CathInfo.com

No worries Meg, you're doing a wonderful job.   In some ways, that quote says it all.  This whole argument is based in the war between the Church and the occult.  I think its stunning when someone who has no knowledge of flat earth like Fr. Ripperger comes out and says something as poignant as this:
"People's denial of the knowledge of God, or that you can come to a knowledge of God, is rooted in certain metaphysical problems in relationship to reality. The common teaching among philosophers is, What your cosmology is, how you view the physical world, the world around you, will determine what your understand of what actually God is.  Due to modern philosophers, People's understanding of the real world has degraded their ability to actually understand things about God by the natural light of reason."  

That's a very appropriate quote from Fr. Ripperger. Quote: "The common teaching among philosophers is, what your cosmology is, how you view the physical world, the world around you, will determine what your understand(ing) of what God actually is."

Maybe Catholics won't be so adversely affected by the globe-earth cosmology, in that they still believe that God created the earth, but society at large doesn't really care about the fact of Creation, and that God created it.

Fr. Ripperger above also says..."Due to modern philosophers, Peoples understanding of the real world has degraded their ability to actually understand things about God by the natural light of reason."
The world today is permeated with occultism. I have family members who are occultists, unfortunately. I saw the new Star Wars movie yesterday with my husband, and that film is SO permeated with occultism (and Buddhism), and yet that's just considered a normal thing for most people today. They don't question it. Most trad Catholics won't see a film like Star Wars, but I think it's useful to see and know what the current Hollywood propaganda is doing to society today.

You said:
The forms of geocentrism that dominated Christendom and the West did not include a flat earth.  

Excuse me?  And you know this how?  Your proof? You have no proof.  In fact, the next sentence explains plenty. " The two most influential thinkers who promoted geocentrism were Aristotle and Ptolemy who both taught the earth is a sphere." Aristotle and Ptolemy had nothing to do with Christendom and their sphere theory reflects that. Further, as Wiki points out:  "Ptolemy wrote in Greek and can be shown to have utilized Babylonian astronomical data."

Ahem. Ptolemy was just another pagan occultist.

Also, Wiki goes on to say: "The maps look distorted when compared to modern maps, because Ptolemy's data were inaccurate."  As well as, "Ptolemy has been referred to as “a pro-astrological authority of the highest magnitude” and "Ptolemy's astrological outlook was quite practical: he thought that astrology was like medicine,..."

So, not only was Ptolemy a demonic pagan, his data was inaccurate.  With inaccurate data, what good was he?  Anyone who believed him was duped.  Ptolemy used false math and astrology to turn the stationary earth into a globe so the next pagan could spin it.  None of this proves geocentric models prior to Ptolemy taught earth was a globe.  

It is very hard to figure out what you would accept as evidence, since you appear to throw out any that does not support you.  There are countless sources to back up my claims about how Aristotle and Ptolemy were viewed in Christendom, but you have consistently rejected any that I have cited in the past.  Presumably you will accept a source that you yourself use.

The very same article on Ptolemy that you have been citing says of his work the Almagest:

Across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa in the Medieval period, it was the authoritative text on astronomy, with its author becoming an almost mythical figure, called Ptolemy, King of Alexandria.^[24] The Almagest was preserved, like most of extant Classical Greek science, in Arabic manuscripts (hence its familiar name). Because of its reputation, it was widely sought and was translated twice into Latin in the 12th century, once in Sicily and again in Spain.^[25] Ptolemy's model, like those of his predecessors, was geocentric and was almost universally accepted until the appearance of simpler heliocentric models during the scientific revolution.

The Babylonian astronomical data contained "systematic records of astronomical observations." The use of these detailed observations is what gave the Ptolemaic model its impressive predictive power.  This is not a "pagan occult" practice but how natural science works.  One makes observations of physical phenomena, basing theories on them which one tests by their ability to predict results.  The Ptolemaic model was one of the longest lasting theories in the history of science, accepted for over a thousand years because it worked so well.

Your quote about distorted maps based on inaccurate data are from a section of the article discussing Ptolemy's work on geography and have nothing to do with his astronomical model.

Again, you say stuff without proof.  As if the popular notions of any era made theory into fact.  There is no reason to believe the Church supported pagan astrology.  In fact, it is well proven that the Church was silenced by historical revisionism.  Look who people like yourself turn to for cosmological information these days: Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Eratosthenes, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Einstein...100% of which were astrological heliocentric spherical pagan air bags.  Further proof: Everyone thought Galileo was right.  Turns out all modern belief of the Affair is erroneous and the result of revisionism.      

There is no reason to believe that I claimed that the Church supported pagan astrology.  Of course, she did not.  For most of history there was a close association between astronomy (a natural science supported by the Church) and astrology (a superstition which is not).  There was a similar relationship between the science of chemistry and the superstition of alchemy. 

Aristotle and Plato were geocentrists who believed in a spherical earth.  Where did you get the idea they were heliocentrists?

I am not sure you mean by saying that everyone thought Galileo was right.  This was not true of his contemporaries.  It is true that the current popular view is greatly distorted and could reasonably be called revisionism.  This does not prove that your understanding is correct.