The Sun, Moon, and Stars Prove the Flat Earth

Haven't posted in a while but in all the evidence we have in our true observation of our world and the sky, this one to me has always been the heliocentric killing trump card. That stars do not change their position in the sky. The fact that Polaris stays DEAD point 365/366 days a year in all recorded history to me seems impossible in the heliocentric model. This fact of its constant position would mean that in the heliocentric model solar system that is supposedly moving, spinning, rotating and revolving around within the Milky Way, does not rotate or spin on ANY axis. If you think of the solar system like a vinyl record, this record cannot rotate on the X, Y or Z axis, it is fixed and can only turn around just like on a record player. Polaris proves that not only does the Earth itself not "wobble", but the WHOLE of the solar system can not be rotating on any axis either.

This is utterly ridiculous to think that free flying happenstance chunks of dirt and hydrogen formed by accident in giant explosions of "astronomical" magnitude would then settle into a constant completely still position in a 2D plane yet still supposedly moving through the galaxy, and the galaxy itself is rotating and moving too in 3 dimensions. In all our observations we see NO parallax, no change in star position year to year, and a fixed North Star that by itself demonstrably proves that we cannot be spinning, revolving, and moving independently in a galaxy of free floating objects.

TL;DR - They were right when they called it the "firmament".

Great points Damnice! Another nail in the heliocentric coffin below:

Admin wrote:Great points Damnice!  Another nail in the heliocentric coffin below:

Great footage, I would love to see more examples of this - I've never seen it before here in AU

Flat Earth - 5 Absurd theories science made up
"Science invent theory on top of a theory on top of a theory to prove the theory is a fact." ~ zup zuke

NASA CGI vs NIKON P900 x83 Optical Zoom
by Adam 1414

Shadow cast onto the clouds from Mt Rainier as the sun moves away:

Tilemanj wrote:Hi csp,
Just to confirm my understanding of pic.... The peak is above the blanket of clouds, so our view is from underneath .... Shadow is lying on top of clouds.....  Which means sun must be low.... If that's correct, it's not only beautiful and inspiring , it's also positive proof of sun's locality and orbital path.... It's great... Every time a pic like this comes along it washes away more of that childhood globe programming....  how can anyone look at this and deny the truth..... Thank you for posting that

Absolutely, and you can see the lit clouds are also lit from underneath - once ones eyes are open, it's hard to deny the facts.

Please forgive my absolutely shizzy android phone camera. I took this picture of the moon to show that the light it produces is impossible for the heliocentric model.

The shadow and light would mean that the sun was STILL in the west, impossible at 1:00 AM.

Star trails: not evidence of stationary earth..it is "PROOF"

1. Open or Closed Orbits ?

Heliocentrics and Globeists, tell us that far, far, away, the Solar system, milky way, galaxies are speeding and spinning through the universe. All the while, the Earth rotates around the Sun. Planetary movements are said to obey Keplers Laws and have a CLOSED elliptical Orbit. Those equations apparently help them (even today), get Objects into space orbits, to explore the Solar System, to boldly go where no man … bla bla…

Gabrielle Henriettes’ shows a simple refutation of this nonsense, in her book Heaven and Earth.
Earths’ Orbit cannot possibly be a CLOSED one (i.e. join itself again like a ring on your finger), if everything is constantly changing position in space.

There are animations in Erics videos, showing that according to globeheads, the motions of these bodies, would follow an OPEN, helical, curve, like a corkscrew shape. It would never CLOSE on itself.

An Orbit cannot be both OPEN and CLOSED. You can’t have it both ways. Both falsehoods contradict one another.

2. Where's the Continuity ?

A continuous, open helical motion, always spinning and orbiting, means there should be no stops or pauses. Everything must be traveling at some rate of spin, wobble, orbit or whatever, every day.  Why would any day be different from any another with respect to this continuous steady motion?

The Sun stops/halts/pauses at the Solstices (Dec 21 and June 21) and stays at the same position / declination for 3 to 5 days, before it starts to climb/sink at a steady rate (x degrees per day) again.

