The Sun, Moon, and Stars Prove the Flat Earth

Some great points made here:

EthericData2 wrote:Hey,
What's going on there? Are these occurrences man-made? Are they created naturally by the firmament? Are they occurring outside of the firmament?

No proof of a firmament.
Perhaps you could research your question and report what you find.

Realearth wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:Hey,
What's going on there? Are these occurrences man-made? Are they created naturally by the firmament? Are they occurring outside of the firmament?

No proof of a firmament.
Perhaps you could research your question and report what you find.

Do you have any research suggestions? I will report back any noteworthy findings.

EthericData2 wrote:

Realearth wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:Hey,
What's going on there? Are these occurrences man-made? Are they created naturally by the firmament? Are they occurring outside of the firmament?

No proof of a firmament.
Perhaps you could research your question and report what you find.

Do you have any research suggestions? I will report back any noteworthy findings.

Libraries, this thread, reference materials thread on this forum, Amazon Books, old newspaper articles, science journals and internet.
Remember, provable repeatable experiments, facts and evidence, NOT opinions.
Good Luck Researcher!

Admin wrote:Some great points made here:

Good video . Thanks for posting that . Extremely interesting .

Maybe you’ll have heard these reports (and some video) that we apparently can’t see stars past a certain height (50k feet? I can’t remember). This seems like a proof that could actually make some heads turn in mainstream. If we could get a camera on one of these balloons that was pointed UP, maybe we could film them as they faded out as it traveled up? I feel like we need to film them continuously from being able to see them to not, otherwise they will simply make the excuse that you could never see the stars. So it probably needs to happen at night. Also, I haven’t actually seen any conclusive evidence for this theory of not being able to see the stars for myself so if any of you can link any videos on this would be appreciated. At the least we should investigate it I think.

Could the stars just be like pin holes in a darkened dome above us with light shining through them? maybe there’s a bright heaven beyond this dark dome and the pin prick holes let some light in which is the stars we see. Is there some logic for this as a possibility? I guess it doesn’t really explain planets, since they move. But could it possibly explain stars?

Adding to this, is it possible comets could be temporary new holes in this dark dome? And their “tails” are actually just “light shining through the hole?” I’ve noticed there does not seem to be any parallax (movement of the comet in relation to the stars) on the time-lapse videos I’ve seen, though perhaps I just haven’t seen the right one.

One strange observation is that apparently comet tails “always point away from the sun”, which is sort of strange for the mainstream view being that these tails are supposed to be dragging behind the comet. But the actual mainstream view is supposed to be that the sun’s solar winds blow the tail away from the sun, even if it means blowing it in front of the comet, which is a really awkward explaination of these tails if you try to visualize that. It’s not surprising that they don’t advertise this part of the story because it sounds odd and doesn’t fit their image of a trailing comet very well.

This is a video from a guy called “Phuket Word”.

According to the heliocentric model, different stars should appear at different times of the year in the sky, right? But apparently, they do not. Is this confirmed? If so, this seems like an absolute globe killer! But they always have some sort of excuse for everything. What is their excuse for this anomaly?

As most know, the main reason given for the moon always showing the same face towards the Earth, is that its rotational speed matches its orbital speed. This excuse hinges on one BIG faulty assumption : That the orbit of the moon around the Earth is circular.

However, for some reason, likely to do with constructing argumentation for seasons (as is the case of all the planets orbits around the sun), the orbit of the moon around planet Earth had to be elliptical. - How else was the apparent different sizes of the moon as well as the moon phases be explained as being the source of tides and shown as shadows of the Earth on the face of the moon?


But, an elliptical orbit entirely annihilates the idea that the moon would be showing the same face constantly towards the Earth.

Because since the speed of the moon will have to vary from maximum speed at perigee (closest to earth) to near zero (or relatively very small) speed at apogee (furthest from Earth) the rotational speed of the moon around its own axis has to increase and slow down accordingly. This, of course, is a clear violation of the conservation of momentum. Unless the moon houses some magical rotational machinery and breaks ...

