I'm a moderately intelligent person, and I couldn't figure out how your visual aid video refuted anything. Would you mind explaining it for me? Sincerely and truly, I don't mean to mock.
People in the antartic circle DO NOT experience or observe a 24 hour sun.
Just so we're clear, for your flat earth theory to be correct, are you suggesting that everyone that lives close to the south pole (southern South America, New Zealand, the various islands), the Antarctic cruises, everyone that goes on those cruises, the people that live and work in Antarctica, the companies and organizations involved, are all lying? Are you suggesting that all videos of the southern summer sun are all doctored and fake?
If what you say is true, has any flat earther gone to Antarctica, or on an Antarctic cruise (many of which will let passengers step foot on various parts of Antarctica) in December to prove that it doesn't get constant sun?
If the flat earth theory is true, why isn't the entire plane of earth illuminated by the sun? Except for reflection, refraction, diffraction, and gravitational lensing, light travels in a straight line. This means, according to the flat earth theory, that if the sun is in the sky, above the flat plane earth, geometrically, all areas of earth should be illuminated 24/7, because no area would be shadowed by curvature. Even if light diffuses through more atmosphere, the sun would still be visible, but more dim, and the area would get less light, but the sun would never set beyond a horizon. According to the video you linked, this is explained by a refraction lens covering the earth. Is this the accepted theory among all flat earthers? Do you not realize that adding additional layers to simple explanations makes it less believable?
If the flat earth theory is true, why does the sun illuminate different areas of the moon throughout the lunar cycle, dependent upon where the earth, moon, and sun are?
What explanation does the flat earth theory have for lunar and solar eclipses?
If the flat earth theory is true, and the sky rotates around the fixed northern star (Polaris), according to your own videos, why does anything in the sky dip below the horizon? The sun, moon, stars, planets, etc.? According to the theory, this shouldn't happen.
If the flat earth theory is true, why do the northern and southern hemispheres, above and below the 30° latitude, experience the different seasons and weather dependent upon the sun's location? According to globe earth, it's because the tilt of the earth, relative to the sun's rays, increases, thus dispersing the same number of rays over a wider area, reducing the photons per area, which reduces heat transfer. As an example, shine a flashlight perpendicular to the surface (the illuminated area is small, concentrating the photons), and then tilt the surface or flashlight (the illuminated area increases, dispersing the same number of photons across a greater area). This phenomenon is in combination with the shorter daylight hours, again, which requires the sun to dip below the horizon, which shouldn't happen under the flat earth theory.
In the video you linked, relating to why the sky appears different colors during different times of the day, are you suggesting that all experimentation and scientists involved in spectroscopy have lied? That is, why would angle of view change the color of the same ionized gas in the atmosphere. Wouldn't this necessarily require the gases of the atmosphere to change dependent upon sun location and each individual person on the planet? Furthermore, spectroscopy is a studied and repeatable science that shows certain elements and compounds reflect, absorb, and emit specific wavelengths of light, which is how we can determine chemical composition of far away objects, and by identifying unknown samples of things on earth. Are you suggesting that everyone involved with these sciences, companies, and organizations are lying?
How do flat earthers explain satellite imagery of space? According to your videos and theory, space shouldn't be pitch black. How far away does this supposed lens covering earth go? Are all satellite images of space faked, and everyone involved lying? Are all deep space satellites, especially those that have traveled to other moons and planets fake, and everyone involved lying?
Another problem with you theory occurred to me. In the video you linked about why the sun isn't visible to the entire flat plane earth, it's due to a refractive lens covering earth. However, if this is true, that refractive lens would also refract the light from the stars and other celestial objects in the sky. This means that they wouldn't produce clearly circular orbits in the night sky. It would also produce a lot of distortion in the sky near the horizon, at least from the refractive lens example shown in your video.
I'm a moderately intelligent person, and I couldn't figure out how your visual aid video refuted anything. Would you mind explaining it for me? Sincerely and truly, I don't mean to mock.
Just so we're clear, for your flat earth theory to be correct, are you suggesting that everyone that lives close to the south pole (southern South America, New Zealand, the various islands), the Antarctic cruises, everyone that goes on those cruises, the people that live and work in Antarctica, the companies and organizations involved, are all lying? Are you suggesting that all videos of the southern summer sun are all doctored and fake?
If what you say is true, has any flat earther gone to Antarctica, or on an Antarctic cruise (many of which will let passengers step foot on various parts of Antarctica) in December to prove that it doesn't get constant sun?
If the flat earth theory is true, why isn't the entire plane of earth illuminated by the sun? Except for reflection, refraction, diffraction, and gravitational lensing, light travels in a straight line. This means, according to the flat earth theory, that if the sun is in the sky, above the flat plane earth, geometrically, all areas of earth should be illuminated 24/7, because no area would be shadowed by curvature. Even if light diffuses through more atmosphere, the sun would still be visible, but more dim, and the area would get less light, but the sun would never set beyond a horizon. According to the video you linked, this is explained by a refraction lens covering the earth. Is this the accepted theory among all flat earthers? Do you not realize that adding additional layers to simple explanations makes it less believable?
If the flat earth theory is true, why does the sun illuminate different areas of the moon throughout the lunar cycle, dependent upon where the earth, moon, and sun are?
What explanation does the flat earth theory have for lunar and solar eclipses?
If the flat earth theory is true, and the sky rotates around the fixed northern star (Polaris), according to your own videos, why does anything in the sky dip below the horizon? The sun, moon, stars, planets, etc.? According to the theory, this shouldn't happen.
If the flat earth theory is true, why do the northern and southern hemispheres, above and below the 30° latitude, experience the different seasons and weather dependent upon the sun's location? According to globe earth, it's because the tilt of the earth, relative to the sun's rays, increases, thus dispersing the same number of rays over a wider area, reducing the photons per area, which reduces heat transfer. As an example, shine a flashlight perpendicular to the surface (the illuminated area is small, concentrating the photons), and then tilt the surface or flashlight (the illuminated area increases, dispersing the same number of photons across a greater area). This phenomenon is in combination with the shorter daylight hours, again, which requires the sun to dip below the horizon, which shouldn't happen under the flat earth theory.
In the video you linked, relating to why the sky appears different colors during different times of the day, are you suggesting that all experimentation and scientists involved in spectroscopy have lied? That is, why would angle of view change the color of the same ionized gas in the atmosphere. Wouldn't this necessarily require the gases of the atmosphere to change dependent upon sun location and each individual person on the planet? Furthermore, spectroscopy is a studied and repeatable science that shows certain elements and compounds reflect, absorb, and emit specific wavelengths of light, which is how we can determine chemical composition of far away objects, and by identifying unknown samples of things on earth. Are you suggesting that everyone involved with these sciences, companies, and organizations are lying?
How do flat earthers explain satellite imagery of space? According to your videos and theory, space shouldn't be pitch black. How far away does this supposed lens covering earth go? Are all satellite images of space faked, and everyone involved lying? Are all deep space satellites, especially those that have traveled to other moons and planets fake, and everyone involved lying?
Another problem with you theory occurred to me. In the video you linked about why the sun isn't visible to the entire flat plane earth, it's due to a refractive lens covering earth. However, if this is true, that refractive lens would also refract the light from the stars and other celestial objects in the sky. This means that they wouldn't produce clearly circular orbits in the night sky. It would also produce a lot of distortion in the sky near the horizon, at least from the refractive lens example shown in your video.