Ignore this - just more Flat Earth mischief. If you're curious and wanna know more though you can check out this video on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18RKoYIu0GA
(Click on the images to enlarge)
I should probably flesh this article out a bit for it to make more sense. The above pictures were originally uploaded in response to a comment posted on the above linked-to YouTube video. The video concerns the merits of another video;
this one - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgZa9oZDN5g
- which purports to show unedited footage of the 24-hour Antarctic sun. The comments however have now been removed from beneath the video, so the images above probably won't make much sense to anyone xD
To provide background information, Flat Earthers and Ball Earth Skeptics (which I suppose is probably the category I'd put myself in at this present moment) claim that the lack of video footage of the 24 hour Antarctic sun is evidence that we're effectively being lied to about the nature of the earth's true shape. On a tilted ball earth there should be regions in the extreme south that experience 24 hours of daylight for given periods of the year - given this fact footage shouldn't be too hard to come by. However, thus far most of the footage out there showing the phenomena has been discontinuous - i.e. cutting from one shot to the next, and not showing continual, uninterrupted coverage of the sun.
The video in question however is different. It was released about a month or so ago and shows continual footage of the Antarctic day, with the camera following the sun a full 360 degrees around its course. Ball Earthers have hailed it as definitive proof of the Earth's rotundity, Flat Earth & Co have dismissed it as a piece of government-shill fakery.
Personally I'm not too convinced by the footage. I think they've simply used the same bit of sun footage for both the beginning and the end of the video to create the impression of a continual loop. Hence the above screenshots I've took (from 0.55 and 1.54 in the video) showing the obvious similarity. The rays of the sun are identical in length and angle, and both images also appear to have identical lens flares. The second image has a few extra lens flares added over the top for good measure, no doubt from another image layer. I therefore deem the video unconvincing evidence of what it purports to show.
I should say of course that all of the above is just my opinion though, and it's not my position to cast a definitive judgement on another person's work. This article intends no offence and is simply me just exercising my own critical judgement. I urge others to do the same. Peace x