[Nifty77]

Pretty much the title.

[jack44556677]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered ad-nauseam by now - did you not find an answer when you searched for relevant threads before posting this?

In any case, the answer is simple.  Put a picture of the moon on the middle of your ceiling (add constellations if you wish).  Now walk from the "southern hemisphere" to the northern hemisphere on the opposite side of the room.  What do you observe?

If you continue to have trouble understanding beyond that, I encourage you to visit grand central station (sadly I must recommend virtually, rather than literally) and observe the model of the earth and sky that the main hall represents.

[geolguy29]

I'm sure this has been asked and answered ad-nauseam by now - did you not find an answer when you searched for relevant threads before posting this?

In any case, the answer is simple.  Put a picture of the moon on the middle of your ceiling (add constellations if you wish).  Now walk from the "southern hemisphere" to the northern hemisphere on the opposite side of the room.  What do you observe?

If you continue to have trouble understanding beyond that, I encourage you to visit grand central station and observe the model of the earth and sky that the main hall represents.

Every time flat earthers use this rebuttal, but it makes no sense. First of all if the moon was above us on a flat plane, and the sky was rotating above us we would see the moon rotate over the course of the night, however we don't. Secondly, everyone on Earth sees the same face. It may be the wrong way round, but it is always the same features on the face of the moon. How could it be possible that people in Scotland and people in South Africa see the same face at the same time. Try hanging a ball up on the ceiling of your room and looking at it from different sides of the room. You're never going to see the same face. Now if the moon was a LONG LONG way away from the Earth then maybe you would see the same face. But if it was that far away then on a flat Earth you would see the moon 24 hours a day. The other potential option would be if the moon was also flat. Everybody would see the same face. However, the moon would only ever be spherical if you were directly underneath it. Otherwise it would look like an oval, which never happens.

As for the constellations. People don't see the same constellations in the north hemisphere as they do in the Southern hemisphere. That is a lie. Now the most damning observation is if you record the stars in the northern hemisphere over the course of the night, and speed up the footage, you'll find that they rotate anti-clockwise around the Earth's north axis. However, if you do this in the southern hemisphere, you'll see the stars rotating clockwise around the Earth's southern axis. At the equator stars move more linearly. This doesn't possibly make any sense on a flat earth. How could stars be moving two different directions at once. This only works on a sphere...There is nothing more to say.

[jack44556677]

Every time flat earthers use this rebuttal

It's just an explanation, not a rebuttal.

First of all if the moon was above us on a flat plane, and the sky was rotating above us we would see the moon rotate over the course of the night,

Yep, that's right.  https://www.space.com/24871-does-the-moon-rotate.html (don't go to, or trust anything on space.com). It does not rotate fully in one day the way the rest of the stars do, but that may be because of its own rotation.

Secondly, everyone on Earth sees the same face.

Yes, exactly like the picture of the moon I suggested one could put on their ceiling to understand what is occurring.

Try hanging a ball up on the ceiling of your room and looking at it from different sides of the room. You're never going to see the same face.

Also correct! This is a problem for the presumptive view, not the one we are discussing.  We always see the same face (minor "libration" aside) and so the moon is most likely not spherical.  Like you said, if we are on a ball, and the moon is a ball, we should see different faces from different locations - but we don't.

Otherwise it would look like an oval, which never happens.

It could be convex (concave facing us), or there could be things in the way affecting the light.  We have very little certainty what we are looking through and how it affects the distant objects.

People don't see the same constellations in the north hemisphere as they do in the Southern hemisphere.

They see some of the same ones, they just don't see ALL the same constellations, or the same stars.  The north star can be seem in the southern hemisphere (what do you think that means for the constellations?).

How could stars be moving two different directions at once.

Why do you think they couldn't?  There could be 2 rotating star spirals above us.  The most compelling interpretation I have seen involves a transparent dome.  However, it is important to remember that it is fundamentally stupid and unscientific to look up in the sky to study the shape of the ground.  It's LITERALLY the opposite direction of what you hope to understand.  The lights above us have no bearing on or relevance to the shape of the earth.

