I also want to share the link to this valuable resource:
http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat+Earth+Dome+Model&demo=Intro#App
Now because God has the best sense of humour, the blessed man who made this app completely disavows Flat Earth (which you can read in detail on the same page).
The researcher Shane St Pierre, member of Aether Cosmology, details his Flat Earth model on the following webpage:
https://adl.place/shanes-fe-model
Note that although the Dome itself may be 3D, it only represents a 2D surface. The Sun, Moon and Stars on the Dome never go physically below the horizon. This has always been a simple product of the limit of our vision and the angular resolution limit of our optical range. Again our math supports this. This also demonstrates why the sun never truly changes angular size: it is always the same distance from you. If you are limited by 3,959 miles in the celestial heavens in every direction, that would naturally create a spherical limit aound you. This could easily be called the celestial sphere. Infact, it is exactly the celestial sphere of the globe, if you consider thaf halt the visible sky in each would, by the equivalence principle
@rryanr To my - possibly poor - understanding: nothing. From an astrological perspective they don´t exist. What exist are the 12 segments of the horizon, 30 degrees out of 360 each, that we call Rasis, or zodiac signs. Later a greek - does anyone recall his name? - came up with the idea of connecting the stars corresponding to that segment in such way that one, using the imagination, could picture a goat, a bull, a crab etc there...
Staffan
@staffan Indeed, I am persuaded by Ernst's essay concerning the zodiac. St. Pierre is not an astrologer, but he does recognize a fundamental misunderstanding, that the latitudes to Polaris are due to perspective (over a plane surface)--that the angles naturally reduce as you move away--which the manipulators have mapped onto an imaginary earth sphere, as if to say, "the reason you can't see the stars in the sky anymore is because the ground is blocking them up ahead," rather than it being an optical limit.
@staffan Forgive that I've probably spammed these before, but I do think the inimitable Witsit comes through with the essential points in these two edits:
True Earth 101: Motion
True Earth 101: Curvature
@rryanr Here I get lost and have no idea what you are referring to. I think we might be talking about different things.
Staffan
@staffan My mistake for just using the linked video as an excuse to reignite the original thread topic! We are sort of talking cross-purposes.