Serious question here. The north star can be seen in some places "the northern hemisphere" and the southern cross can be seen in other places "southern hemisphere". How does this phenomenon happen in the flat earth model? If there is a 3d model video that explains this that would be great (im a visual kind of person).
You can see the North Star from South Africa. It should be impossible on a Globalist Earth. I had a friend take a picture of the damn thing. The earth is not what you are told. Simple observation proves it. [Here's a video on perspective](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5M7vdrBrZc_
How come I can see holes at the poles of Saturn and that it is an obvious sphere but the earth is flat? Bullshit. All planets are hollow.
You are looking through a 2d telescope. You don't know what you are looking at is a sphere. Speaking of spheres. How can you play basketball when the court is flat?
... With a basketball that is HOLLOW. That's how.
Billiard balls are spheres, billiard tables are flat.
Just test it for yourself. Or keep sucking down that kikeball jizz, cause that what it is.
No idea mr fuk? Do you know whats up with the north star / southern cross deal within the flat earth model?
Works fine from Hollow earth. I think what you posit is actually a supporter of Hollow earth... by the way... I just spout this shit at the flatties to piss them off because Hollow is simply easier to argue. Lava earth is the easiest to argue though ha ha but wheres the fun in that.
There’s lots of theories about the southern stars. This is what I believe to be the most likely.
The earth is flat. Test for yourself. I have, which is why the theories are interesting, but they don’t negate the fact that there is no curvature, so we simply do not live on a sphere.
Hey, I watched a great video about this about a year ago, but surprise, surprise it’s no longer in my watch history. I found this one which is a lot briefer but still posits the same theory - definitely only a theory.
Unlike the flatness of the earth, which I urge you to test for yourself. Given the ‘accepted’ size of the globe in the heliocentric theory, there is observably, repeatedly and (most importantly) measurably NO curvature. That was the clincher for me personally, when I tested for curvature myself with a far away landmark. IF the earth were a ball (using the ’accepted’ dimensions), the landmark should be completely hidden by the curve. I should never be able to see it. But I see it, unless it’s raining. But don’t take my word for it, or anyone’s, just complete your own tests using the scientific method. You can use the altimeter on your phone, distance.to and search up any ‘earth curve calculator’ (I used a few different ones) or even do the math yourself, if you are so inclined. Then when you find out it IS flat, you have the torturous task of breaking through your conditioning. Not fun.
what math did you use? i look up the earths radius and circumference, i divide the circumference by 360°. now i know how long a section of 1° is. then i divide 1° by that length. now i know 1km distance = x°. now i take the cos of x°. now i multiply the radius by the cos°. and finally i subtract that resulting number from the real radius.
a = √[(r + h)² - r²]
where:
a stands for the distance to the horizon, h is your eyesight level, and r is the Earth's radius, equal to 3959 miles or 6371 km.
Yeah ive look at different things but the north pole / southern cross thing is what really doesnt seem to fit in the fe model. Can Australians see the north star?
So you didn’t understand the video?
The flats deny the existence of photographs, take from space and the moon, that clearly show that the Earth is a spinning globe. Why wouldn't they just deny the existence of the Southern Cross?
I dont know. Ive never heard a fe explanation of the southern cross not being seen from canada er wherever.
(post is archived)