The Pole Star Conundrum that no one has a solution for ?

Well actually, I am agnostic on the shape of the Earth. I see evidence on both sides.

But his video is useless because it's full of falsehood. And yet again a spokesman for the Flat Earth Theory manages to dodge what I consider to the be hardest challenge to the theory, the southern circumpolar stellar system.

All stars rotate East to West around Polaris just above the central North Pole like in a planetarium dome. The planetarium dome of our Earth however is so vast that the law of perspective doesn't allow you to see all the stars from any one vantage point. You can however see Polaris, Ursa Major/Minor and other Northern constellations from every point on Earth all the way to the Southern Tropic of Capricorn. The supposed "South Pole star," Southern Crux and other outer constellations conversely can NOT be seen from every point in the Southern Hemi"sphere" the way Polaris can from every point in the North. Nor do the Southern constellations circle around it West to East as is claimed. All stars rise more or less in the East and set in the West, with the angle/inclination being based on where you are on Earth and what direction you're facing.

Another proof if you have professional surveyors knowledge is just to survey the land.    The maths will not make any sense for very large areas if you are doing calculations for a flat earth.

www.landsurveyors.com/resources/accuracy-of-land-surveys/

Total stations using a real-time kinematic GPS system are accurate to around 20mm horizontally and 30-40mm vertically.

Total stations are fully automatic and can just be left in position to email results.

Electronic distance measuring systems can be used up to 50km with an accuracy at that distance of +-10mm.

I got it all mapped out right here…I threw this all together in a huge hurry, so there are some other minor points that I'm sure flat earthers already had counter-arguments for, I might delete this and make a better one soon...but after about 4 minutes in, the observable movements of the stars prove beyond all doubt that the earth is round - there is literally ZERO chance of making this fit with a flat earth model. It could, however, be interpreted as the stars spinning around the earth, rather than the earth spinning…But no chance it's flat.

This is it. The one sticking point that prevents me from fully believing in the Flat Earth (at least the standard model that is presented) If you can solve this, I will be utterly delighted, because I have found NO Flat Earther that can explain it in a plausible way. So here goes:



How can we see circular star trails in photos taken pointing towards the South? I just cannot fathom how you can stand on a far-Southern land mass and time lapse photograph a concentric set of circles surrounding Sigma Octantis? The photos look exactly like circular star trails taken at the North Pole.


At the North Pole, the stars move in concentric circles around Polaris, and as one moves South, this pattern of circles gets lower in the sky from the point of view of the observer. As you pass the 'equator', the stars move over head in an arch and Polaris disappears over the Northern horizon. This is due to perspective and the vanishing point of the observer.



All this makes sense on the Flat Earth; but as you move further South and look towards the Southern direction from where you are standing, you will notice that the stars in the Southern sky once again begin to move in concentric circles around another star, Sigma Octantis. They move the opposite direction than the stars moving around Polaris, and they create concentric star trails the exact same way the stars do in the North.



In other words, the stars in the night sky appear to move around TWO points, in axial motions. This is easily proven from the thousands of amateur photos of star trails taken from, say, Australia, camera pointing to the Southern skies.



Please could someone explain where the second rotation point comes from? I know Sigma Octantis is not the 'South pole star' in the same obvious sens that Polaris the North Pole Star, it is very dim compared to Polaris, Sigma O is not perfectly still in the sky, and actually traces a very small circle in the sky itself; but if you look at any photo of the Southern skies you can unmistakably see the same concentric circle pattern you see in the North. I simply see no way this is possible on a Flat Earth.




This video is not made by me, but it presents the problem very well.












To give an example of what I mean in photo form, this photo was taken by at The Very Large Telescope by the European Southern Observatory on Cerro Paranal in the Atacama Desert of northern Chile.



And this photo is the classic familiar sight of the circumpolar stars surrounding Polaris, the North Pole Star:



I think as Flat Earth investigators we must realize this geometry of star patterns is a mystery from the Flat Earth model perspectuive, and try and think what could be creating the second axial point of motions in the Southern sky. With all due respect to Samuel Rowbotham, and all the other Classical Flat Earth writers, they didn't have the access to camera technology that we now have, and couldn't see the concentric circles in the South sky, moving around an axial point. It wasn't an issue for them, but sadly I have seen this used against the Flat Earth position many many times on the Internet, and no one appears do have a solution or a model that explains it. 

PLEASE HELP ME OUT! (not KICK me out like they did at IFERS for asking this question lol )Hi I live south of the equator and this youtube time lapse night sky filmed from Sydney may answer your question