Your experience has not encompassed enough of the earth to provide enough information. If the earth is flat, a drive from Washington to Baja gets you, what, 30% closer to the ice wall? At the same time, it gets you 50% closer to the sun (if not more than 50%).
That made me laugh. Thanks. Since the Earth is flat and only about 25,000 miles across, and the Sun is 93 million miles away the difference from any place on Earth to the sun is negligible, the angle being so tiny. So 50% is WAY off. As a percentage it would be closer to .00000000001%. I hope your facility with math is not representative of all Rounders.
BUT, you did chance on something that gives me a potential solution to the problem I posed. Indeed, I did not travel far enough 'South.' You see, there also is, at the very center of the Earth, an enormous mass of ice and frigid dirt called the Arctic. So, as I traveled away from that ice mass I got warmer. At the halfway point, what YOU call the 'equator,' I expect I would start to get colder as I approached the Ice Wall.
It's because the sun is always above the Equator or not far from it. And it's 3000 miles above the Earth, not 93 million. Temperature is based on distance from the sun, not distance from the edge; the reason there's ice around the Earth and in its center is that these are the parts of the Earth farthest from the sun. I'm sure you thought you were being clever, but your question seems to be based on the mistaken assumption that it's distance from the edge that determines temperature, which is not something you read here (I have no idea where you got that from), so I hope this clarifies things for you.
Except that doesn't work. The equator is equal distance between the north and south pole. (i.e. the top and bottom of the planet) Assuming a round, flat planet like all of the material I have seen, this would leave far more area below the equator than above it. The southern hemisphere would be much colder as it would receive a smaller amount of energy per sq mile than the northern hemisphere.
Let's suppose you have a circle of with a radius of 10 miles. Now, create a second circle with half the radius, 5 sq miles. This circle represents the northern hemisphere. The total area is 314 sq miles. The area of the northern hemisphere is only 78 sq miles. Do a little subtraction, and the area of your southern hemisphere is 236 sq miles.
You could also say that this explains the ice wall (which only some of you think exists), but then you run into the problem of the southern hemisphere being mostly covered in ice. Australia begs to differ.
You could also say that the orbit of the sun is larger to compensate for your temperature problem, but then you run into the problem of the sun never rising very high at northern latitudes and being very high at southern latitudes.
And for the coupe de grace, the Sun in the southern hemisphere would have to cross the sky MUCH more rapidly than in the north as it has to cover much more ground.
The Zetetic method is CLEARLY not being used in regards to flat Earth.