why wouldn't they fake one stupid image which proves nothing?

@cikljamas,
hundreds of star trail pictures made by the amateur astronomers prove the spherical earth’s shape, plummeting your credibility and an audience.


Keep up "good work" and enjoy:

At first glance these spectacular swirls of colour may look like clever computer graphics or the result of faulty camera work.
They are, in fact, the product of hour after hour of painstaking night-time shooting by photographer Lincoln Harrison.
His stunning pictures of star trails across the Australian night sky were taken over periods of up to 15 hours.
Australian photographer Lincoln Harrison endures 15-hour photo shoots to capture stunning night images of star trails | Mail Online





Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
David K. Lynch

5. Summary and Conclusions
In view of the agreement between the visual observations,
measurements of the photographs, and the theoretical curvatures, it seems well established that the curvature of the Earth is reasonably well understood and can be measured from photographs. The threshold elevation for detecting curvature would seem to be somewhat less than 35; 000 ft but not as low as 14; 000 ft.
Photographically, curvature may be measurable as low as 20; 000 ft.
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pd


Al

[cikljamas]

Is this the look of three men who had just returned from being the first men to walk on the Moon? The Apollo 11 crew have just returned to Earth and are talking to President Nixon from quarantine. This group is definitely
not a bunch of happy campers. Could they feel ashamed about something they didn't do?



Michael Collins was designated the navigator for Apollo 11. In his book he lists the 37 navigation stars they were to use, plus their corresponding octal numbers which identified them to the computers. Here's how Michael explains that navigation package:

"The astronaut, peering out through either his telescope or his sextant finds one of the chosen few, superimposes a + on it, and pushes a button at the instant of perfect alignment. He then tells the computer which star it was, by numbers. Repeating this process on a second star allows the computer and the platform to determine which way the spacecraft is pointing. So we now know which way is up? Well, not exactly, because "up" is a rather fragile concept meaning away from the center of the earth, a direction opposite the gravity vector used to clutch us tightly by. But suppose we cannot even see the earth in our window, suppose we are floating free of earth's gravity. What now, M.I.T.? Back to our friendly stars. We simply define a new up-down and left-right, using the stars in place of earth. All will be well as long as we all play the game by the same rules, as long as the ground controllers send us instructions using the same stellar frame of reference. Now we are free of all terrestrial conventions and can correct our course to and from the Moon by pointing in the proper direction relative to the stars."

Collins seems to be saying that the sextant had a cross hair in its optics. But sextants don't have cross-hairs. Curiously, I went sniffing through his book and found out that sure enough he was talking about a sextant. Almost 100 pages later he continues:

"Unlike Gemini, however, Apollo has a fancy computer tied to the optics, and now I call on it for help; it responds by swinging the sextant around until it points at where it thinks Menkent is. Aha! There it is, in plain view, and it's a simple task for me to align the cross-hairs precisely on it and push a button at the instant of alignment. Now I repeat the process using Nunki, and the computer pats me on the back by flashing the
information that my measurements differ from its stored star angle data by .01 degree. It displays this information as 00001. In M.I.T.-ese, a perfect reading of 00000 is called five balls."

Aha! There it is, in plain view: he does claim his sextant has a cross-hair, but this cannot be true! A sextant is an instrument that uses mirrors mounted on a calibrated movable leg. The essence of the instrument is to superimpose one object over the image of another thereby measuring the angle between them. On Earth, one of the objects is usually the horizon but here he is measuring the arc distance between two stars. As I said, there is no reason to have a cross-hair.

*********************************

A clean glove often hides a dirty hand.
English Proverb

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one. A. Hitler

The trouble with lying is that your lie changes slightly with each telling.
Rene

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof
against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting
ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
Herbert Spencer

While examining Newton's gravity I found that most rock strata underlying a 1,000 foot cliff should collapse. One cubic foot of rock weighs about 100 pounds therefore a square foot of the overlying rocks weigh about 100,000 pounds which exceeds the known bearing capacity of those rocks which is usually in the 20,000 pounds per square foot range.

From studies and simple experiments I concluded that Newton's Equatorial Bulge could not exist. A bulge would cause a shift in latitude from a perfect sphere and using a super accurate transit I shot the stars. I discovered that if there is a bulge it can be no larger than a few hundred yards high which destroys Newton's miles high bulge.

Our massive Equatorial bulge is a myth proclaimed by our geological gas bags because if true our equator should be constantly shifting due to the movement of huge masses on the surface which change latitude. Gigantic icebergs, dust storms, and the shipping of ores from one place to another changing the line of heaviest mass which should always form the equator. This is the same problem that Newton faced.
Rene

[cikljamas]

Hit the nail on the head

Now, i am going to hit the last nail in the round earth coffin:

Imagine that we live in the house placed in the North Pole region, or that we fix the web cam on the roof of our northern house and direct it (web ca,) to the sun.