So, the fact the the moon shows the same face towards the Earth disqualifies the whole idea of the moon being a rotating ball in an orbit governed by "gravity".

But this all is no surprise, since both Kepler and Newton are hoaxes.

Yesterday I captured those beautiful sun rays from my friend’s house! The sun is so close to our plane !!

I have a question concerning star trails but it’s a little bit hard to explain, I’ll try my best.

As from my point of view (Austria / now in September) I see Ursa Minor and Ursa Major vertically in a line when I look to the north at 12am, at 4am they are heading in direction to northeast and are almost horizontally in a line.

12am (September)


4am (September)



However..

In November for instance, Ursa Minor and Major are already horizontally in a line at 12am. And later at 4am they are almost upside down.

12am (November)


4am (November)



It’s not about the trails, it’s more about the time changes or why they are not at the same spot every day at the same time. Does the speed change?

I hope you get my point. Why do you think this happens?

If there’s already an explanation, let me know! This literally keeps me up all night.
Thanks!

JayEs wrote:I have a question concerning star trails but it’s a little bit hard to explain, I’ll try my best.

As from my point of view (Austria / now in September) I see Ursa Minor and Ursa Major vertically in a line when I look to the north at 12am, at 4am they are heading in direction to northeast and are almost horizontally in a line.

12am (September)


4am (September)



However..

In November for instance, Ursa Minor and Major are already horizontally in a line at 12am. And later at 4am they are almost upside down.

12am (November)


4am (November)



It’s not about the trails, it’s more about the time changes or why they are not at the same spot every day at the same time. Does the speed change?

I hope you get my point. Why do you think this happens?

If there’s already an explanation, let me know! This literally keeps me up all night.
Thanks!

Hi friend! In my opinion (not an expert on star trails and constellations) this happens because the difference of 4 minutes between solar and sidereal/stellar days.
Solar day = 24 hours (the amount of time the sun takes to reach his starting point in the sky)
Sidereal/Stellar day = 23:56 hours (the amount of time the fixed stars take to reach their starting point in the sky)
This means that the stars are a bit faster than the sun. so 60 days (23 September - 23 November) X 4 minutes (difference per day) = 240 minutes (4 hours difference)
And if we compare September 23 04:00 am to November 23 00:00 we ll see the constellation a bit higher in November and this happens because of the 1 hour back world-time change which happens the last Sunday of October (clocks from 01:00 go back to 00:00) I think.
That's my opinion, maybe I am wrong somewhere. Let me know!
Check out Eric's last youtube video!!
Greetings and sorry for my english

dexter1914 wrote:
Hi friend! In my opinion (not an expert on star trails and constellations) this happens because the difference of 4 minutes between solar and sidereal/stellar days.
Solar day = 24 hours (the amount of time the sun takes to reach his starting point in the sky)
Sidereal/Stellar day = 23:56 hours (the amount of time the fixed stars take to reach their starting point in the sky)
This means that the stars are a bit faster than the sun. so 60 days (23 September - 23 November) X 4 minutes (difference per day) = 240 minutes (4 hours difference)
And if we compare September 23 04:00 am to November 23 00:00 we ll see the constellation a bit higher in November and this happens because of the 1 hour back world-time change which happens the last Sunday of October (clocks from 01:00 go back to 00:00) I think.
That's my opinion, maybe I am wrong somewhere. Let me know!
Check out Eric's last youtube video!!
Greetings and sorry for my english

Hey!

Thank you for your response! I've heard about the the Solar day/Stellar day difference, but I really need to look further into this subject. It sounds definitely possible and those 4 hours would make sense.

Btw your English is fine, don’t worry!

