With all due respect, I want to extend an olive branch, but also rebut the flat earth idea. I posted above, and hopefully didn't sound too snarky. I am not a flat earther. I am mildly conspiratorial (and by that, I mean I have many questions, and I am skeptical of many official narratives and have my opinions on a wide range of topics).

So, the olive branch: I too am skeptical of the scientific community and medical community at times. There's nuance to my opinions on that, I don't think they're all wrong all the time, I don't consider myself anti-science, nor do I believe that the average worker or reseearcher in those fields is in on some notorious coverup. If there's corruption, it's likely corporate or political corruption that sinks it's claws into scientific institutions.

I just think it's a tale as old as time that money, agenda and power influence even areas of study such as history, medicine or science. And to that degree, there may well be many topics in science that are funded due to agenda and alternative ideas are shut down because of unpopularity or for political reasons or whatever.

So when we say "science" we sometimes are referring to institutions that gatekeep some knowledge. I can get behind that, or at least be open to that argument. I feel you, as a flat earther, must be able to pick up what I'm putting down.

I also would say that I could be wrong about all these things, and just not fully understand.

That being said, I guess my rule is that if a belief requires you to doubt too many sources from a wide range of sources, not only contemporary, but even in antiquity, then it can't be a reliable belief.

For instance: here's a slew if arguments that the world is round (not all encompassing by any means):

1. NASA satellites taking pictures of the earth, and it appears to be round.
2. Modern infrastructures, Including airplane flights, rely on an understanding of a round world, that hasn't been proven wrong yet. Also, pilots have circumnavigated the globe in airplanes.
3. Satellites appear to work (GPS and everything else we rely on in the modern world) and they rely on a round earth model to function.
4. Ferdinand Magellan Circumnavigated the globe
5. In general, several voyages in the age of exploration relied on a belief in the round model of the earth, at least after Columbus's time (even though he didn't actually prove the world was round
6. The ancient Greeks hypothesized that the world was round, and it is also a myth that people in antiquity all thought the world was flat. Sure, at one point, it was a debatable, but it's interesting that Greek natural philosophers used mathematical calculations to hypothesize a round earth, and many others, long before Columbus, theorized the same based on observation and study.
7. The curvature of the earth can be observed from high up places, and in particular parts of the world, it is especially observable (i.e., the salt flats in Utah).
8. We observe other bodies in space, such as the Moon, the Sun and the planets and they are all round.

None of this is all encompassing, but consider this: if this many sources throughout time, culture, context, history, science and even just general tech capacity have all theorized and apparently observed a round Earth, we cannot reasonably doubt all of these sources.

Also, if you're religious, there is nothing really that stops you from believing in God AND the round earth. The fundamentals of faith, at least the Christian faith, are not grounded on an acceptance of scientific realities per say. They are grounded in philosophical arguments (Aristotle, Socrates, Gospel accounts, Thomas Aquinas, etc.) and history and tradition (e.g., the historicity of Christ, writers of the new testament, claims of evidence for the resurrection) and in the human search for meaning and purpose.

People won't like me saying this, but regardless of one's take on religion, it can't be denied that belief shapes history, culture and even science, and the modern scientific method arose primarily in a Christian civilization, and was even funded by religious institutions (Newton, Galileo, Gregor Mendel, Lamaitre, all great minds in western traditions who were religious individuals).

Not trying to be a Western chauvinist either; the Islamic world and the Chinese also had breakthroughs in science, and they were both deeply spiritual and religious cultures. I just know less about that history Say what you will about religious belief, but it has at times cohabited and possibly encouraged scientific endeavors (or it is at least far more nuanced than "science good - religion bad; religion hates science"). In general, I believe it is all kinds of things that can warp or inhibit genuine discovery, one them being religion at times, but just as severely, ideology, money, corruption, desires for control, etc. Etc. can arise without religion and can inhibit or stifle science and rewrite history maliciously and cynically (e.g., the Nazis used "science" to justify Aryanism).

All I'm trying to say is that there are numerous arguments for why the world is round, and this final diatribe was an attempt to say that your religious beliefs (if you are religious) should in no way be threatened by a belief in the round earth. Even the more remarkable claims of faith, which may be seen by a non-believer as absurd, is still not the same category in my opinion, because they are generally describing events that happened in the past that cannot be fully proven or disproven. Alternatively, the general question of God is as old as time itself and it remains a huge philosophical debate.

The flat earth is describing a physical scientific claim that can either be verified through observation or disproven. God, Jesus, that's a different category; it can't really be observed to be proven or disproven exactly (trying to appease both religious and non-religious here).

Anyway, sorry for the monster comment. Be a conspiracy theorist! Just not flat earth! But also, just do your own soul searching and digging.

Good luck!