[randomperson]

Hey guys,

So, it seems like the FE model proposed here is fairly clear (a flat disk with the south pole arranged around the outside, and the north pole in the centre) although I've heard a few different theories on the layout (two-pole version etc). And the most popular theory here seems to be that the moon and sun are rotating and spotlight-like fairly close to the earth (say, a few thousand miles). That's what seems to be shown in the Society's logo, for example. But where are the stars? Is there an accepted theory for that? I put as many different layouts as I could think of in the poll, would be interesting to hear people's theories. Thanks!

R

[3DGeek]

Hey guys,

So, it seems like the FE model proposed here is fairly clear (a flat disk with the south pole arranged around the outside, and the north pole in the centre) although I've heard a few different theories on the layout (two-pole version etc). And the most popular theory here seems to be that the moon and sun are rotating and spotlight-like fairly close to the earth (say, a few thousand miles). That's what seems to be shown in the Society's logo, for example. But where are the stars? Is there an accepted theory for that? I put as many different layouts as I could think of in the poll, would be interesting to hear people's theories. Thanks!

R

I'm pretty sure that the prevailing theory here is that the stars all exist in a flat layer a little above the sun and moon (they are clearly BEHIND them).

But - as always - there are MANY different theories floating around.   I've seen FE'ers who claim that the stars are CLOSER than the moon because they mistakenly believe that you can see stars in the dark limb of a crescent moon(!).  The Wiki has some very bizarre explanation here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Stars - which really doesn't describe anything that remotely fits what we see in the real world.

It claims that the stars move in circular patterns over the North pole...and with the usual northern hemisphere perspective completely fail to note that different stars move in different directions in the southern hemisphere.  Hilariously, it also references a 1968 paper by NASA(!!) as proof...but the person who wrote the Wiki page can't have read far past the abstract of the paper because what follows is UTTERLY contradicting most FET principles.

[Pete Svarrior]

I'm pretty sure that the prevailing theory here is that the stars all exist in a flat layer a little above the sun and moon (they are clearly BEHIND them).

This, perhaps unsurprisingly, is patently nonsense. Nobody here (and I invite you to find examples to the contrary) claims that the stars are aligned in a flat layer. You were kind enough to provide a source which contradicts you. The "distant cloud" answers are the closest to correct out of the options available.

3DG, why do you insist on answering threads about what FET is? You do not have even a basic level of understanding of what's going on around here, and I have yet to see a single answer from you that's not completely misleading. You are, of course, the same person who thought Dallas, TX is in Japan because it fit into your theory of measuring distances with ping, so this disconnect is not surprising.

[3DGeek]

I'm pretty sure that the prevailing theory here is that the stars all exist in a flat layer a little above the sun and moon (they are clearly BEHIND them).

This, perhaps unsurprisingly, is patently nonsense. Nobody here (and I invite you to find examples to the contrary) claims that the stars are aligned in a flat layer. You were kind enough to provide a source which contradicts you. The "distant cloud" answers are the closest to correct out of the options available.

I said:  "But - as always - there are MANY different theories floating around."

[Pete Svarrior]

I said:  "But - as always - there are MANY different theories floating around."

You also said "I'm pretty sure that the prevailing theory here is that the stars all exist in a flat layer a little above the sun and moon" - you know, the thing I quoted in the first place and to which I was responding. This is completely absurd. I doubt you can find a single FE'er here who believes this, let alone make the case that it's prominent or prevailing.

[StinkyOne]

I'm pretty sure that the prevailing theory here is that the stars all exist in a flat layer a little above the sun and moon (they are clearly BEHIND them).

This, perhaps unsurprisingly, is patently nonsense. Nobody here (and I invite you to find examples to the contrary) claims that the stars are aligned in a flat layer. You were kind enough to provide a source which contradicts you. The "distant cloud" answers are the closest to correct out of the options available.

3DG, why do you insist on answering threads about what FET is? You do not have even a basic level of understanding of what's going on around here, and I have yet to see a single answer from you that's not completely misleading. You are, of course, the same person who thought Dallas, TX is in Japan because it fit into your theory of measuring distances with ping, so this disconnect is not surprising.

The dome FEers do believe what 3D said. The problem is, you're defending a "theory" that doesn't have a single set of beliefs and has no advanced research backing it up. 

[mtnman]

As he is taking exceptions with 3D's descriptions of a prevailing theory and/or lack of agreement, perhaps Pete will post the correct answer to the poll question as agreed to by FE theorists.

[Pete Svarrior]

As he is taking exceptions with 3D's descriptions of a prevailing theory and/or lack of agreement, perhaps Pete will post the correct answer to the poll question as agreed to by FE theorists.

The "distant cloud" answers are the closest to correct out of the options available.

The dome FEers do believe what 3D said.

I invite you to find examples to the contrary

[StinkyOne]

The dome FEers do believe what 3D said.

I invite you to find examples to the contrary

https://flatearthscienceandbible.com/2016/02/16/introduction-to-the-flat-earth-how-it-works-and-why-we-believe-it/

[mtnman]

As he is taking exceptions with 3D's descriptions of a prevailing theory and/or lack of agreement, perhaps Pete will post the correct answer to the poll question as agreed to by FE theorists.

The "distant cloud" answers are the closest to correct out of the options available.

There are three "distant cloud" answers. So you say that the opinion of FE theorists is that the stars are distant and are either stationary, are rotating together, or are moving independently.

So your only point of agreement is that stars are distant. Is that correct?

[randomperson]

Thanks for the replies, guys! Keep 'em coming!

Firstly:  I guess I should have been more specific with the questions (although I tried to be pretty specific!), because it's not clear if the people who selected the "Earth is in a distant cloud of stars..." answers may have been Round Earthers, that seems to be the arrangement in the "conventional" Round Earth model. So it's perhaps too early to say what the prevailing belief is amongst members of the Flat Earth Society. Please do leave further details in the comments if you get the chance!

Secondly, the link that StinkyOne provided does indeed state that "the general flat earth belief is that the earth’s sky is surrounded by a sky dome the holds in the air and protects us", but so far nobody who has replied to the poll believes this, so it's a bit much to say that that's the general belief. It certainly sounds like whoever wrote that page believes it though!

However (sorry for missing it before) the wiki https://wiki.tfes.org/Stars says "The sun, moon, and stars are all rotating around a central point over the North Pole...The stars in the night sky rotate around common barycenters above the earth just as the sun and moon do. From a location on the earth's surface the stars in the sky might seem to scroll across the night sky with Polaris at the hub.", and the animation below seems to show a cloud of stars rotating "as a single unit" around a common central axis. I'm assuming that The Earth is supposed to be at the bottom of that diagram? The text of the article does also describe "a swirling multiple system", not sure that I quite understand what that, or the attached 400-page NASA paper, mean, but it certainly sounds like the author of that page is describing "a cloud of stars hovering above the earth all rotating around a central axis directly above the north pole".

Did I understand that correctly? Would be great if someone could explain this in slightly simpler terms - Pete, sounded like you had some ideas? I'm particularly interested in what kind of star movements (or apparent movements) you'd expect to see looking up into the sky on a nightly basis - since I'm not gonna be around for millions of years I don't have any way of testing some of the more "long term", but it's pretty easy to look out of the window at night and see what's up :-)

[3DGeek]

Thanks for the replies, guys! Keep 'em coming!

Firstly:  I guess I should have been more specific with the questions (although I tried to be pretty specific!), because it's not clear if the people who selected the "Earth is in a distant cloud of stars..." answers may have been Round Earthers, that seems to be the arrangement in the "conventional" Round Earth model. So it's perhaps too early to say what the prevailing belief is amongst members of the Flat Earth Society. Please do leave further details in the comments if you get the chance!

Secondly, the link that StinkyOne provided does indeed state that "the general flat earth belief is that the earth’s sky is surrounded by a sky dome the holds in the air and protects us", but so far nobody who has replied to the poll believes this, so it's a bit much to say that that's the general belief. It certainly sounds like whoever wrote that page believes it though!

However (sorry for missing it before) the wiki https://wiki.tfes.org/Stars says "The sun, moon, and stars are all rotating around a central point over the North Pole...The stars in the night sky rotate around common barycenters above the earth just as the sun and moon do. From a location on the earth's surface the stars in the sky might seem to scroll across the night sky with Polaris at the hub.", and the animation below seems to show a cloud of stars rotating "as a single unit" around a common central axis. I'm assuming that The Earth is supposed to be at the bottom of that diagram? The text of the article does also describe "a swirling multiple system", not sure that I quite understand what that, or the attached 400-page NASA paper, mean, but it certainly sounds like the author of that page is describing "a cloud of stars hovering above the earth all rotating around a central axis directly above the north pole".

Did I understand that correctly? Would be great if someone could explain this in slightly simpler terms - Pete, sounded like you had some ideas? I'm particularly interested in what kind of star movements (or apparent movements) you'd expect to see looking up into the sky on a nightly basis - since I'm not gonna be around for millions of years I don't have any way of testing some of the more "long term", but it's pretty easy to look out of the window at night and see what's up :-)

If you REALLY want to get the FE'ers in a kerfuffle - ask them why the stars in the north rotate counter-clockwise about the pole star - and the stars in the south rotate clockwise about the southern cross.   You'll need separate answers from the people who believe in the "unipolar" map with the north pole in the center and the south pole...erm...not existing.   And from the people who believe in the "bipolar" map where both poles exist - but something very bizarre happens when you're south of the south pole (whatever THAT means!).

[DigitalBlasphemy21]

I feel like using the term "star" is so misleading because it makes more sense in keeping with the fantasy definition of balls of bright energy spread all over the "universe". Really a new term should just be made for them as defined as bursts of cymatic light projected all along the firmament.

[mtnman]

I feel like using the term "star" is so misleading because it makes more sense in keeping with the fantasy definition of balls of bright energy spread all over the "universe". Really a new term should just be made for them as defined as bursts of cymatic light projected all along the firmament.

So.... where do you think these projectors are located and who do you think invented, installed, and maintains them?

[3DGeek]

You know - with only 7 people voting (other similar surveys are equally ignored) - it really is a waste of time asking these things.

[randomperson]

You know - with only 7 people voting (other similar surveys are equally ignored) - it really is a waste of time asking these things.

Hmmm yeah pretty disappointing - seems like there really aren't many people who believe this, and/or the ones who do don't seem to want to discuss it, for reasons I can only speculate on...

If you're interested, another thread (star trails in the southern hemisphere) includes the following quote from a 19th Century book called 'earth not a globe':

 "
The earth is a plane, with a northern centre, over which the stars (whether fixed in some peculiar substance or floating in some subtle medium is not yet known) move in concentric courses at different radial distances from the northern centre as far south as and wherever observations have been made. The evidence is the author's own experiments in Great Britain, Ireland, Isle of Man, Isle of Wight, and many other places; the statements of several unbiassed and truthful friends, who have resided in New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Rio Janeiro, Valparaiso, and other southern localities, and the several incidental statements already quoted."

I assume the guy who posted this believes it, but in retrospect, I'm not sure how "unbiassed and truthful" this dude's friends were, since we're now fairly confident the stars do "appear to rotate around the southern cross) when viewed from south of the equator, unless The Conspiracy also includes everybody south of the equator...right?