CathInfo.com

I have not noticed any difference in the amount of emotionally charged language used by the two sides of this issue.  Few people of any position discusses it calmly and rationally.  So this characeristic does not seem like something that will be any help in determining which side is correct.

I have noticed that lately you only seem to point out illogical or otherwise flawed posts when they support the globe earth position.  This suggests that, rather than objectively seeking out the more logical position, you have emotionally chosen a position and are guilty of confirmation bias.

I have chosen neither position.  If I single out going after Neil's posts in particular, it's because the 5-page emotional rants surrounding one debatable piece of evidence annoy me.  I have already explained that I agree with you that the Church does not teach flat earth.  So you noticed wrong.  Theologically, I disagree with the flat earthers and have since the beginning.  Scientifically, I am undecided.  I have been weighing the evidence on both sides and currently find myself leaning in the direction of flat earth due to the evidence appearing to be stronger in that direction.

I have never applied the calmness of the parties involved to my "determin[ation of] which side is correct".  I'm having to distill actual evidence out from within the biased posts of many people.

This literally makes no sense. I stated that there is no proof whatsoever that FE is a Dogma of the Church. What would you like me to provide proof of? Those who claim that it's necessary for salvation need to provide proof. Claiming that merely the basic concept of FE is in Scripture with nothing explicit is not proof. There would need to be something from the Magisterium.

You claimed flat earth is schismatic and demonic.  You were asked to prove it, which you did not do.  We don't need "explicit proof" from the Magisterium because while Scripture, Church Fathers and science favor a flat geocentric earth, and never a heliocentric globe, the Copernican/Pythagorean doctrine of that same heliocentric globe is the science of the globalists destroying the world and the Church.  

I have not noticed any difference in the amount of emotionally charged language used by the two sides of this issue.  Few people of any position discusses it calmly and rationally.  So this characeristic does not seem like something that will be any help in determining which side is correct.

I have noticed that lately you only seem to point out illogical or otherwise flawed posts when they support the globe earth position.  This suggests that, rather than objectively seeking out the more logical position, you have emotionally chosen a position and are guilty of confirmation bias.

As with most issues, I get hostility from both sides ... because I'll argue against and reject arguments from either side without respect to positions and to persons.  Then I invariably get the criticism ... from both sides ... of needing to get off the fence and make up my mind, to side with one camp or another.  I rarely feel compelled to join a camp.  If one side's argument is good about one thing, then I accept that, even if I reject several of their other arguments or points.

So, for instance, on this issue, theologically I disagree with (at least the dogmatic) flat earthers, whereas scientifically I'm undecided but leaning flat earth, based on the evidence that I have seen so far.  I have seen videos where they have used lasers, GPS accurate to within centimeters, sound beams, etc. to demonstrate a decided lack of the mathematically-expected curvature of the earth over certain distances.  Now, if those results are not COMPLETELY FAKED AND FABRICATED, then I do not see how they can be debunked.  Refraction doesn't fly anymore when you're talking about GPS, lasers, and sound beams.