How is this possible? Why does it not always remain steady? Irrespective of what rate of change is actually measured, there is no reason for any difference in the rate at which motion happens at these two particular times. Why should the Sun appear to stop or stay at a constant value for any duration whatsoever? It should always be changing, if this is an open, helical, never ending motion.

first time i have heard about somebody who is 72 years old man from Kolkata, India propagating the theory of "sun moving around the earth" and he has been trying to convince the people of the place for past 50 years now. here is the link below:

https://www.google.co.in/?client=firefox-b#q=kc+paul+sun+moves+around+the+earth&gfe_rd=cr

rc0123 wrote:first time i have heard about somebody who is 72 years old man from Kolkata, India propagating the theory of "sun moving around the earth" and he has been trying to convince the people of the place for past 50 years now. here is the link below:

https://www.google.co.in/?client=firefox-b#q=kc+paul+sun+moves+around+the+earth&gfe_rd=cr

It looks like he is living on the street now, very sad.

Last night I noticed again how the slightly more than half Moon's light never adjusted to the supposed position of the Sun as the Earth "rotated" through the night. I have a free app on my android phone called Google Sky Map that lets you point your phone towards the sky or ground and it will show you the position of stars, celestial bodies and the Sun & Moon. Funny thing is the Moon's light and shadow on the app were adjusted to the position heliocentric models would require for where the Sun HAS TO BE for the heliocentric model to work. So the shadow of the Moon on the app was on top of the Moon about 3 am, but looking at the moon out my window the shadow was STILL directly to the East(left side) and was lit on the West half(right side). This absolutely proves the Moon satellite reflection theory false, it's impossible for the Sun to have traveled more than half way around the round Earth and for the Moon's lighting(were it a reflection) in its relation to the Sun in the sky not to adjust. The fact that even Google Sky Map shows how the shadow SHOULD be with its depiction of the Moon in the app view shows just how false the model is when in REALITY, with our own eyes, we can see it doesn't behave remotely like it should. I wish I could get a higher quality camera to document this all with the real Moon and the app in the same picture along with a compass and a clock to show all the elements at once. Until then, stay up late and look at the Moon yourselves and I'm sure you can see with your own eyes just how much genuine observation contradicts Copernicus.

Some interesting shots in the above video

I created a youtube channel for FE stuff and I uploaded sun "rise" over flat earth which shows to moves in circle toward the camera, and you can see the difference in size of the sun when it just came out of the horizon and when it almost on top of the camera. It's proof that earth is flat!!

Another FE proof video on sun"set" when it shows that the sun move away during its orbit to west horizon...

Sorry if this has been brought up before, and I apologise for my ignorance of high level science, but I have a rather simple (I hope) question/point.

According to the heliocentric model:

If the sun is 93 miles away, and it is transferring heat energy to earth via 92 odd million miles of cold space - how can it be that space is cold, and our planet is receiving this energy still? Surely that contradicts the law of heat transfer? Am I missing something?

ronnieswoleman wrote:If the sun is 93 miles away, and it is transferring heat energy to earth via 92 odd million miles of cold space - how can it be that space is cold, and our planet is receiving this energy still? Surely that contradicts the law of heat transfer? Am I missing something?

You're not missing anything, it's the masses who are missing all the contradictions in their scientism theories.

Indeed, the solar system is a sham. Wake up and smell the coffee, or the marijuana, or the plumbing; or whatever refuse pierces the air. Just open your eyes! The full moon is tomorrow; make your wishes fool! The Moon is listening!

The Moon is especially important. Every wizard knows this! But be careful. It might reap more than you can sow.

The Moon itself should have its own category. Its sequence and consequence is key.

Thanks csp.

Are there practical examples where the law of heat transfer is ignored? Because if not, then the heliocentric model is impossible with this simple explanation; It means you can spread this to people without having to even mention the intellectual hot potato of Flat Earth.

A few weeks ago i looked through my scope (x12) at the moon and damn my eye felt cold after a few moments.



Heliozentric up my ass

Are the Sun and the Moon inside the Dome or outside the Dome and what is the force/mechanics that actually moves them.

csp wrote:

ronnieswoleman wrote:If the sun is 93 miles away, and it is transferring heat energy to earth via 92 odd million miles of cold space - how can it be that space is cold, and our planet is receiving this energy still? Surely that contradicts the law of heat transfer? Am I missing something?

You're not missing anything, it's the masses who are missing all the contradictions in their scientism theories.

They call it gamma rays. Yes--radiation IS a safe and natural method of heat. Wow!
Just kidding, nobody knows why we aren't being nuked considering the explanation provided. Watch these people try to answer a seriously important question while not one of them can agree with each other: http://physics(.)stackexchange(.)com/questions/142005/how-earth-protected-from-the-gamma-rays-generated-by-sun