Reading through how FE explains phenomena, I have started to wonder what the appeal in a FE is. Here is my reasoning:

On a round earth, we need only assume that concentrated energy causes other concentrated energy to be attracted towards it. IE gravity. Every natural phenomenon we experience is just a logical consequence of this. No appended side explanations. We can even predict how the earth was formed using it.

A flat earth, however, only supplies an answer to one observation (the small area that can be seen by a human on the surface of the earth appears flat). This is fine, but you also need to invent side-explanations that are unrelated to any central theory (for example you rely on an immense world wide conspiracy involving every space agency and government that tells us that the earth is round, or you use an undetectable floating mirror in the sky to explain how the surface is lit (I may not remember this correctly)). This, overall means that FEt just causes more problems than it solves, and takes more effort to understand.

Why do you choose a theory that overcomplicates things, and is forced to invent answers to problems that would otherwise disprove it? Whereas REt is centered around one idea, and is not forced to invent solutions to any shortcomings as there are none.