It's true. I believe that the earth is round, despite the fact that when I observe the earth, I see a flat plane in every direction. But of course, I could be wrong. That is why I'm here.
I read the entire FAQ before posting, so there's no need to refer me to it. Much of what was said there is rather unbelievable at best and some strains credulity to a point that is simply unreasonable. Still, I could be wrong. Real science is always questioning itself.
A few things that were NOT resolved adequately or at all by the FAQ.
1) In northern regions, during the winter, the sun disappears completely for months at a time. this cannot be explained by a simple greater circumference or orbit during the winter months, as the sun would still be above the horizon as it is in summer months.
2) There was no mention of the disappearing of the hulls of boats before the sails. How do you explain that (I've read that it has to do with the human eye, but this is demonstrably incorrect)?
3) The Greeks and Romans, and some Chinese (despite the difference from tradition) Independently used mathematics and observable evidence to infer that the Earth was round. I happen to know that my Chinese ancestors were quite accomplished at math and observation, as were the Greeks. Since that time, every scientifically or mathematically adept civilization has come to similar conclusions. I find it difficult to believe that they were all wrong.
4) Sunrises/Sunsets. How can the sun simply be getting closer and further away? During a sunset, the sun doesn't become smaller and smaller as it fades into the distance, it sinks below the horizon. the same is true in reverse for a sunrise. It doesn't help that your theory is still being updated in this area.
5) Foucault pendulum.
6) Your answer to the atmosphere's non-diffusion was rather inadequate, I do not understand how the energy could form a field that does not also dissipate. Energy flows from high to low. the field would flow inward, the atmosphere would flow outward.
7) "There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards the level of the sea without falling more than a few feet? notably, the Nile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth's 'convexity.'" Carpenter also presents aeronautic testimony that even at the great observable heights no curvature of the earth is observed, and fits with the idea of a flat-earth, since it is the nature of level surfaces to rise to a level with the human eye."
This is absolutely possible in a round earth model. even if in a thousand miles, there is only one foot of drop in elevation, gravity pulls inward toward the center of the earth; at every individual point in the river, even if there is only a hundredth of an inch of difference in elevation, water will eventually flow in that direction, which is why the Nile flows backwards in some areas..
You don't like to go into the conspiracy very much, but I have only one complaint. The US, Russia, and China would all jump on the opportunity to embarrass the others with confirmed evidence of a scandal of this magnitude. There's very little likelihood that they would all keep it a secret.
There is clearly more evidence both for and against, but I only have so much time to spend. I have attempted to respect your views as much as possible, please grant me the same courtesy, please be as patient as you can in explaining things that you have already had to explain on previous occasions.
Obviously, I cannot change your minds, just as I doubt that you will be able to change my own. But, I do enjoy a challenge.