What would happen?

For several summer months the sun would change it's position in the sky very slowly (due to Earth's orbital motion), but in this period of time sun wouldn't change noticeably it's position in the sky due to Earth's daily-rotational motion, in other words we wouldn't be able to notice sun's daily circular path across the sky because we would stand directly in the line with Earth's axis, which means: our northern house wouldn't make any circle at all or in the worst case it would make such a small circle (if we were somewhat out of straight Earth's axis line) that it couldn't have any such effect which could yield any noticeable sun's parallax in the sky.

Sun would be practically immovable spot in the sky (just like stars are).

Why don't we have until this day any such movie which could easily prove Earth's daily rotation?

Because the Earth is not revolving at all, and because the Earth's surface is flatly flat!

All you (round guys) have to do is to make live video like this:
Arctic Midnight Sun

Only this time you should film North Pole Midnight Sun from the roof of our hypothetical northern house...

...and voila...

But you can't do that, because if you could you would have already done it!!!

Am i right? Of course i am right!!!

What excuse are you going to put forward this time?

Too cold region for filming? Too cold for flying over not-existing South Pole? Too cold for reasoning?

[aljhoa]

Now, i am going to hit the last nail in the round earth coffin:

Too cold region for filming? Too cold for flying over not-existing South Pole? Too cold for reasoning?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZICflK6K_3M

The sun Returns in Antarctica.
Some great time lapse footage of us getting our sun back and putting the flag up.
There is also an extract from my Documentary called 'Why Winter?' which played along side Werner Herzogs 'Encounters
at the end of the world' for a week at the Antarctic film festival in Tasmania.


Where on your "flat earth navigation chart" the Arctic Midnight Sun and the Antarctica’s Midday Night can be filmed at the same time?


Al

[cikljamas]

Now, i am going to hit the last nail in the round earth coffin:

Imagine that we live in the house placed in the North Pole region, or that we fix the web cam on the roof of our northern house and direct it (web ca,) to the sun.

What would happen?

For several summer months the sun would change it's position in the sky very slowly (due to Earth's orbital motion), but in this period of time sun wouldn't change noticeably it's position in the sky due to Earth's daily-rotational motion, in other words we wouldn't be able to notice sun's daily circular path across the sky because we would stand directly in the line with Earth's axis, which means: our northern house wouldn't make any circle at all or in the worst case it would make such a small circle (if we were somewhat out of straight Earth's axis line) that it couldn't have any such effect which could yield any noticeable sun's parallax in the sky.

Sun would be practically immovable spot in the sky (just like stars are).

Why don't we have until this day any such movie which could easily prove Earth's daily rotation?

Because the Earth is not revolving at all, and because the Earth's surface is flatly flat!

All you (round guys) have to do is to make live video like this:
Arctic Midnight Sun

Only this time you should film North Pole Midnight Sun from the roof of our hypothetical northern house...

...and voila...

But you can't do that, because if you could you would have already done it!!!

Am i right? Of course i am right!!!

What excuse are you going to put forward this time?

Too cold region for filming? Too cold for flying over not-existing South Pole? Too cold for reasoning?

Now i am going to hit the final nail right in the heart of the rotund Earth hoax (the greatest hoax in the history of mankind):

Since it's obviously too cold to put web cam in the north pole region we can make even simpler test right away:

If the Earth was rotating about its axis, someone in Quito, Ecuador would be traveling twice as fast from west to east as someone in Oslo, Norway – at any moment, and at every moment. Meanwhile, someone looking at the proverbial North Pole, would hardly be moving at all! But is that reality?

Of course it is not reality, but this supposed fact of Earth's rotation now becomes deadliest error of all, concerning supposed differences of Earth rotational speeds at different latitudes.

If these differences were really the true fact then the apparent motion of all celestial bodies would be twice faster for any observer on the equator than it would be for any observer on the latitude of Oslo.

Am i right? Of course i am right, as always!

How hard would be to make an experiment (measurement) of such kind???

CASE CLOSED?

[aljhoa]

Now i am going to hit the final nail right in the heart of the rotund Earth hoax (the greatest hoax in the history of mankind):

If "N" points to Polaris Star on your "flat earth navigation chart" then the star named "sun" "runs in circles" and Arctic Midnight Sun is everywhere.
So where is the night-day cycle on your "flat earth navigation chart"?

run in circles
1. Lit. to run in a circular path.
2. and run around in circles Fig. to waste one's time in aimless activity. Stop running in circles and try to organize yourself so that you are more productive. I have been running around in circles over this matter for days.
run in circles - Idioms - by the Free Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.


Running in circles United Pursuit Band lyrics - YouTube

Al

[cikljamas]

Now, i am going to hit the last nail in the round earth coffin:

Imagine that we live in the house placed in the North Pole region, or that we fix the web cam on the roof of our northern house and direct it (web ca,) to the sun.

