First, English isn't my first language, which explains my grammar.
Second, I hoped that FE's theory was because of religion but it's only because of their pretention to be scientists. In fact, I don't think anyone is scientist here. A scientist observes something and explains it with maths/physics/chemestry. I didn't see any of these proofs in here. They are only based of philosophia. And philosophia isn't a good base to proove anything scientific.
Third, your theory says that the government controls the telescopes and whatever. But, when it was first proved that the earth was round, no one could have predicted this, so no one could have controled his telescope. (And guys, it's IMPOSSIBLE to control a personal telescope : it's a system of concave mirros put together in order to zoom in. There can't be chips or anything that could control it.) His observations were based on trigonometry and he finaly prooved that the Earth was round.
Fourth, if you look at the Moon in the night, you will see that the shade on it is ROUND. The shade is made by the ROUND Earth.
Fifth, the theory of the flat Earth doesn't give any explanation of the stars. Don't say that the government (or anything else) controls the sky, because we could doubt about the existence of the Moon and Sun. I can see stars by eye, as I can see the Moon and the Sun by eye. Why the stars would be different ? Only because those two are bigger ? That's not enough.
Sixth, if the Earth wasn't round, our orbit would be different, as it is for meteorits (if the meteorits don't exist, how do you explain this :
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Meteor.jpg and this :
http://cyberechos.creteil.iufm.fr/cyber5/Invitation/etoile/Cratere.jpg). Meteorits have a different orbit because of their shape that affects their gravity.
I'll be right back with other ideas : I don't have much time to lose with people stuck in the 1500s.