JayEs wrote:
Hi friend! In my opinion (not an expert on star trails and constellations) this happens because the difference of 4 minutes between solar and sidereal/stellar days.
Solar day = 24 hours (the amount of time the sun takes to reach his starting point in the sky)
Sidereal/Stellar day = 23:56 hours (the amount of time the fixed stars take to reach their starting point in the sky)
This means that the stars are a bit faster than the sun. so 60 days (23 September - 23 November) X 4 minutes (difference per day) = 240 minutes (4 hours difference)
And if we compare September 23 04:00 am to November 23 00:00 we ll see the constellation a bit higher in November and this happens because of the 1 hour back world-time change which happens the last Sunday of October (clocks from 01:00 go back to 00:00) I think.
That's my opinion, maybe I am wrong somewhere. Let me know!
Check out Eric's last youtube video!!
Greetings and sorry for my english

Imagine for a moment that the whole thing is like a clock. All cogs and wheels.
The sidereal stars the biggest of the wheels. Always 4 minutes ahead of everything else.
Followed by the Sun wheel, then the moon, and then the wandering stars... and then some...

As a metaphor, almost like the Mayan calendar... maybe that's what the calendar represent... This spinning of the celestial lights from biggest to smallest. The finite inside the infinite.

Jack Aurora wrote: Imagine for a moment that the whole thing is like a clock. All cogs and wheels.
The sidereal stars the biggest of the wheels. Always 4 minutes ahead of everything else.
Followed by the Sun wheel, then the moon, and then the wandering stars... and then some...

As a metaphor, almost like the Mayan calendar... maybe that's what the calendar represent... This spinning of the celestial lights from biggest to smallest. The finite inside the infinite.

Ok, I think I’m beginning to understand.
It’s not just one duration of day, each "wheel" has its own pace so to speak. It’s one system but different parts.

Right?

JayEs wrote:

Jack Aurora wrote: Imagine for a moment that the whole thing is like a clock. All cogs and wheels.
The sidereal stars the biggest of the wheels. Always 4 minutes ahead of everything else.
Followed by the Sun wheel, then the moon, and then the wandering stars... and then some...

As a metaphor, almost like the Mayan calendar... maybe that's what the calendar represent... This spinning of the celestial lights from biggest to smallest. The finite inside the infinite.

Ok, I think I’m beginning to understand.
It’s not just one duration of day, each "wheel" has its own pace so to speak. It’s one system but different parts.

Right?

It's is as if they all function in mutual agreement without agreement...
They function as one, yet as many.
None of any particular part is in control, and yet perfect control is maintained.
Very Taoists, as one perspective of it.

Also, watching the polar videos, our perception of a day is quite distorted.
One day to earth is one year to us humans.
I'm referring to the polar year.
6 months light 6 months dark.
One day.

We are counting time in miniscule ways, with seconds and hours and so called days and years.
What if one actually year to earth, is like 360 years to us?
10 years to earth is then 3600 years to us?
Happy birthday earth!!!
Here is a present!!!
Every 3600 years...hmmm, I see a pattern here...lol

Jack Aurora wrote:It's is as if they all function in mutual agreement without agreement...
They function as one, yet as many.
None of any particular part is in control, and yet perfect control is maintained.
Very Taoists, as one perspective of it.

Also, watching the polar videos, our perception of a day is quite distorted.
One day to earth is one year to us humans.
I'm referring to the polar year.
6 months light 6 months dark.
One day.

We are counting time in miniscule ways, with seconds and hours and so called days and years.
What if one actually year to earth, is like 360 years to us?
10 years to earth is then 3600 years to us?
Happy birthday earth!!!
Here is a present!!!
Every 3600 years...hmmm, I see a pattern here...lol

It's pretty complex and never ceases to amaze me how everything fits perfectly together.
Thanks for explaining it so well!

Also thank you again @dexter1914 for your help!
You're right, Eric actually answers my question in his latest video.

Is there any explanation for meteor showers on flat earth ? I have been searching for this but have not found any thread discussing the same.
The heliocentric model attributes meteor shower to earth crossing a comet's path which leaves debris behind leading to the light show, but then how come we have periodic meteor shower every year December. One would assume that the lop-sided orbit of comets will not coincide with earth's orbit every year at the same time.

naiveharry wrote:Is there any explanation for meteor showers on flat earth ? I have been searching for this but have not found any thread discussing the same.
The heliocentric model attributes meteor shower to earth crossing a comet's path which leaves debris behind leading to the light show, but then how come we have periodic meteor shower every year December. One would assume that the lop-sided orbit of comets will not coincide with earth's orbit every year at the same time.

