[DaFsGoingOn]

I'm not saying i have any opinion either way although i cant see how the FET can explain the southern celestial pole. when looking at the sky in the northern hemisphere the stars all seem to spin around the northern celestial pole, a point which by luck is very close to polaris, a very bright star, the FET explains this. However in the southern hemisphere where polaris and the northern celestial pole as well as much of the stars in the northern hemisphere depending how far south you go are no longer visible there's all new stars that appear to spin around a point known as the southern celestial pole. This unfortunately has no bright, close by stars but people have invented tricks to estimating it quite easily such as using the intersection of a line running through two of the stars in the constellation of southern cross and a line drawn perpendicular to two stars known as the southern pointers running in-between them.

 

[Venus]

I'm not saying i have any opinion either way although i cant see how the FET can explain the southern celestial pole. when looking at the sky in the northern hemisphere the stars all seem to spin around the northern celestial pole, a point which by luck is very close to polaris, a very bright star, the FET explains this. However in the southern hemisphere where polaris and the northern celestial pole as well as much of the stars in the northern hemisphere depending how far south you go are no longer visible there's all new stars that appear to spin around a point known as the southern celestial pole. This unfortunately has no bright, close by stars but people have invented tricks to estimating it quite easily such as using the intersection of a line running through two of the stars in the constellation of southern cross and a line drawn perpendicular to two stars known as the southern pointers running in-between them.

This is correct !! I have personally observed stars from both the northern and southern hemispheres, as I live in Australia but have travelled north to Thailand, Japan and taken numerous trips to USA and Canada.
Not only is the set of stars different between the northern and southern hemispheres, but also stars viewed from the northern hemisphere appear to rotate counter clockwise about Polaris, but stars viewed from the southern hemisphere appear to rotate clockwise about the south celestial pole ... how does the FE model explain this???

Another difference is the view of the moon... when viewed from the southern hemisphere it appears to be an upside down version of the moon as seen from the northern hemisphere!! https://i.imgur.com/ZPY5fvh.jpg 
This is explained perfectly by the spherical earth model as shown in this diagram  http://guanolad.com/stuff/moon_orientation.jpg

But the FE model has no explanation for this observation either.

Also the phases of the moon as viewed from the southern hemisphere ... this link explains the differences http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/time/moon/hemispheres.html

[Round fact]

I would not hold my breath waiting for FE to respond to these points. I have posted two questions on 4/4 and though they have both been read more than 30 times each, the questions remain with 0 responses.

It seem the math involved cannot be refuted by FE so therefore it is ignored.

I have no proof, so it is my opinion only, but I think this site and the site that gave birth to it, were created as a form of entertainment. And the entertainment is only in the Forums. The rest of the site(s) are filled with not very imaginative fantasy/fiction. If  you read any of it, what emerges is a haphazard  hodgepodge of conflicting ideas centered on one "Holy Grail" a FE. The rest is window dressing thrown together seemingly in the hopes of creating so much confusion that a rational mind is not sure where to begin in asking questions.

Tom Bishop out of hand dismissed the Surveyor thread, simply because HE PERSONALLY  was not addressed as if the same math didn't apply to his FE. "I can't be over drawn, I still have checks." 

FE is not even good fantasy

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

I'm not saying i have any opinion either way although i cant see how the FET can explain the southern celestial pole. when looking at the sky in the northern hemisphere the stars all seem to spin around the northern celestial pole, a point which by luck is very close to polaris, a very bright star, the FET explains this. However in the southern hemisphere where polaris and the northern celestial pole as well as much of the stars in the northern hemisphere depending how far south you go are no longer visible there's all new stars that appear to spin around a point known as the southern celestial pole. This unfortunately has no bright, close by stars but people have invented tricks to estimating it quite easily such as using the intersection of a line running through two of the stars in the constellation of southern cross and a line drawn perpendicular to two stars known as the southern pointers running in-between them.

This is correct !! I have personally observed stars from both the northern and southern hemispheres, as I live in Australia but have travelled north to Thailand, Japan and taken numerous trips to USA and Canada.
Not only is the set of stars different between the northern and southern hemispheres, but also stars viewed from the northern hemisphere appear to rotate counter clockwise about Polaris, but stars viewed from the southern hemisphere appear to rotate clockwise about the south celestial pole ... how does the FE model explain this???

Another difference is the view of the moon... when viewed from the southern hemisphere it appears to be an upside down version of the moon as seen from the northern hemisphere!! https://i.imgur.com/ZPY5fvh.jpg 
This is explained perfectly by the spherical earth model as shown in this diagram  http://guanolad.com/stuff/moon_orientation.jpg

But the FE model has no explanation for this observation either.

Also the phases of the moon as viewed from the southern hemisphere ... this link explains the differences http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/time/moon/hemispheres.html

What I can't seem to find out is what the full moon looks like at the Equator. Does it just apparently flip as soon as you pass an imaginary line or what?

[Rounder]

What I can't seem to find out is what the full moon looks like at the Equator. Does it just apparently flip as soon as you pass an imaginary line or what?

Ask and ye shall receive!  Here's the equator view:


What's missing from the Junior School link, which shows two views of the moon 180° different from each other, is that those views correspond to the exact south pole and the exact north pole.  The actual view at any different latitude within a hemisphere will actually be tilted at the same angle as your latitude..  In fact, the view of the moon rotates smoothly from straight up and down at the north pole, through straight left to right at the equator, to straight down and up at the south pole.

[rabinoz]

What I can't seem to find out is what the full moon looks like at the Equator. Does it just apparently flip as soon as you pass an imaginary line or what?

The moon doesn't "flip" at all, it's simply that people in the South generally look North to see the moon, in the North they look South.
If you are on the Equator the moon is going almost overhead. Of course the moon rises roughly in the East moves overhead and sets in the West. We just face the direction we need to see it.

It's not the moon changing, it's the people looking from a completely different angle.

[geckothegeek]

I would not hold my breath waiting for FE to respond to these points. I have posted two questions on 4/4 and though they have both been read more than 30 times each, the questions remain with 0 responses.

It seem the math involved cannot be refuted by FE so therefore it is ignored.

I have no proof, so it is my opinion only, but I think this site and the site that gave birth to it, were created as a form of entertainment. And the entertainment is only in the Forums. The rest of the site(s) are filled with not very imaginative fantasy/fiction. If  you read any of it, what emerges is a haphazard  hodgepodge of conflicting ideas centered on one "Holy Grail" a FE. The rest is window dressing thrown together seemingly in the hopes of creating so much confusion that a rational mind is not sure where to begin in asking questions.

Tom Bishop out of hand dismissed the Surveyor thread, simply because HE PERSONALLY  was not addressed as if the same math didn't apply to his FE. "I can't be over drawn, I still have checks." 

FE is not even good fantasy

I thought my signature line was a fair asessment of this website.