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.
 

I don't get where you think what The Bible depicts is a matter of opinion.  It clearly depicts a Flat and Stationary Earth.  

Of course you get it Wholefoods, unless all the Fathers interpreted certain passages in the Bible as meaning a flat Earth, or the Church defined them as depicting a flat Earth, then one can read such descriptions as metaphorical or literal.

THAT IS THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

I think that the standard is even higher.  Simple unanimous consensus among the Church Fathers doesn't suffice either ... if it just happened to be that they agreed due to some thinking that was current at the time.  So, for instance, if they all read these passages in the Bible as referring to flat earth because at the time EVERYBODY believed the earth was flat (due to the current state of science), then that wouldn't be a dogmatic consensus either.  There would have to be some indication that this understanding of the text was revealed and was a teaching of the Church handed down from the Apostles.

Shouldn't the boarder between Canada and the U.S. form part of an arc of a flat circle on the Flat Earth?  That's the way it is on all of the Flat Earth maps that have been posted on this forum.  Yet it looks straight.  

So, the horizon looks straight and that "proves" the Flat Earth, yet a straight border along a line that should be curved like an arc also "proves" a Flat Earth?  Something doesn't make sense here.

The boarder between the United States and Canada does have a slight curve to it. Maps depicting the boarder between the United States and Canada are not in scale.

Of course you get it Wholefoods, unless all the Fathers interpreted certain passages in the Bible as meaning a flat Earth, or the Church defined them as depicting a flat Earth, then one can read such descriptions as metaphorical or literal.

THAT IS THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

No, I don't think that's correct.  I think the teaching of The Church has always been that The Bible is Inerrant (not The Fathers) and any decent scholar of ancient literature would tell you that, The Bible depicts a Flat and Stationary Earth, with a Geocentric view of things.  

However, it is clear that there is debate on Biblical Inerrancy, at even the highest levels of The Church.  Some have promoted the idea that The Bible is Inerrant only in matters pertaining to Salvation and this has created controversy in The Church and apparently, is not currently clarified.  Of course, The Church can't just reverse itself on two thousand years of teaching.  So, for the time being, while that opening has been created, it appears that Biblical Inerrancy is still, has always been and will eternally be, the teaching of The Church.  

No doubt, that opening was created, simply because The Church has allowed (even in its own schools) the teaching of "facts" that are in clear opposition to The Bible, although perhaps not to Salvation.  But, that has created a slippery slope.  So, unfortunately, it will and has, lead to the loss of Faith among Christians and the failure of Christians to lead many of The Lost to Salvation, which of course, should be the primary aim of The Church:  to fight the good fight (to save souls from Hell).  

Shouldn't the boarder between Canada and the U.S. form part of an arc of a flat circle on the Flat Earth?  That's the way it is on all of the Flat Earth maps that have been posted on this forum.  Yet it looks straight.  

So, the horizon looks straight and that "proves" the Flat Earth, yet a straight border along a line that should be curved like an arc also "proves" a Flat Earth?  Something doesn't make sense here.

I don't know what pictures you mean, but here's a couple of pictures I found of a Flat Earth Map and a Globe Earth map, showing The border between Canada and The USA.  


FLAT EARTH MAP

GLOBE EARTH MAP

That's just a plain silly argument.  On a flat earth, a line along a latitude would be curved and it should look like a curve.

This is the argument that y'all use in saying that a what appears to be a flat horizon is evidence of a flat earth.

The globe earth maps are not an accurate representation at all; the earth is flat. You fell for the Freemasonic deception.

That's just a plain silly argument.  On a flat earth, a line along a latitude would be curved and it should look like a curve.

This is the argument that y'all use in saying that a what appears to be a flat horizon is evidence of a flat earth.

.
Welcome to silliness argument central. You'll never get a dogmatic flat-earther to use a cogent argument. It's all emotion.
.
Women who are sucked into flat-earthism

.
Notice how wide Australia is -- as wide as Africa is long!

.
One of the numerous questions to which flat-earthers have no intelligent answer:

Are you implying that flat earthers have intelligent answers for some things?  That they even have intelligence?