I have some questions for all of you, including both round earth theorists and flat earth theorists. What made you seek out this site? What propelled you to come here? How did you even find out about it? And what makes you keep coming back? Since most round earth theorists are so convinced that the earth is round and that flat earth theorists have gone off the deep end, I think this is fair to ask.
From what I've gathered so far, round earth theorists believe in these fundamental truths:
1. Truth can only be found by consensus. You cannot rely on yourself alone since you can be deceived. What the majority constitutes as evidence is proof. What the minority constitutes as evidence is an illusion.
2. Humans can create reliable devices which can come up with truths that humans alone cannot.
3. Truth is ever changing. With more reliable formulas and computers, previous truths are discarded and replaced by new truths.
Now, since you guys picked apart what I considered my fundamental truths, I think it is only fair that I pick these apart. (By the way, let me know if I got the above fundamentals wrong, according to your view.)
If I cannot rely on myself alone to determine the truth and have to rely on what the majority thinks, then what about this: Christianity is the one true religion. Why? Because there are more Christians in the world than any other religion. Here is the breakdown:
1) Christians - 2,116,909,552 (which includes 1,117,759,185 Roman Catholics, 372,586,395 Protestants, 221,746,920 Orthodox, and 81,865,869 Anglicans)
2) Muslims - 1,282,780,149
3) Hindus - 856,690,863
4) Buddhists - 381,610,979
5) Sikhs - 25,139,912
6) Jews - 14,826,102
And...
a) Others - 814,146,396
b) Non-Religious - 801,898,746
c) Atheists - 152,128,701
http://geography.about.com/od/culturalgeography/a/popularreligion.htm
Now of course these numbers should be questioned, as this comes from a government source (the CIA!). Not to mention we are not told how they came up with these numbers. But let's for argument's sake assume that these numbers are correct.
So why doesn't science proclaim that Christianity is the one true religion? After all, the majority believes in it. Also, shouldn't Biblical truths then override truths that science comes up with?
Now about the second point... humans can create devices which are more truthful than they are. What if one day we were able to create artificial intelligence to rival man, and this machine came to the conclusion that humans are a threat to the universe and should be wiped out? Is it then justifiable for the computer to systematically destroy the human race? And going back to the first point, if these computers were able to convince the majority of humans of the validity of their proofs, then doesn't this make it out to be true?
As for the last point... since truth is not fixed and rock solid, then how can you even argue about what is true and what is not? Something might be discovered tomorrow that renders everything you know today to be false. What's even the point?
Anyway, I would like you round earth theorists to answer these questions please, if you can without degenerating into calling me stupid or an imbecile or saying I shouldn't be born. Let's keep it civil for once.
And let me say once more, I am not Tom. But I guess going back to the last point, since truth is ever changing, if more people on here believe I am not Tom, then at that point I am no longer Tom. 
I'm going to shock everyone by going back on topic...
First of all, I came to this site because I was curious to see what arguments anyone could possibly come up with to explain a flat earth. And I have to say, I'm impressed - the theory is far more ludicrous than I could have possible imagined!
Now, about your first point:
1. Truth can only be found by consensus. You cannot rely on yourself alone since you can be deceived. What the majority constitutes as evidence is proof. What the minority constitutes as evidence is an illusion.
I certainly don't believe the majority. The fact that most people believe in a round earth has nothing to do with it - the irrefutable weight of scientific evidence does. For example, most American's don't know that Mercury is the closest planet to the sun. I know that it is, therefore I don't believe the majority. Also, I am an atheist. Most of the people on earth are Christian. I am not Christian. Therefore, I am not following the majority. I don't believe the minority (you) because of the ludicrous nature of your argument which is based on no real evidence.
2. Humans can create reliable devices which can come up with truths that humans alone cannot.
A device does not come up with a truth on its own - a human will provide it with evidence and it will do the calculations and come to a conclusion. A human could have performed those same calculations - it would have taken a lot longer, but it's possible. As for your AI scenario, the invention of artificial intelligence is so improbable we may never have to worry about that
3. Truth is ever changing. With more reliable formulas and computers, previous truths are discarded and replaced by new truths.
Truth is not ever changing - our understanding of the truth is. What changes is beliefs that are not grounded in fact. We used to believe that the atom was a solid little ball. This was because we did not have the capabilities to prove or disprove this - it was just an assumption. As we became capable of digging deeper into the atom, we learnt more and more. The atom was the same shape through this - our understanding of what was inside it changed. Our knowledge that the earth is round is grounded in fact, not speculation, and therefore it cannot be proven wrong. Our knowledge of it may be advanced, but it will always be round.