[GreatATuin]

People don't see the same constellations in the north hemisphere as they do in the Southern hemisphere.

They see some of the same ones, they just don't see ALL the same constellations, or the same stars.  The north star can be seem in the southern hemisphere (what do you think that means for the constellations?).

Polaris, the current North star, cannot be seen in the southern hemisphere. More generally, the stars and constellations you can or cannot see depend on just one thing: your latitude. You can see the same stars in Adelaide, Buenos Aires and Cape Town, along the 34th parallel south. You can see the same stars in Crete, in Kyoto and in Albuquerque, along the 35th parallel north. But in the North you'll never see Crux, and in the South you'll never see Polaris.

Also, what does "hemisphere" even mean if the Earth is not a globe?

[geolguy29]

Okay, to clarify a few things for you Jack.

1. When I said the moon would rotate, I meant a clockwise/anticlockwise rotation, something akin to a record player turning. The type of rotation you are referring to in that article is axial rotation. The point I was making is that if the sky was rotating above a stationary plane then we would see the moon rotate in the manner I mentioned. If you wanted to see the moon rotate, then you need to move to higher or lower latitudes which cause the moon to rotate. This is because we are on a spherical Earth and a change in latitude changes your angle of view.

2. The example of putting a picture on the ceiling doesn't work though. Because the moon we see is always round, no matter what time of night it is and where you are on the Earth (provided it is night). Now for you to see the same face all the time it would need to be flat. Any curvature or convex nature of the moon, as you mention, would mean that part of the face that is visible in one part of the world, will not be visible in another part of the world. Get a bowl, draw black marks on it, and tape it to the ceiling round side down. Depending on where you in the room, you'll see different marks. Yet people in Scotland see the exact same face as people in South Africa. Now if the moon was flat, then it would only be round if it was directly above you. However, we see it as round the entire night. What is it going to be? Flat or round. Either way you can't explain why you see the same face on the moon all over the world. However on a globe it makes sense. Not only is the moon extremely far away, but the moon is also tidally locked, which means that the Moon doesn't rotate on its axis the way a planet does.

3. I am sorry, your argument that we should see different sides because it is a ball doesn't work on the globe model. That's because the Moon is so far away from the Earth. It would be like sticking a basketball 100 metres away from you on a long straight road. Stand on one sidewalk and look at it through binoculars. Then look at it from the other side. You're still going to be seeing the exact same face. And that is because relative to the width of the road, the ball is a long way away from you. At least see this as proof that the moon has to be 100's of thousands of miles away from the Earth. But, the general flat Earth consensus is that the moon is much closer to us. 

4. You can't say, things may be affecting the view of the moon. The image of the moon is consistent. Or is it just a happy coincidence that no matter where you look at the moon, it is the same shape, the same face, and just changes rotation based upon your latitude. - Don't come back at me with crescent moons etc, that remains consistent  across the globe so doesn't mean anything. Also if you want to go into it, it is just further proof of a spherical Earth so I wouldn't recommend it.

5. Yeah. Go to the southern hemisphere, further that one degree south, and try and find Polaris. You can't.

6. There can't be two rotating star spirals above us. A star constellation that has declination of +45 degrees can be visible in Paris at the same time it is visible in Cape Town. They will be in different places in the sky, but both can be visible. Now, in Paris, that constellation will be moving anti-clockwise. That exact same star constellation in cape town can be seen rotating clockwise. How is that possible on a flat plane. The stars can't be moving in two different directions. It is IMPOSSIBLE, unless Paris is "upside down" compared to Cape town.

[jack44556677]

@GreatATuin

Polaris, the current North star, cannot be seen in the southern hemisphere.

https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2018/12/polaris-from-the-southern-hemisphere

Yes, it can - but not very far into it, depending on weather conditions and date/time viewed.

