To all of you non flat earthers.

You're going too fast for me. I thought we already agreed that the Southern Cross can't be seen simultaneously in all places in the Southern Hemisphere? Or it can now?

Anyway, say there are two places in the Southern Hemisphere, where two guys in the different locations (one guy at each location) are looking simultaneously at the Southern Cross, and both their compasses point South.... When you say South, is it like, exactly South, or South plus/minus a number of degrees?

I can't really explain it, except for coming up with some hypothesis invoking a transparent firmament and refraction.

However, I would counter with the argument that if the Southern Cross really does sit atop a pole in the South above (below?) a globe-shaped Earth, it should therefore be observable simultaneously by anyone in the Southern Hemisphere observing the night sky, at all (night) times of the year. There are claims that it cannot, therefore (if these are true) the Earth cannot be a ball.

As discussed previously, I think there is more to the workings of the Heavenly bodies than we currently understand (whether ball-Earthers or flat-Earthers), so invoking the Heavens to prove Earth's shape often ends up in a stalemate (as opposed to directly observable, measurable evidence taken here on Earth, such as laser-light over a frozen lake).

Per FE, Antarctica is either the 4 corners or it is like Greenland, small between Australia and South America. It used to be "between" Africa and South America, but is slowly "drifting" west. From Africa there would be no direct access to Antarctica now if it is small. Meaning Antartic is either always directly "South" and huge, or no longer South of Africa and is moving.

If one were to go with small and moving, like Australia, the SC would look the same in Antarctica. If Antarctica is the four corners, then the SC would have the same view (orbital course) at night opposite the sun during the day, as the sun. Meaning the SC would literally not even be above a spot during the day, like the sun is literally not "above" that spot at night. It would definitely not be stationary. It would literally make the largest orbit around the northern star, while the northern star would have a very small orbit at the center of the map.

So to refute, during the darker winter, the SC would always be in the "same spot" 24 hours a day. It would seem stationary because it would be part of the "universe" and not part of the firmament above the earth. Even in Canada during the summer the sun looks like it is further north than it literally is. Even on the earth perspective can be decieving as to the actual position above the earth. That is not because of either curvature or being flat.

It would seem to me that the stars change the size of their orbit path in accordance with the change of the sun's. They are not on one fixed course. The SC would "move across the sky" slighy faster than the sun does. It would also move faster in the winter time (northern hemisphere) than in the summer. That is why those in Texas only have a small window of time to daily view the SC in certain seasons.

One other point about a globe is time variance. The closer one gets to "both poles" the distance in longitude becomes smaller. For time to be equal the area near the poles would have to spin slower than the equator. This effect in reality is somewhat negated by either constant light or constant dark. Except time does not change differently as if the earth is not spinning. The fact that there is more light in summer and more dark in winter just means the sun has changed to a wider orbit, and still moves at the same speed regardless. The equal day is still the same at the equator even though the orbital path of the sun changes during the year.

God did declare the stars and the two lights to work as a clock. Genesis 1:14

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Since there is a clock in the firmament it is smaller than the earth. The widest orbit is still above Antarctica and not outside of the firmament. Of course not many people live at the ends of the earth. Not yet.

I didn't know there were actually flat earthers still in existence until I came to this website

The dipper can't be seen simultaneously in all places in the Northern Hemisphere either
Day time, remember? We can only see stars in the dark...

Plus or minus 25 degrees

Careful how we word things... Notice you didn't mention night or day in your opening and specified "simultaneously in all places" I disagreed with "all places" and say only where its dark. Which is what your saying now

The crux is observable simultaneously by anyone in the Southern Hemisphere observing the night sky, at all (night) times of the year. Yes thats true it is.
Your such a typical Aussie too... LOOK OUTSIDE... LoL. So lazy Aussies... Shes there every night. Its on our flag.
The southern cross isn't just Aussie... Its on Brazils flag as well, tight in the center. Cos its in their sky 24/7... Or 12/7 at night...

Hahahaha... Na, im not putting it down to "the mysteries of the cosmos". We have a south pole mate. The southern cross doesn't lie...

Has that been done? The laser light?
I know there are heaps of other lines of arguments... Spotting tings off sure that are meant to bee to far is a classic...
Im not denouncing every FE model... Im denouncing any model without north and south poles...

There are flat earth models in my mind that can still adhere to the southern cross.
It could be a flat circle but with 2 poles. Or my favourite, it could be a flat diamond with poles on the tips... Doesn't the bible say the earth has corners??? So flat earth is possible still in my mind. But not this particular FE model

I'm not really sure how it all fits together geometrically. But I am convinced the Earth is indeed flat. And this makes sense of what we know of water, and explains why all the oceans don't drain off the Earth around Antartica, as they would if Earth really were a giant ball.

I can't have a conversation with three people trying to bring up different points all at once...
Ive been through it all now with Gary.

