You like many others can claim Earth has roughly a 25,000 mile circumference but that does not make it true. It has to be verified and documented, but it never has been.
This depends on what you mean by "verified".
If you mean someone has to go out with a tape measure and measure it, then no, it hasn't been verified.
If you just mean shown to be that, then it has been countless times, including on a day to day basis with the use of GPS which relies upon that to be able to determine position.
Don't say we're morons
Don't worry, you're not a moron.
You are wilfully ignorant, blatantly lying about reality and hiding from the facts so you can pretend Earth is flat.
As for your images:
The experiment, when completely removed from context, is inconclusive. This is because it is unconstrained and as the height of the sun varies so to does the curvature.
But it wasn't an experiment with no context.
It was an experiment done after it was already shown that the sun is very far away and that Earth was round.
In this context, it did prove Earth had a circumference of roughly 40 000 km.
But don't worry, even if you want to ignore all that historical context, the only reason it is an unconstrained solution is because there were just 2 points.
We can do better by taking more points.
A good example to start with is Polaris.
Its altitude in the sky is known to vary with position.
As you move away from the north pole, it gets to a lower position. Importantly, this relationship is linear.
i.e. it is of the form, a=a0-kd.
This shows Earth is round.
A simple example is taking 3 points, the equator, the north pole, and half way between.
For the north pole and 45 degrees north, there are a multitude of solutions just like Eratosthenes. The simplest 2 are a round Earth with the 45 degrees spanning 5000 km and Polaris being very distant; and a flat Earth with Polaris 5000 km above the pole.
But when you travel an extra 5000 km to the equator and observe Polaris at/near the horizon, only one of this is consistent.
With a RE, travelling these extra 5000 km should put Polaris at an altitude of 0 degrees.
But with a FE and Polaris 5000 km above the north pole, Polaris should appear at an altitude of 26.6 degrees.
If instead we take the 2 points of the equator and the pole, we get the same solution for a RE, but for a FE we get Polaris at basically no height above the north pole.
If instead we take the 2 points of the equator and 45 degrees north, we get the same solution for a RE, but for FE we get Polaris at basically no height above a location just north of 45 degrees north.
So no, it is quite clear what the actual solution is.
And more lies in your image. The globe theory is not based upon Earth's circumference.
It is based upon the mountains of evidence which indicate Earth is round. The circumference is part of that.
As pointed out to you before, the curvature has been verified countless times. You wishing to remain wilfully ignorant of that will not change that fact.