What would happen?

For several summer months the sun would change it's position in the sky very slowly (due to Earth's orbital motion), but in this period of time sun wouldn't change noticeably it's position in the sky due to Earth's daily-rotational motion, in other words we wouldn't be able to notice sun's daily circular path across the sky because we would stand directly in the line with Earth's axis, which means: our northern house wouldn't make any circle at all or in the worst case it would make such a small circle (if we were somewhat out of straight Earth's axis line) that it couldn't have any such effect which could yield any noticeable sun's parallax in the sky.

Sun would be practically immovable spot in the sky (just like stars are).

Why don't we have until this day any such movie which could easily prove Earth's daily rotation?

Because the Earth is not revolving at all, and because the Earth's surface is flatly flat!

All you (round guys) have to do is to make live video like this:
Arctic Midnight Sun

Only this time you should film North Pole Midnight Sun from the roof of our hypothetical northern house...

...and voila...

But you can't do that, because if you could you would have already done it!!!

Am i right? Of course i am right!!!

What excuse are you going to put forward this time?

Too cold region for filming? Too cold for flying over not-existing South Pole? Too cold for reasoning?

Now i am going to hit the final nail right in the heart of the rotund Earth hoax (the greatest hoax in the history of mankind):

Since it's obviously too cold to put web cam in the north pole region we can make even simpler test right away:

If the Earth was rotating about its axis, someone in Quito, Ecuador would be traveling twice as fast from west to east as someone in Oslo, Norway – at any moment, and at every moment. Meanwhile, someone looking at the proverbial North Pole, would hardly be moving at all! But is that reality?

Of course it is not reality, but this supposed fact of Earth's rotation now becomes deadliest error of all, concerning supposed differences of Earth rotational speeds at different latitudes.

If these differences were really the true fact then the apparent motion of all celestial bodies would be twice faster for any observer on the equator than it would be for any observer on the latitude of Oslo.

Am i right? Of course i am right, as always!

How hard would be to make an experiment (measurement) of such kind???

CASE CLOSED?

The prosperity of heliocentrism was ceased a by talented objection, that all dropped objects should land behind their starting positions because the turning Earth leaves them behind. Unfortunately, the objection of the talented people was refuted because of a dead law in air atmosphere – the law of inertia. It is the Galileo’s law and the first law of Newton. Their common reply is that: all dropped objects have inertia, and thus, the rotating Earth will not leave them behind. The law of inertia cannot be applied in air atmosphere under any conditions. Galileo demanded that, the law of inertial is valid only in the absence of air but the Helios fellows extended the inertial law in air atmosphere. We would gratefully appreciate Galileo if his law were situated in air, since it will save our Earth from the pollutions of the fossils. Consider one of their fellows in airplane and during its motion in air atmosphere he left the airplane with a parachute. According to the inertial law; the fellow and the airplane are supposed to move side-to-side with the same speed. He must feel proud to his superpower; the airplane is consuming propellers and he is not! In reality, and in the first moment, he will realize that the airplane is ahead of him and he is left behind in air because the inertial motion is terminated by the presence of air. Argue or not, it is well-known fact since the ancient civilizations. In the presence of air atmosphere, the law of inertia does not function. If you threw an object aloft several meters, it will come back to your hand; not because of the law of inertia but because the Earth is stationary. You cannot breathe oxygen from air atmosphere and speak about the law of inertia. Dump the law of inertia in space.

The modern folks are disturbed from the disbelief of some fellows to their theory. They are wondering why some fellows whom are belonging to the 21st century and can not realize the rotation of the Earth with a speed of 1669.8 km/hr at the equator. To even our trouble; the modern fellows insisted that the air atmosphere is also rotating with the rigid Earth. Perhaps, they do not know that, the Earth’s speed varies with Earth’s latitude. Since the rigid sphere has different speeds along its latitude; hence, the air molecules must have the local speed of the rigid Earth at any given latitude. What are the airspeed and pressure pattern that would be caused by the Earth’s rotation? The maximum airspeed and the maximum pressure (dynamic pressure) must be oriented at the Earth’s equator in which the Earth suffers its maximum rotational speed of 1669.8 km/hr. Conversely, the minimum air speed and the minimum pressure (dynamic pressure) must be oriented at the north and south poles since the rotational speed is zero. This pressure setup is the fittest route for Hurricanes; a pressure drop between two regions (from high pressure to low pressure). No one has measured the Earth’s speed even in the modern time with a developed technology. Scientists have measured the speed of microscopic constituents of the Earth, atoms and molecules, but they have failed to measure the speed of rotating Earth! The "Earth’s rotation" is a technical notation refers to a fake mechanism that only found in the fairytale of heliocentrism.

fixitan is stupid! you see?