The only fact that im asserting is that there is one south pole.
Iv tried to explain it the best i can in my previous posts with illustrations
Sorry if its hard to understand, i tried the best i could, and thats my conclusion after looking at the southern cross for over 2 months

View attachment 228051
This FE model cannot explain how we are all facing crux to the south simultaneously
It tries to by using misinformation

Not necessarily. All are looking up at the sky. They are not looking "through the earth" at a virtual pole in the ground.

On a flat earth, one would not be looking through the earth. They would be looking straight at the pole in the ground. Except that pole would be every point to the south in a circle, the last circle available within a square.

Thats all good and well. There are heaps of different lines of argument...
Mine is that there is one south pole based on the fact that there is one southern cross... Thats all

View attachment 228058 This cannot be explained

Then how can we all be looking south at the cross simultaneously on this FE model???

View attachment 228075

The SC is always pointing south. That does not mean south is always on the same side of the map. When it is pointing away from you above Africa or between Africa and SA, it is still pointing south for them.

People at the North pole on a globe cannot even look south. They would be looking out at space. Only on a FE, can a person at the NP, see the South, in a 360 degree panorama. People in Australia can look north past the NP, and see south in the opposite direction as actually looking south. What people cannot do is look east and see themselves in the west. There is no east or west at the NP.

If one was standing on the equator, and followed the virtual latitude on a flat earth they would walk in a circle. They could not walk straight or eventually they would head south always. On a globe if one walked east in a straight line, one would eventually be at a different latitude. The test is not only a drop in "elevation" it would have to be a straight line, without any curve. On a globe an object should be right or left depending on the hemisphere as much as down under the horizon.

On a FE, an object would be in a straight line from us, but the line of latitude would curve away and back to the object. The lines of latitude on a flat earth just give us the path of objects moving in an orbit around the NP. No objects in the sky should have orbits around the SP. Not even the SC. It would orbit the NP, but always point south. The bottom star being in the furthest orbit away from the NP. The light from any object in the sky only can be seen when the orbit takes that object overhead. Stars are not that far away, according to Genesis 1. Only God knows why some appear further away than others. If that is an illusion, it does not necessarily mean God is decieving us. God created 3D. Why would not the heavens be portrayed as having depth? The heavens do not need to have all the stars look flat in the sky. Just like the earth does not need to look flat, to be flat. It has depth as well.

People at the North pole on a globe cannot even look south. They would be looking out at space. Only on a FE, can a person at the NP, see the South, in a 360 degree panorama. People in Australia can look north past the NP, and see south in the opposite direction as actually looking south. What people cannot do is look east and see themselves in the west. There is no east or west at the NP.

If one was standing on the equator, and followed the virtual latitude on a flat earth they would walk in a circle. They could not walk straight or eventually they would head south always. On a globe if one walked east in a straight line, one would eventually be at a different latitude. The test is not only a drop in "elevation" it would have to be a straight line, without any curve. On a globe an object should be right or left depending on the hemisphere as much as down under the horizon.

On a FE, an object would be in a straight line from us, but the line of latitude would curve away and back to the object. The lines of latitude on a flat earth just give us the path of objects moving in an orbit around the NP. No objects in the sky should have orbits around the SP. Not even the SC. It would orbit the NP, but always point south. The bottom star being in the furthest orbit away from the NP. The light from any object in the sky only can be seen when the orbit takes that object overhead. Stars are not that far away, according to Genesis 1. Only God knows why some appear further away than others. If that is an illusion, it does not necessarily mean God is decieving us. God created 3D. Why would not the heavens be portrayed as having depth? The heavens do not need to have all the stars look flat in the sky. Just like the earth does not need to look flat, to be flat. It has depth as well.

This doesn't explain how the crux can be south everywhere at once either...

6pm... In Australia... Im looking south at the crux
4-5am... In south America... Their looking south at the crux

View attachment 228092

You haven't explained how this is possible. The cross cant be behind me and in front of me

This doesn't explain how the SC can be seen to the south in multiple directions at once...

View attachment 228089 View attachment 228090 View attachment 228091

This doesn't explain how the crux can be south everywhere at once either...

6pm... In Australia... Im looking south at the crux
4-5am... In south America... Their looking south at the crux

View attachment 228092

You haven't explained how this is possible. The cross cant be behind me and in front of me

With respect, you don’t understand the globe model at all, and your explanation of the FE model is nonsense.

No it is above you. You can see it at 6pm above you?

For one thing night is not an equal 12 hours in the 3 southern most points who would even be looking for the SC. At this post it is about 6:30 am in Johannesburg, 2:30 pm in Sydney, and 1:30 am in Punta Arenas, Chile. Johannesburg only shares about 5 hours of darkness with Chile. That the SC is between them in the sky should not be a problem. When Africa is seeing it in the morning waning, Chile would be just seeing it at night coming into view.

No it is above you. You can see it at 6pm above you?