I was on topic until you guys rolled around - The Wall is an unsubstantiated theory that has no observable evidence that any Flat Earth theorist can put forward.
The Horizon, as brought up by gecko, is in fact perfectly in line with this - With no horizon, the wall should be clearly visible in clear condiitons from the outer latitudes. The atmosphere's transparency or lack thereof would mean the horizon would fade out to nothing before we could ever observe a meeting point between earth and sky. Since this is not the case, the wall should be visible on the horizon.
Where is it?
Here is my analysis of "The Wall".
Since this is the "Debate" section of this forum, it should be open for debate.
In the first place, there is no debate. The earth is a globe.
Antarctica has been explored, surveyed and mapped. It is definitely not a wall but a continent.
The existance of the wall seems to stem from the belief that the Unipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection is the map of a flat earth.
But this is a two-dimensional map of a three-dimensional object.....the globe.
It is not an accurate map of a flat earth.
Due to the extreme distortion south of the equator, inherent with this projection of the globe, Antarctica is shown as a ring aound the perimeter of this map.
If this ring was a wall which really existed , survey ships would have mapped it as a solid ring around the perimeter of a flat disc, and would be about 80,000 miles in length.
But this has never been done.
These survey ships could have sailed off shore, close enough to the wall to observe it without it being obscured by any "atmoplanic" effects of fog or haze.
But this has never been done.
If this wall really existed it would seem that the only place where a horizon - in the definition of where earth and sky appear to meet - would be where the flat earth and the sky meet - if the sky is sort of a dome over the flat disc. In other words, the horizon on a flat earth would be only at the wall, where the bottom of the dome meets the top of the wall.
This is my analysis is why I believe the ice wall is non-existant and just imaginary or the result of faulty reasoning from the interpretation of the Unipolar Azimuthal Projection of the globe.
This may seem a bit lengthy, but I will just present this as my idea as to why "The Wall" is just one more flaw in the idea of a flat, disc shaped earth.
I'll just leave it up for debate.