What any telescope is looking at is called the "celestial sphere" I posted about it above.
If the earth is a ball, should not there be at least two sets of stars seen? one set seen from the north pole region,
and a totally different set seen from like the bottom of Africa?
How many times does it need to be explained before it finally sinks in the stars you see depends on where you are on earth because it is a sphere!!!
I live in Australia at a latitude of around 38⁰ S.
Since declination is a projection of latitude and the earth is spherical, I cannot see stars which have a declination of >52⁰ N (90⁰-38⁰).
It’s for this reason Polaris is below my northern horizon which has a declination of around 89⁰N.
If I was located on the equator at 0⁰ latitude, I would be able to see both the north and south celestial poles on my northern and southern horizons respectively.
If the earth is flat, Polaris would be seen at any location on earth.
How can the stars be seen as a dome over us? And mapped out as if they are on a dome over us?
What does the wiki page say about it?
"All celestial objects seem equally far away, as if fixed onto the inside of a sphere with a large but unknown radius,which appears to rotate westward overhead; meanwhile, Earth underfoot seems to remain still. For purposes of spherical astronomy, which is concerned only with the directions to celestial objects, it makes no difference if this is actually the case or if it is Earth that is rotating while the celestial sphere is stationary"
?!
So, if the world were stationary, the result would be the same .
Excuse me you don’t get to ignore the fact equatorial mounts completely destroy the notion of a flat non rotating earth and thereby conclude the notion is sound.
If you want defend the notion it is up to you to explain how equatorial mounts work in this case.
With regards to the Wiki quote, it’s obvious you do not understand what the paragraph is stating.
It is best explained with an analogy when driving a car; you are driving in a forward direction but stationary objects such trees and telephone poles appear to be moving backwards in your frame of reference.
As a driver you are stationary relative to the car but are moving in a forward direction relative to the road.
This leads to the science of relativity which states if the car is travelling at a constant velocity or in an inertial frame of reference, the physics is exactly the same if the car is moving forward and the trees and telephone poles are stationary, or the car is stationary and the trees and telephone poles are travelling backwards at a constant velocity.
This is the point of the Wiki paragraph the observer on earth is in an inertial frame and is stationary relative to the rotating earth and therefore sees celestial objects moving in a westerly direction while the earth beneath his feet is rotating in an easterly direction.
The earth however which is rotating is not an inertial frame but in an accelerated frame of reference which leads to real and fictitious forces.
The effects of centripetal acceleration which is a real force can be measured by noting a person’s weight is less at the poles where the centripetal acceleration is zero and more at the equator where it is at a maximum.
Then there are the fictitious Coriolis forces which causes air currents to deflect over the earth’s rotating surface resulting in the formation of hurricanes (or cyclones if you live in Australia).
The Coriolis effect also explains the mechanism of how a Foucault pendulum works.
None of these effects would be observed on a stationary flat earth.