God’s flat earth creation they LOVE , while globe earthers on Cathinfo.com are spending more time on God’s flat earth creation they HATE. Either way, God’s flat earth creation prevails as globe earthers hold their heads down in shame.

God’s flat earth creation they LOVE , while globe earthers on Cathinfo.com are spending more time on God’s flat earth creation they HATE. Either way, God’s flat earth creation prevails as globe earthers hold their heads down in shame.

Many times I have given the reasons why I am a global geocentrist and not a flat-earther.
Both can be divided into two spheres, if you pardon the pun, belief based on faith and reason. Geocentrism is a dogma of the Catholic Church, a dogma that is has been denied since 1741 by some and by nearly all Catholics today. Scientific investigation over the last 400 years has concluded there is no science capable of determining what order the universe is. Even though the evidence for geocentrism is overwhelming compared to not one piece of heliocentric evidence, the nature of space prohibits proof for that order. Indeed if there was proof then it could never have been defined as an act of faith.

The theory of a flat-earth, they say, is true based on both faith and reason. When it came down to it this 'faith' is confined to a personal interpretation of Scripture, not the unanimous opinion of the Fathers based on Scripture like geocentrism. Nor did any Pope define it as revealed in Scripture, a decree that would have compelled Catholics to believe Scripture reveals a flat-earth. Thus from a faith perspective it is not a dogma with no obligation for Catholics to believe.
    
But here again science can be used to see if it is a physical truth or not. Unlike geocentrism spacial relativity is not involved. Since 1700 however the science of geodesy began to investigate the shape of the earth. It is no different to the science surveyers use to build roads, working out the topography and shapes of the land to be built on, only on a much larger scale. Domenico Cassini, surveyor for the pope in his time conducted such a earthly survey and found a curve over huge distances that cannot be measured over shorted distances visible to man. In other words, flat earthers always confine their straight line earth to what a human can see on the horizon, even from an aeroplane. Global measurement is done over hundreds if not thousands of miles using the stars as measuring guides. This science has found the earth is a globe.
    
Then there are modern photos of the curved earth from space. But all these are supposed to be faked. So too satellite pictures of curved earth. I think some flat earthers say no such satellites or space rockets ever went up there. Well saying there is no proof only faked proof does not prove a flat earth. We can see the global earth by way of eclipses but these too are rejected by flat-earthers. Fair enough.  

That said, I now see there are some Catholics who do seriously believe in a flat-earth based on Scripture. I can find no objection to this either. There are many other things some Catholics believe that are not dogmas nor heresies so they could be said to be permitted within Catholicism.
   
However, I certainly object to the assertion that fellow Catholics MUST also believe and that if they don't they should 'hold down their [Catholic] heads in shame.' This borders on Protestantism or some weird religious cult. It certainly is not Catholic calling fellow posters such names. 
 

Many times I have given the reasons why I am a global geocentrist and not a flat-earther.
Both can be divided into two spheres, if you pardon the pun, belief based on faith and reason. Geocentrism is a dogma of the Catholic Church, a dogma that is has been denied since 1741 by some and by nearly all Catholics today. Scientific investigation over the last 400 years has concluded there is no science capable of determining what order the universe is. Even though the evidence for geocentrism is overwhelming compared to not one piece of heliocentric evidence, the nature of space prohibits proof for that order. Indeed if there was proof then it could never have been defined as an act of faith.

The theory of a flat-earth, they say, is true based on both faith and reason. When it came down to it this 'faith' is confined to a personal interpretation of Scripture, not the unanimous opinion of the Fathers based on Scripture like geocentrism. Nor did any Pope define it as revealed in Scripture, a decree that would have compelled Catholics to believe Scripture reveals a flat-earth. Thus from a faith perspective it is not a dogma with no obligation for Catholics to believe.
    
But here again science can be used to see if it is a physical truth or not. Unlike geocentrism spacial relativity is not involved. Since 1700 however the science of geodesy began to investigate the shape of the earth. It is no different to the science surveyers use to build roads, working out the topography and shapes of the land to be built on, only on a much larger scale. Domenico Cassini, surveyor for the pope in his time conducted such a earthly survey and found a curve over huge distances that cannot be measured over shorted distances visible to man. In other words, flat earthers always confine their straight line earth to what a human can see on the horizon, even from an aeroplane. Global measurement is done over hundreds if not thousands of miles using the stars as measuring guides. This science has found the earth is a globe.
    
Then there are modern photos of the curved earth from space. But all these are supposed to be faked. So too satellite pictures of curved earth. I think some flat earthers say no such satellites or space rockets ever went up there. Well saying there is no proof only faked proof does not prove a flat earth. We can see the global earth by way of eclipses but these too are rejected by flat-earthers. Fair enough.  

That said, I now see there are some Catholics who do seriously believe in a flat-earth based on Scripture. I can find no objection to this either. There are many other things some Catholics believe that are not dogmas nor heresies so they could be said to be permitted within Catholicism.
  
However, I certainly object to the assertion that fellow Catholics MUST also believe and that if they don't they should 'hold down their [Catholic] heads in shame.' This borders on Protestantism or some weird religious cult. It certainly is not Catholic calling fellow posters such names.
 

If Domenico was using the stars to measure,  then he found the curvature of the Firmament,  not the earth.
Didn't that occur to you?
The Firmament is curved like an upsides down bowl over the flat plane of earth.
Even Sungenis' s movie has an illustration of a microwave star map that shows the stars embedded in concentric domes.

Land surveyors show no curvature of earth whatsoever at any time. And all attest to this truth.

