I just wonder what exactly that means to a person debunking, or maybe debating the flat earth, like l yourself. For one, in supporting the the flat earth theory, i would say there are a lot more unkowns involved than you might. But I am also kindof caught up on this psychology of a "flat earther" thing. And i just don't think they are being given a fair shake.... its like we all know already - lets lok at the way they think - but I am not aware of your average person having really looked at the a lot of the evidence the FET is built on.
The unknowns you speak of are pretty much all only unknown because it is either misunderstood or much more frequently flat out lied about by FE "supporters" I have not met a single FE supporter who doesn't blatantly misrepresent something then just ignore any explanation of what they misrepresented, most of the they drop off into insulting behavior. Yeah they get shit on by people also, but most of the time, pretty much all of the time they deserve it due to prior interactions that they started. Also, like I said, I have seen way more FE so called "proof" than you. I understand a bit more physics than the average person being an engineer by profession, a military retiree, and having quite a bit of experience dealing with physics in various jobs prior to getting my engineering degree. The stuff most flat earthers claim is pure nonsense when applied to those prior experiences, the remainder of claims I have seen by flat earthers that may not have involved stuff that I would have worked with prior can easily be shown to be misunderstandings at best, but the majority are intentional misrepresentations. The vast majority of FE arguments are all incredulity based strawman BS arguments.
But like Jack said, most people who do see some FE supporter perform their little play, see the BS behind it and then just ignore it from then on. I have given this prior, but if an FE supporter wants me to take them seriously, they need to show me a singular model that can work for multiple things that we observe. I have never seen this, and I have seen almost all of them. They do have to actually explain something though, without some magical explanation. If you use something like "bendy light" you need to explain to me how it actually works, if you claim that bendy light is refraction and you cannot explain why refraction does what you claim, like how we explain the speed of light through differing densities will make it appear to bend and which direction it appears to bend without fail, you cannot just say refraction and ascribe it to whatever you like doing all manner of magical shit.
So, no it's not unfair to them, they have shown to be mostly dishonest or overly naïve with no desire to learn. They have been weighed, measured, and found wanting. I do not argue for their sakes, I argue for those naïve people who stumble in here and need to get a dose of reality so they can decide what to believe. If it was all just misunderstandings, or the physics were just that hard, I would have no disdain for FEers, as it stands though, they are almost all dishonest and I have no respect for people of that caliber. I know, i know, the trolls are a coming. The indoctrinated BS claims are coming, the nuh uhh claims that I am lying about it, no matter what I offer as evidence or how many times I break down the math and or explain how the physics actually work. they don't want you to think for yourself, they want followers to make themselves feel special or to scam. Lonely snake oil salesmen just needing some confirmation that their delusions of being rebel heroes are not complete BS.