103. Ursa Major should not be visible from latitude 30 degrees south on a spherical Earth

"There are several constellations which can be seen from far greater distances over the face of the Earth than should be possible if the world were a rotating, revolving, wobbling ball. For instance, Ursa Major, very close to Polaris, can be seen from 90 degrees North latitude (the North Pole) all the way down to 30 degrees South latitude. For this to be possible on a ball-Earth the Southern observers would have to be seeing through hundreds or thousands of miles of bulging Earth to the Northern sky."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declination

Dubay does not understand basic trigonometry

As I recall my kids had this nailed at age 13, so it should not be too complicated even for Eric Dubay if he puts his mind to it.  You will always be able to see a constellation at some point in the year if the difference between its declination (angle above the equator) and the observer’s latitude is not more than 90 degrees.



Ursa Major has a declination of +55.38°.  I.e. it is over 55 degrees above the equator.  That means it is 35 degrees away from Polaris (Not “very close” by any definition ... another lie), and 85 degrees away from an observer standing at 30 degrees south latitude.

Since it would be visible up to 90 degrees away from an observer, of course Ursa Major can be seen from 30 degrees south of the equator on a spherical Earth

Is Dubay just incompetent at trigonometry?  Probably, but I believe that in this "proof" he is deliberately lying in order to back up his spurious claim that the observed stars would be impossible on a spherical Earth.


< Prev    101-110   Next >

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

127. Straight reflections of sunlight and moonlight are impossible on a spherical Earth

Debunking Eric Dubay's 200 proofs the earth is not a spinning ball

9. Engineer W Winckler was published in the Earth Review in 1893 arguing that no engineer took the curvature of the earth into account