If Domenico was using the stars to measure,  then he found the curvature of the Firmament,  not the earth.
Didn't that occur to you?
The Firmament is curved like an upsides down bowl over the flat plane of earth.
Even Sungenis's movie has an illustration of a microwave star map that shows the stars embedded in concentric domes.

Land surveyors show no curvature of earth whatsoever at any time. And all attest to this truth.

.
False.
.
Land surveyors clearly do show the curvature of the earth as is evidenced for example in the curving lines of latitude when they are the centerline of streets or national boundaries. Many streets in the continental USA are centered on such curving lines but the streets appear to be straight in the short view of local appearance. Baseline in San Bernardino, CA, is one example.
.
The border between the USA and Canada is an obvious case. It runs along the 49th parallel from British Colombia to Manitoba on the Canada side, and from Washington State to North Dakota on the States' side. If you only consider what you can see first hand at short range, it appears straight, like here:
.

GEODETIC  SURVEYING  is  a  process  of surveying in which the shape and size of the earth are considered. This type of survey is suited for large areas and long lines and is used to find the precise   location   of   basic   points   needed   for establishing control for other surveys. In geodetic surveys, the stations are normally long distances apart, and more precise instruments and surveying methods  are  required  for  this  type  of  surveying than  for  plane  surveying.
.
The  shape  of  the  earth  is  thought  of  as  a spheroid, although in a technical sense, it is not really a spheroid. In 1924, the convention of the International  Geodetic  and  Geophysical  Union adopted 41,852,960 ft as the diameter of the earth at the equator and 41,711,940 ft as the diameter at  its  polar  axis.  The  equatorial  diameter  was computed on the assumption that the flattening of the earth caused by gravitational attraction is exactly 1/297. Therefore, distances measured on or  near  the  surface  of  the  earth  are  not  along straight lines or planes, but on a curved surface. Hence,  in  the  computation  of  distances  in  geodetic surveys,  allowances  are  made  for  the  earth’s minor and major diameters from which a spheroid of  reference  is  developed.  The  position  of  each geodetic  station  is  related  to  this  spheroid.  The positions  are  expressed  as  latitudes  (angles  north or south of the Equator) and longitudes (angles east or west of a prime meridian) or as northings and castings on a rectangular grid.
.
The methods used in geodetic surveying are beyond  the  scope  of  this  training  manual.
.
.
.
When the article mentions "the spheroid" they are referring to a standard term in current use for the purpose of GPS systems for example, in which an idealized geometric spheroid or ellipsoid is imagined at or near the earth's surface, a spheroid or ellipsoid which is established as a datum reference and from which measurements are taken. In other words, the shape of the earth is APPROXIMATED as a "spheroid" or "ellipsoid" for use in practical calculations, even though the earth is not technically a spheroid. The earth is generally speaking spheroidal or ellipsoidal in shape even though it is not precisely a spheroid or ellipsoid.
.
In application, the elevation of any object on the earth's surface or any point on the ground can be defined by its distance up or down from the ellipsoid. When you use your GPS in your car, for example, your elevation is calculated based on your distance vertically, away from the ellipsoid, which can be positive or negative. If you are below the ellipsoid it is negative, and if you are above the ellipsoid it is positive. Most tall mountains have summits above the ellipsoid, and points at the bottom of the ocean are below the ellipsoid. As shown in the diagram below, the ellipsoid is one and the same as the surface of the ocean, commonly referred to as "mean sea level." "The ellipsoid" over dry land surfaces is a somewhat arbitrary theoretical egg-shaped geometrical shape.
.

I find the videos very interesting and quite compelling.  I haven't finished the longer one though.

Map curvature is also explainable with a circular flat earth model with the North Pole in the middle.  Question is whether the earth rises and falls and not whether it curves.

.
North and south directions are traceable as straight lines on maps and on the ground.
.
But east and west directions are not -- with one exception, which is at the equator.
.
Only on a spherical earth can the equator be a straight line in the same way that all longitude lines are straight.
.
The border between Canada and the USA is a curved line on the ground and on a map.
.
If that were "explainable" as you say, on a "circular flat earth model," then please explain how the equator, which is also a curved line on that "model" is in fact a straight line on the surface of the earth.
.

Whether the line at the equator is straight or circular/curved would depend on which map you impose it on, wouldn't it?  Using a map that's based on globe earth, it would of course be straight.  But project the same line out to a circular flat earth and it would be curved.  Depends on how you draw the map.  I don't consider this proof.

.
Obviously, the projection chosen will determine the image you end up with. The point is, where do you find maps containing the equator or land areas in the southern hemisphere which show latitude lines curving around the north pole like they do in the USA and other northern hemisphere areas? 
.
Is this a worldwide conspiracy to hide the "secret forbidden gnostic flat-earth" doctrine?
.
If it's just a matter of imposing it on a map, then why has no one imposed the "flat-earth" model on a southern hemisphere map? (Hint: Maybe it's because it would be useless to do so -- unless like the "flat-earth" Youtube videos they would be serving the purpose of dogmatic flat-earthers. Or could it be that making distorted maps is more difficult than making silly repetitious videos based on lies?)
.
So all the maps you can find (go ahead and find them) show these east-west lines I mentioned in the USA as curving around the north pole. 
.
In South America, there are no country borders that traverse east-west lines of latitude like the ones I mentioned in Canada/USA.
.
If the flat-earther hypothesis were accurate, we would have maps of South America showing the same concentric curves centered on the north pole. But what we have instead are concentric curves in latitude lines centered on the south pole.
.
NOTE: in all such maps we should be aiming at accuracy and truth, and not at distortion:
.