The magical gravity force is there because it is needed for the globe model to work.
It seems kind of hypocritical to say that gravity is just there to make the round world model work when you could say the same of the universal accelerator and the flat earth model. The universal accelerator explains one thing and one thing alone. Gravity explains many things. Without gravity, suddenly you don't know how the elements in the universe were formed, nor can you account for why observed abundances of elements in the universe match up so well with what is predicted with a universe with gravity and a big bang. Gravity explains why the solar system exists, why the galaxy exists, why people observe black holes, why there are variations in the moon's orbit, why tides exist, why stars go supernova, and how matter was able to coalesce in order to eventually form things like plants and people. The universal accelerator, on the other hand, explains just one thing: 9.81 m/sē.
So I ask, which one is more contrived? The fantastic thing that explains just one thing, or the fantastic thing that explains many things? For some reason, you say the thing that explains many things, but not the thing that explains just one thing.
I would also ask how the universal accelerator is less magical than gravity. In gravity, you don't lose or gain any energy. With the universal accelerator, however, it constantly requires energy going into the system, and that seems pretty suspect.
Note: in the event that you don't believe in any of the thing I mentioned, for whatever reason, just change it to "gravity explains why people report that _____". Otherwise, you are forced to invoke that either it's just a massive coincidence that the universe acts like it has gravity and that the world is round, or that
even more people are lying to you, for some reason.