See the fact that you say there would be "absolutely no reason to lie about this" shows how small your thinking is on the matter. There would be numerous reasons to lie about it, including undermining everyone's reality.
But why lie specifically about the shape of the earth?
The fact that you or I have no clue where we really live means we can't even really fathom what other reasons there might be
You might have no idea, but you can't speak for me or others!
- we are unaware of a huge number of things that are being hidden from us. We can't even begin to fathom the scope of stuff that is hidden from us.
What logic!
If "we are
unaware of a
huge number of things that are being hidden from us" how can you claim "a
huge number of things that are being hidden from us".
Remember YOU said, "we are unaware".
What's that phrase, knowledge is power?
My point with the age of earth is that I don't know how old it is, but don't take such an oddly specific answer like "4.6 billion years" to be anything but complete and utter bullshit.
But that has absolutely
nothing to do with the shape of the earth!
I said I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a few hundred years, not that I thought it was.
You may admit to total ignorance!
On the other hand, I am prepared to accept some of the recorded history, especially when there a number of sources for it and archeological evidence backing even that up.
It could be 50 thousand years old, 50 million years old, or hell, 50 trillion for all I know.
It might be! And it might have been created exactly as we see it

"last Thursday"

see
Last Thursdayism.Rabinoz, I've seen that vid or whatever and sorry but I don't take it to be anything other than bullshit. Get up in a plane and you will see there is no curvature on any stretch of bridge of any length imaginable.
What possible connection is there between "Getting up in a plane" and "seeing there is no curvature on any stretch of bridge of any length imaginable".
In case you hadn't heard it before,
the Globe is huge!Nobody has ever observed a curving body of water, and never will as far as I'm concerned
Maybe you haven't, but I find even this evidence of "curved water"!
You might wonder at that, but simply the fact of a sharp sea-air boundary is evidence of a near horizon, only a few kilometers away.
And how do I know that? From these photos taken from the same place.
The left photo below is taken with the camera about 50 cm above water level.
That beacon is known to be 2.6 km away and on the horizon and guess what?
Ignoring any possible refraction, the curve calculator gives: Horizon = 2.52 km and Hidden= 0 meters.
 Scarborough, Beacon 2.6 km away on Horizon | |  Scarborough, Beacon from 3 m elevation |
The right-hand photo taken from about 3 m above water level,
the horizon is well past the beacon.Those simple photos are, to me, very good evidence of "curved water".
It the water were not curved the horizon would be
distant and blurred by the blue haze we see from a higher altitude from mountains and aircraft.
On the
horizon you have undoubtedly seen this, but
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Proving the Earth is not Flat - Part 1 - The Horizon.
It does explain why the horizon looks flat -
because the horizon is flat!but we will agree to disagree because it is not a point worth arguing on the flat earth society (or is it the round earth society, hard to tell these days).
Yes, "we will agree to disagree", but if it wasn't for us
terribly gullible
Globularists you might never know the weaknesses in your "Flat Earth Theory 101" and find some way to paper over the cracks.
If our posts offend your delicate sensibilities,
you might apply to become a "true believer", as a number have, and post in the Flat Earth Believers forum away from our clutches.