No, the earth is not flat

I can appreciate questioning the powers that be and all, but the earth is not flat. Two indisputable observations prove it:

1. You cannot see all stars from all points, and that's due to curve of the earth. From our perspective in the northern hemisphere, we cannot see the Southern Cross. And they cannot see northern hemisphere stars from the south. I have never seen a flat earther explain how this can possibly comport with their dome model. If you've ever visited a dome (like the Capitol Rotunda) you can see everything in it from any point under it. Look at any of the countless models of the so-called flat earth online. Pick a point - any point. Then ask yourself why you cannot see all the stars from that point. It simply does not make sense.
2. The apparent rotation of the stars is another easy objection to the flat earth model. When you observe the stars and trace them over the course of an evening, they appear to rotate counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern. Known as diurnal motion, this fits exactly with what you would expect from a sphere. It's not even worth exploring how different constellations of stars could appear to rotate in complete opposite directions under a dome.

Again, these are observations anyone can make with their own eyes. There is no room for CGI, fish eye lenses, NASA conspiracies, or the other usual litany of conspiracies flat earthers use to dismiss "globe earthers" out of hand. Sorry. Earth isn't flat.

Yeah, but the Reptilian Conspiracy folks make the Flat Earthers look like rocked scientists.

I stand corrected. There are quite a few "photos" of round earth from the moon (with astronauts in them), but they're so stupid-looking. I can't believe that we were so ignorant back in the day that we couldn't "see" the ridiculousness of it all. They're literally laughable.

I can appreciate questioning the powers that be and all, but the earth is not flat. Two indisputable observations prove it:

1. You cannot see all stars from all points, and that's due to curve of the earth. From our perspective in the northern hemisphere, we cannot see the Southern Cross. And they cannot see northern hemisphere stars from the south. I have never seen a flat earther explain how this can possibly comport with their dome model. If you've ever visited a dome (like the Capitol Rotunda) you can see everything in it from any point under it. Look at any of the countless models of the so-called flat earth online. Pick a point - any point. Then ask yourself why you cannot see all the stars from that point. It simply does not make sense.
2. The apparent rotation of the stars is another easy objection to the flat earth model. When you observe the stars and trace them over the course of an evening, they appear to rotate counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern. Known as diurnal motion, this fits exactly with what you would expect from a sphere. It's not even worth exploring how different constellations of stars could appear to rotate in complete opposite directions under a dome.

Again, these are observations anyone can make with their own eyes. There is no room for CGI, fish eye lenses, NASA conspiracies, or the other usual litany of conspiracies flat earthers use to dismiss "globe earthers" out of hand. Sorry. Earth isn't flat.

And if anyone catches that Gertrude Stein allusion i will include you in my prayers for the rest of my life!

Well this is odd. The dudes on the ISS are spacewalking right now and what's interesting is that they aren't moving in slow motion like the astronauts were back in 1969. I wonder why that is?

LOL! Their cameras were turning such that it made the round earth 100% flat, so they cut the "live feed" and changed angles RIGHT BEFORE the earth would have appeared to be concave. Can't make this stuff up!!

And if anyone catches that Gertrude Stein allusion i will include you in my prayers for the rest of my life!

The light of day will no doubt bring clarity.

The only thing I know about Gertrude Stein is that Picasso painted her portrait.

I did not get G.S. allusion.

There are no photographs of a globe Earth. The next-gen satellite just launched on Christmas won't be giving us any either. Officially, the back of the satellite is covered with sensitive electronics which would be damage by direct sunlight, so the satellite will sit at the Lagrange point and NEVER turn to face the Earth. How about that.

Pretty incredible, isn't it? I just watched an ISS interview where this "astronaut" was teaching children that outside the window of their spaceship when in the sun it is 150 degrees, but then out of the line of sunlight it was something like negative 150 degrees. What electronics that we are aware of, can endure those kinds of conditions?

It is amazing that people fall for this stuff.

Forgive me I'm getting dense but I don't follow you here.

Ahhh . . . what I'm getting at is the 300-degree differential. JStates was referencing electronics being damaged in the sunlight/heat in outer space, so I added onto that thinking with the concept of such an extreme heat differential. Think of a rubber tire that goes from 150 degrees to being deeply, deeply frozen day in and day out. That tire just isn't going to last long. Not unless, however, we were to develop a new form of rubber. Maybe that's a bad example, and maybe rubber [can] endure such extreme heat differentials.

In the end, I'm just a regular person with no training or education on these matters. I'm not an expert, but I do enjoy posting questions to others to see their response. It amazes me how "triggered" people become over this stuff. It's as if having an opinion were equivalent to murder, or something.

Huh. I've never heard of the Southern Cross.

It's been around a long time.