Agree.  And there is plenty of circuмstantial evidence that the earth is flat, i.e.
1.  when satan tempted Christ in the desert, he took Him up to a high mountain where all the kingdoms of the earth could be seen.  Not possible on a globe earth.
2.  Christ ascended into heaven, in the direction of "up".  Not possible on a globe earth.
3.  How about when St Luke says the whole world was covered in darkness when Christ was on the cross.  How is this possible on a globe earth?  How can the sun be darkened on the whole earth, at the same time, on a globe earth?  It can't.

44And it was almost the sixth hour: and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. 45And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. 46And Jesus crying with a loud voice, said: Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. And saying this, he gave up the ghost. (Luke 23)

Yeah, a firmament is a basic concept of a Catholic earth model.  Without a firmament, the model is anti-Scripture and wrong.

1.  When Satan tempted Christ in the desert, he took Him up to a high mountain where all the kingdoms of the earth could be seen.  Not possible on a globe earth.

'Again the devil took him up into a very high mountain, and shewed him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them,  9 And said to him: All these will I give thee, if falling down thou wilt adore me.  10 Then Jesus saith to him: Begone, Satan: for it is written, The Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and him only shalt thou serve.' (Matt Ch 4 8-10.)

How in God's name can this passage be 'circuмstantial evidence' for a flat-Earth? Even if it did happen on a flat Earth, as each of us witness every day, one cannot see all the Earth even from a mountain top. How many climbers who reached the top of Mt everest said they saw st America or Australia? How Satan 'showed' Christ all the kingdoms of the world we do not know. He could have pointed to them in every direction that can apply to a flat or global Earth, or he could have created some sort of image, or both he and Christ could have seen in their own way all the kingdoms of the world. 

2.  Christ ascended into heaven, in the direction of "up".  Not possible on a globe earth.

I have already written: A God created global Earth would need a supernatural element to ensure all on such a globe had the Earth under their feet and the sky above their heads. The above 'impossibility' suggests that not even God could create a globe on which what is called gravity by man, could allow man to live anywhere on Earth 
and have the ground under their feet and the sky above their head. It suggests people who live in Australia would be upside down on a global Earth. If we could get to the moon, we would have to land on top of it or end up sideways or upside down on the bottom of it. 
For an explanation as to how man can live on a global Earth, no matter where on it, the top, sides or bottom, it would need a little supernaturalism. Indeed it kind of proves that there is a supernatural element to God's first creation, an Earth for mankind. A flat-Earth would not need supernatural evidence. Christian theology teaches that God’s love sustains the inanimate universe that necessarily ensures the existence of mankind on Earth, be it a globe or not. Thus, we are totally dependent on Him for everything. We call this divine concursus; the act by which God’s energy flows into all the operations of creatures, like gravity to keep hell below and heaven above the Earth. The motions of the universe are presided over by God’s mediate concursus, signifying the remote divine activity that gives and preserves created power of action.

3.  How about when St Luke says the whole world was covered in darkness when Christ was on the cross.  How is this possible on a globe earth?  How can the sun be darkened on the whole earth, at the same time, on a globe earth?  It can't.

 On a global Earth, the sun causes day on one half of it and night (darkness) exists on the other half. If God turned off the light of the sun, which the Scriptures tell us He did, then the whole global Earth would find itself in darkness. 

So, sorry Pax, I don't think the above will convert many from global to flat Earthism.

Yes, we better get rid of all those Child of Prague statues quick:

Dumb.  You might as well get rid of your Bible, then, since it describes a solid firmament and water (H2O) above it.  Besides that, as has been repeatedly pointed out, FEs believe that the world is a globe, just that the globular firmament encircles the earth, and God's throne is above the firmament, which is precisely what's depicted by the cross on top, or Our Lady standing on top of it.




And ... as if Catholic art now has the force of dogma or even doctrine.  But, speaking of art ... behold the globe (with cross on top) ...

I spent a long time on other threads demonstrating Sungenis' bias and his bad attitude and bad will towards Flat Earthers.  It's palpable in his book from page one.  In addition, he was commissioned to write the book by the Kolbe Institute, so his conclusion was predetermined, and this shows as he applies confirmation bias to all the "evidence" he cites.  I've demonstrated this clearly by citing form his book.  I purchased the book because I had seen an interview in which he seemed to take a respectful tone toward Flat Eathers, and so I went in wanting to read the book with an open mind, thinking that I would find there the most solid arguments against Flat Earth.  Instead I found a polemical diatribe, ridicule, disparagement, and gross disrespect toward Flat Earthers.  And this latest video clip that was posted with him and Hugh Owen had the temerity to lump Flat Earthers in with those who hold Sacred Scripture to contain error and even to be mythical ... and that is a total outrage, and ... quite frankly ... slanderous.  You can "submit" whatever you want, but your gratuitous submission is gratuitously rejected.

And you know full well that rattling off posts like this and writing a book are completely different matters.  This post took me exactly two minutes to write (I type very quickly), but to apply the discipline necessary to write a properly researched and edited book are an entirely different matter.

And now for the rest of the story -- in your own words: "You [Ladislaus] can 'submit' whatever you want, but your [above] gratuitous submission is gratuitously rejected."

But, thanks for at least giving Sungenis credit for in your own words, "the discipline necessary to write a properly researched and edited book."  That part is not rejected. 

Sungenis, Cassini, and Always among others supposedly have a confirmation bias against FE, but of course none of the Flat Earthers on this forum are so unfortunate as to have a confirmation bias against GE.  Whatever!

 Every one of us was a glober at one point who taught FE is ridiculous, then we gave it a chance. Yeah, we can claim the high ground, Sungenis can't because he never considered the option he was wrong. 

Every one of us was a glober at one point who taught FE is ridiculous, then we gave it a chance. Yeah, we can claim the high ground, Sungenis can't because he never considered the option he was wrong.

Since you, yourself make the claim for everyone, would you mind standing behind your claim in noting for the record all the user names (every single one) of who you are referring to when you say, " Every one of us was a glober at one point who taught FE is ridiculous."?

Since you, yourself make the claim for everyone, would you mind standing behind your claim in noting for the record all the user names (every single one) of who you are referring to when you say, " Every one of us was a glober at one point who taught FE is ridiculous."?

I'm struggling a bit with the grammar of the quoted sentence, but if the intent is to say that all FEs were initially globers, that is a true statement (with the possibility of a few outlier exceptions here or there).  Several of the most prominent Flat Earthers initially set out with the intention of debunking flat earth ... but then upon examining the actual evidence became convinced of it.  None of us relishes the ridicule to which we are subjected.  We're constantly derided as nutjobs, crazies, whackos ... are laughed it, ridiculed, and mocked.  Probably 70% of the replies to FE posts consist of nothing more than

I'm not fully convinced but the knee jerk reaction alone is making me reconsider.

The Wikipedia disclaimer that should pop up whenever someone searches 'how fast does the earth move' - "No one has ever demonstrated that the earth is moving but many have tried and for centuries have performed varied and numerous tests.  The results have always come back 'negative'". lol

They say the Biblical flood covered the whole face of the Earth. Water has a characteristically free surface and takes the shape and curve of its containment or container. How did the flood waters not go over the sides in a flat Earth?

In a sphere, there's not the same problem. The sides are all tangents to a sphere, the old sphere of vanishing flatness, and they're everywhere. All the flood waters that cover the whole Earth bear down to the center equally and can go as high as the Heavens as the depths of it all below increase the same.