What do the north and south polar regions have in common? Well..
- They are very cold places.
- They are also the coldest places in their respective hemispheres.
- They both have plant and animal life that has adapted to very cold conditions.
- They receive equal amounts of daylight over the course of one year.
- They both lie beyond lines called polar circles where you can observe abolutely equal movement of the sun, only offset by a time-shift of 6 months.
- They share the same prevailing wind patterns called "Polar Easterlies"
- Aurora borealis is predominantly observed in north and south polar regions
The list goes on...
I would go so far as to conclude that north and south polar regions do share similar conditions. But do they share equal conditions? No. The most obvious being that the north polar region is considerably warmer than the one in the south. Ok then, why don't they share equal conditions? I think one simple question can provide you with the solution:
What heats up faster when you shine light on it, an ocean or land?
The answer is land. Why? The amount of heat energy that is required to raise the temperature of a given amount of "stuff" is called "Specific Heat Capacity" and it is considerably lower for soil (0.8 kJ/kgK) than for water (4.2 kJ/kgK).
We have 60% water in the northern hemisphere and 73% water in the southern hemisphere. You could even go further and divide earth into land and water hemispheres where the water hemisphere (having only 1/8 of earth's land mass while being 95% covered with water and ice) definitely covers most of the southern hemisphere.
With soil heating up more than 5 times faster than water that gives the northern hemisphere a big plus in warmth.
If we also factor in
-differences in albedo (reflection of light) through different amounts of land, water, snow and ice with more reflection happening in the south (more water and bigger polar ice sheet)
-differences in pollution with most pollution going on in the north and staying there because of prevailing wind patterns
it gets even worse. So clearly the northern hemisphere has a bunch of good reasons for being a good deal warmer than the south.
#51 See #50
#52 What's that even supposed to mean?
1) South Georgia has an area of 4,000km², while Iceland covers 103,000 km².
2) As shown in #50, the northern hemisphere generally is warmer than the south.
3) Iceland is influenced by the warm Gulf Stream, while waters around South Georgia are dominated by the cold Antarctic Circumpolar Current resulting in much stronger and colder winds.
3) South Georgia is 2,000 km away from continental mainland, Iceland 1,000 km.
That's why there is no reason to expect anything near an equal amount of wildlife/diversity in South Georgia compared to Iceland.
5) It's called "South Georgia" with "Georgia" being a country in Eurasia.
6) There aren't many trees in Iceland, either.
#53 False claim. Pants-on-fire-false.
It just doesn't happen. This is one of these claims, where I'm first speechless and then very close to losing it because it's just so obviously utterly false.
Look at the sun's movement in Tokyo. Then, 6 months later, fly straight south to Adelaide and look at the sun again. You will see the exact same thing happening, only with north and south positions switched. You have the same times for dawn and dusk, the sun will be at the same angles at the same time of day.
Here's Tokyo during its summer solstice, on June 20, 2016:
Here's Adelaide during its summer solstice, on December 21, 2016
Subtract an hour from Tokyo time due to different time zones and there you have it. The tiny offset of max 2 minutes (rounded) has two reasons:
-Adelaide and Tokyo are not on the exact same longitude.
-The earth does not complete a perfect 180°00'00'' orbit after exactly 6 months. We have leap years for the very same reason.
#54 see #53
#55 Illogical argument.
You can't assume a flat earth map and then conclude results for a globe. You look at a pancake and then conclude geometrical consequences for an apple. It's geometrically illogical: As shown in #34&35, the azimuthal projection is neither equal-area, nor conformal (equal angles) nor equidistant (except for lines that go through the centre).
As shown in #53, dawn, dusk, twilight, day and night are almost exactly the same in north and south with an offset of 6 months. As shown in #50, there are many good reasons for different temperatures in the northern and southern hemisphere.
It's "polar night" and not "arctic night". A setting sun during a polar night is a contradiction in itself. It doesn't happen. Also, midsummer polar nights do not exist, not one and not "many". They are events that occur in periods around winter solstices. It's the exact opposite timeframe.
#56 Incomprehension of the model.
Leaving out refraction (big factor, but not necessary here) and looking at geometry alone, the statement is just false. Let's say there was no axial tilt. Sun would never set at the poles and it would always move in a circle around the horizon. From any other vantage point we could not see the sun for 24 hours straight because of the rotation of the earth. The last observation is what should happen on earth according to Mr. Dubay's claim.
Now if we introduce an axial tilt of 23.5°, what happens?
Well, the north pole (90°N) would be exposed to the sun for 6 months and then the south pole (90°S) for 6 months.
The altitude of the sun at each pole during summer solstice (day of maximum exposure) had to be equal to the value of the axial tilt (23.5°), with maximum and minumum altitude roughly the same as the sun describes almost a perfect circle around the pole during the day of midsummer, not dropping by even one degree. Let's look at the northern summer solstice.
What is the altitude of the sun at a proposed tropic of cancer (23.5°N) at this event?
The maximum altitude should be 90° at noon, minimum -66.5° at midnight.
What is it in, say, Toronto (44°N)?
The maximum altitude should be 69.5° at noon, minimum -22.5°.
Can we find formulas that correctly describe maximum and minimum solar altitudes for these three places during summer solstice? Yes, we can! Here they are:
MaxAltSuSo= 90°- Latitude + Axial Tilt (For places south of the tropic of cancer it's "- Axial Tilt")
MinAltSuSo= -90° + Latitude + Axial Tilt
Punch the numbers for any place within the polar circle into you calculator and it will make a happy face! ;-)
#57 Incomprehension of the model + false claim + illogical argument
First things first: Again, Mr. Dubay mixes up the timeframes. Winter solstice is the time connected to polar night and not to midnight sun. Midnight sun takes place in the polar regions during the time around summer solstice, which is June 20 in the northern hemisphere and December 21 in the southern hemisphere. It's the complete opposite.
Easy way to remember: Summer -> Sun, Winter -> Night.
Anyway, the claim is that the "establishment" doesn't have uncut videos that show midnight sun in the south. Ok then, how about this one?
Two options to keep hanging onto the claim: Either it was not taken by somebody from the "establishment" (that way it would still be a disproof of the flat earth) or it's fake. I assume Mr. Dubay would opt for the latter. So, what's the point in asking for videos anyways, if all videos are supposedly fake?
And even if they were, how is the video-evidence that verified the arctic midnight sun "beyond any shadow of a doubt" any different from the evidence for the midnight sun in Antarctica? This claim commits automatic suicide.
#58 Incomprehension of the model.
Again (as in #57): Winter solstice -> polar night. When? December 21 in the north, June 20 in the south (as of today). What these Belgian explorers observed, was a polar night! And it's not at odds, it's completely in sync with the ball-earth model.
#59 Incomprehension of the model.
Two words: Axial tilt. Days and nights only have identical duration during the two equinoxes in March and September, which is when the sun crosses the equator. This is also when the earth's rotational axis lies perpendicular to the sun. The following video explains how it works on a sphere and how it cannot possibly work on a flat earth: