Well, I tried to post this before but as I wrote it up somewhat badly no one really answered my question. So I'll try again.
Everyone here should agree on this:
(1) There is a certain amount of evidence that indicates that the Earth is flat (the stuff in Tom's sig.).
(2) There is a certain amount of evidence that indicates that the Earth is round (pictures from spaces, surveys, gravimetry, behavior of stars in the Southern Hemisphere, flight times...)
Now, there are seem to be two main views espoused on this site,
(FE) The evidence that indicates a Flat Earth is, on the whole, correct. The evidence that points towards a Round Earth is the result of error, fraudulence or misinterpretation.
(RE) The evidence that indicates a Round Earth is, on the whole, correct. The evidence that points towards a Flat Earth is the result of error, fraudulence or misinterpretation.
Given the above, my question to the Fe's out there is:
Starting from an agnostic stance, why should we reject the evidence that points to RE and accept the evidence that points to FE?
By "agnostic stance" I mean not assuming FE.