No one is claiming that the UN map is true. The UN map is a hypothesis. There are other hypothetical maps of the Flat Earth where the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capercorn are about the same size.
Besides, you have yet to collect evidence showing that the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn are the same size. How can we know whether they are the same size if you refuse to go out and collect evidence demonstrating it so?
You don't have to claim the UN map is true. Listen, you don't deny that distances are traveled using RE assumptions for maps in modern day both at sea and in the air do you?
This is fact, if you map a spherical or spheroid object onto a flat surface there will be distortions. There is no way around this. Try taking a globe of the earth, then cut it open and try to flatten it out. Pieces will be separated from other pieces and will have to be stretched, or distorted in order to make the pieces fit.
The same goes the other way around. Try taking a flat map of the earth (I don't care, any one). Then force it into a globe shape without folding any parts of the map, it's impossible.
So you see the evidence is that we are able to accurately calculate distances and travel across the world using RE maps and RE assumptions, if the earth was flat then this simply would not be possible because of the reasons I stated above.
As for the tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn, why do I have to personally go out and get you data when hundreds of others already have the data. I can certainly provide you with their data, I could probably also find out how they calculated it as well, if you believe it is wrong then show us some evidence that it is wrong.
By the way, I do not see how the Tropic of Capricorn and Cancer would be the same size on that map. Please show me by indicating the 23.5 degree line in both the north and south hemisphere.
You haven't provided any data demonstrating whether the constellations from these far off points would or would not work, or what the reading of the compass would be from those far off points. Why not provide some actual data instead of making assumptions on what is seen and what isn't seen?
We know how a compass works, we know the location of the North and South magnetic poles, and we know that no matter where you stand on the earth, the poles are approximately 180 degrees from an observers vantage point. That is, if an observer was looking in the direction of the north pole, on any location on the earth, the south pole would be approximately 180 degrees from where he is currently facing.
As for constellations, the southern cross and the north pole are both almost fixed in the sky. This is what makes them good for navigation, on any of your maps they would most certainly not be fixed.
You haven't provided us evidence of a Midnight Sun over Antarctica period. Get back to me when you guys have some actual evidence to bring to the table.
Again, plenty of other people have, why don't you prove them wrong.