Also, what does "hemisphere" even mean if the Earth is not a globe?

When speaking with the locals/heathens, it is efficacious to use their language!  That depends greatly on the true shape of the world, which is not known.  Many imagine that the southern hemisphere is, in actuality, a ring around the outer edge of the world surrounding the north pole.

@geolguy29

1. Well you really took that tip about not going to space.com for anything more seriously than I anticipated.  The moon face, which is always the same facing us, rotates like a record over the course of 27 days.  Why do you think it doesn't?  The visible orientation of the moon does vary by location, exactly like the moon you paste on your ceiling and walk around.

2. The moon is always round, yes.  It does not make the moon spherical, this is a logical error.  No, it does not make sense on a spherical earth, we ought to be able to see significant amounts more than the 50 or so we do - and the face should vary (if for no other reason than reflection off of a spherical reflector).

3. That's true, many flat earth researchers think the moon is much more close than the presumptive model.  If that is true, then the optical effect of appearing circular is even more mysterious.

4. There is no proof of the earth's shape in the sky.  I cannot stress that enough.

5.  See link above.  The point is that the same stars are visible in both "hemispheres" including polaris depending on location etc.

6.  There CAN'T be? You sound awfully sure... What is seen is often not what is.  It doesn't have relevance to the shape of the earth, and - as I said - the most compelling conceptualization assuming a flat plane earth (a speculation) involves a transparent dome.  It is certainly not the only way to potentially explain the phenomenon, and there is almost never an instance where there is ONLY one potential explanation.  It is most often just a failure of imagination when you think things like that.

[GreatATuin]

@GreatATuin

Polaris, the current North star, cannot be seen in the southern hemisphere.

https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2018/12/polaris-from-the-southern-hemisphere

Yes, it can - but not very far into it, depending on weather conditions and date/time viewed.

Sure, the limit is not exactly the Equator, it's maybe about one degree south of it because Polaris isn't exactly at the celestial pole and because of atmospheric refraction.

You do realize that doesn't change anything to my point, don't you? I actually thought of mentioning this fact, but didn't, precisely because it doesn't really add anything to the point.

[Tumeni]

The moon is always round, yes.  It does not make the moon spherical, this is a logical error.  No, it does not make sense on a spherical earth, we ought to be able to see significant amounts more than the 50 or so we do

Why?

[RhesusVX]

The moon is always round, yes.  It does not make the moon spherical, this is a logical error.  No, it does not make sense on a spherical earth, we ought to be able to see significant amounts more than the 50 or so we do - and the face should vary (if for no other reason than reflection off of a spherical reflector).

Are you sure about that?  FET clearly states that the moon is a revolving sphere:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon

Are you saying that you don't believe either theory?  If so that's fair enough, but most people tend to support one and reject the other.  Often the debates come down to arguing over equivalence theories that, on paper at least, explain and predict the same observations in both models.

Okay, to clarify a few things for you Jack.

1. When I said the moon would rotate, I meant a clockwise/anticlockwise rotation, something akin to a record player turning. The type of rotation you are referring to in that article is axial rotation. The point I was making is that if the sky was rotating above a stationary plane then we would see the moon rotate in the manner I mentioned. If you wanted to see the moon rotate, then you need to move to higher or lower latitudes which cause the moon to rotate. This is because we are on a spherical Earth and a change in latitude changes your angle of view.

2. The example of putting a picture on the ceiling doesn't work though. Because the moon we see is always round, no matter what time of night it is and where you are on the Earth (provided it is night). Now for you to see the same face all the time it would need to be flat. Any curvature or convex nature of the moon, as you mention, would mean that part of the face that is visible in one part of the world, will not be visible in another part of the world. Get a bowl, draw black marks on it, and tape it to the ceiling round side down. Depending on where you in the room, you'll see different marks. Yet people in Scotland see the exact same face as people in South Africa. Now if the moon was flat, then it would only be round if it was directly above you. However, we see it as round the entire night. What is it going to be? Flat or round. Either way you can't explain why you see the same face on the moon all over the world. However on a globe it makes sense. Not only is the moon extremely far away, but the moon is also tidally locked, which means that the Moon doesn't rotate on its axis the way a planet does.

3. I am sorry, your argument that we should see different sides because it is a ball doesn't work on the globe model. That's because the Moon is so far away from the Earth. It would be like sticking a basketball 100 metres away from you on a long straight road. Stand on one sidewalk and look at it through binoculars. Then look at it from the other side. You're still going to be seeing the exact same face. And that is because relative to the width of the road, the ball is a long way away from you. At least see this as proof that the moon has to be 100's of thousands of miles away from the Earth. But, the general flat Earth consensus is that the moon is much closer to us. 

4. You can't say, things may be affecting the view of the moon. The image of the moon is consistent. Or is it just a happy coincidence that no matter where you look at the moon, it is the same shape, the same face, and just changes rotation based upon your latitude. - Don't come back at me with crescent moons etc, that remains consistent  across the globe so doesn't mean anything. Also if you want to go into it, it is just further proof of a spherical Earth so I wouldn't recommend it.

5. Yeah. Go to the southern hemisphere, further that one degree south, and try and find Polaris. You can't.

6. There can't be two rotating star spirals above us. A star constellation that has declination of +45 degrees can be visible in Paris at the same time it is visible in Cape Town. They will be in different places in the sky, but both can be visible. Now, in Paris, that constellation will be moving anti-clockwise. That exact same star constellation in cape town can be seen rotating clockwise. How is that possible on a flat plane. The stars can't be moving in two different directions. It is IMPOSSIBLE, unless Paris is "upside down" compared to Cape town.

Absolutely spot-on mate, and the Moon alone is almost enough to demonstrate that FET is not analogous to what we observe in reality.  The experiment you can carry out at home with (in my version) a football painted with different colours around its surface is very elegant, and perfectly illustrates what we see:

• Hang said painted football on a string from the ceiling.  Get some friends and family to sit on the floor around the ball.  Voila, they all see a different part of the ball.  This is analogous to FET, which suggests we should see different faces of the Moon, but we don't, we see just one.  Therefore, the Moon cannot be a sphere within the same volume of space that the hemisphere occupies over a flat Earth.
• Hang the same football from a tree somewhere.  Get some friends and family to stand some distance away, 50-100m as you say and get them to move around as they view the ball.  Voila, now they all see the same side of the ball.  This is analogous to RET, which suggests that we should should only see one face of the Moon, and that's exactly what we do see.  Therefore, the Moon has to be a sphere well outside the volume occupied by what would otherwise be the hemisphere above the Earth
• Now get somebody to slowly rotate the ball on the end of the string.  Now everybody sees different faces of the ball, which isn't what we observe in reality.  At least FET agrees with RET here - that the Moon revolves once around its own axis for every orbit around Earth, i.e. it's what we call "tidally locked"

The fact that the Moons face appears inverted to people in one hemisphere compared to another is another indication that the Earth is round.  However, FET has an explanation for that in the form of Electromagnetic Acceleration (EA) which stipulates that the further light travels, the more it curves:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration

This is just one of several elegant, unverified equivalence theories that conveniently explain several observed phenomenon, including why the Sun behaves like a spotlight rather than illuminating the entire surface of the Earth as it would do if light travelled in a straight line.  But, what EA cannot explain is why different people in different places on Earth never see different faces of the spherical Moon.  That this remains unexplained often means that either:

• It just gets ignored
• Nonsensical theories of reflectors and refractors and other such unexplained phenomenon get postulated
• Reams of complex maths, physics and big words get thrown around in an attempt to overwhelm

When you compound that with the fact that as you say, angle of view changes with latitude, and different hemispheres have visibility of different constellations, with some visible to both and some visible to only one or the other, the only rational (and verifiable) model that I can comprehend is one of a round Earth.