Meteors are man made shot in the air to convince hive minded people we're on a spinning space ball

They shoot those fiery balls in the picture above indeed, though there is also some kind of natural phenomenon of "shooting stars" possibly explained here

Pseudo-Scientific Moon Mathe-Magic:



In the heliocentric model of the cosmos, the Moon revolves around the Earth 13 times per year traveling at 2,288 mph, while the Earth revolves around the Sun once per year traveling at 67,000mph. The following model and animation illustrate how this is supposed to occur. As you can see, since the Moon is revolving around the Earth, which itself is revolving around the Sun, in order to maintain its regular orbit, the Moon would have to be constantly and drastically changing its speed in ways completely unaccounted for by the model.

In the outer part of its orbit, the Moon would have to speed up 67,000mph in addition to its regular speed of 2,288mph just to keep up with the Earth. So the Moon would then be traveling at 69,288mph when it reached the front of the Earth. At this point, since the Moon is allegedly 240,000 miles away from Earth, the Earth would catch up in just 4 hours, so the Moon must continue traveling 67,000mph along Earth's trajectory while simultaneously continuing its now perpendicular 2,288mph second trajectory. Then as it turns to reach the inner part of its orbit, the Moon must slow back down to its original speed allowing the Earth to pass by. Lastly, as it passes behind the Earth, the Moon must once again quickly accelerate back up to nearly 70,000mph before getting left in the dust.

In addition to all of this, the Sun itself is allegedly orbiting the Milky Way galaxy at 448,000mph further compounding the problems and calculations of the heliocentric model. If this were true, then the Earth, Moon, and other planets would all have yet another set of ridiculous and impossible corkscrewing accelerations and decelerations necessary just to keep up with the Sun. And for the cherry on top, all of these calculations have been assuming perfectly circular orbits, but the actual heliocentric model claims that the Moon's orbit around the Earth, the Earth's orbit around the Sun, and the Sun's orbit around the Milky Way, are all elliptical, not circular, meaning there would be even more additional accelerations and decelerations to calculate depending where each one is along its elliptical path.

These constant and drastic accelerations and decelerations necessitated by the heliocentric model are rarely if ever mentioned by globe believers because they have always been taught that the reason we do not feel or experience any of this supposed motion is because we always travel at a constant velocity. In their own model however, due to their elliptical orbits and revolving around other revolving bodies, the Moon, Sun, Earth and other planets, could not maintain constant velocities and would instead be regularly accelerating and decelerating. Yet meanwhile you can stack a house of cards, make a rock cairn, or play a game of Jenga all without any of this motion, acceleration and deceleration ever being felt or experienced.

Right on Eric, it's a case of coincidentia oppositorum with an insane concept for an insane 'global' population who's brains have ironically flat-lined.

Good points.

I’m assuming the observable movement of the moons corroborates the heliocentric gravitational cosmological model. If the wandering stars circle the north for magnetic reasons, why do their satellites circle them rather than simply traversing similarly around the north?

Why assume any astronomical observation corroborates the heliocentric gravitational cosmological model ? No evidence was ever presented to bring the heliocentric model to prominence.

That the moons of Jupiter didn't follow predicted occultation and reappearance based on that purely imaginary model led to the assumptions about the speed of light , needed to shore up the helio models erroneous prediction - not required in Brahe's geocentric model - just parallax.

The earth is stationary and does not rotate around the sun.

No one has ever measured the speed of light.

"Kings Dethroned: A History Of the Evolution of Astronomy From the Time of the Roman Empire Up to the Present Day" by G. Hickson is an enlightening read.

Or you could study the work of Professors M. Allais , among others , whose experiment with pendulums proved that the current heliocentric gravitational cosmological model and it's assumptions are untenable .