Absolutely.  Simply mention 'flat earth' and the hysterics begin.  I like when you search 'flat earth' on gootube and the first thing that pops up is a wikipedia disclaimer - 'flat earth is a scientifically disproven conception...' Riiiiiight.  Then try and find a vid that simply presents the arguments in favor.  Then try and tell someone how bogus NASA is.  Man, this stuff never stops.

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.

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

A physical barrier but not an edge? A distinction without a difference? Is twilight not an edge or a limit in space? From where an astronomer can watch sunset, the Sun descends and loses altitude in the horizon. It keeps descending and losing altitude until it has passed a limit or side in that direction. All the horizons are composed of two intersecting planes, having the up and down as equally disposed as all the side ways. There's altitude, ascension, and azimuth in all the positions of the Sun, which combine to show that the Sun is going over some edge of the Earth or descending around another corner all the time.

All the hours are around the Earth at once and in opposition to their opposites all the time. It seems evident that that can ony work itself in balance in the larger sphericity of space.

The first reason, imho, there is necessity in the spherical Earth not the flat model, is that the relation to infinity exists and exists everywhere all the time. Space is somewhat captive or captured in this relationship and can't get out of it. So space expresses or expatiates like Pi, C/D = 3.141592  ... in the six cosmic directions. There's no way for Pi to get out of being Pi and the value of it, and the sphericity of the Earth follws in the nature of that, since geometry expresses the nature of mathematics.

unlike your pal Sungenis who was commissioned (aka paid) by Kolbe to undertake the mission to debunk Flat Earth.

unlike your pal Matthew who has the system rigged so his pal Ladislaus can get up votes, but not down votes.  Maybe you both learned something from the Democrats' ongoing election shenanigans.

There are numerous quotes in this regard, where it was decided up front that Flat Earth was causing problems for them.  I'd love to spend hours sifting through videos from Dr. Sungenis to find the quotes again, but it would hardly be worth my time.

As for being dishonest, yet another dunderhead who can't understand the distinction between conscious mendacity and intellectual dishonesty caused by a pre-determined conclusion and confirmation bias (i.e. lack of objectivity and approaching the subject with an open mind).  I've repeatedly stated that Dr. Sungenis shows no indication of the former, but the latter can be demonstrated from his writing.

With regard to your assertion that the voting system has been rigged for me, it has nothing to do with me personally, but is just the result of an algorithm Matthew implemented to prevent various abuses combined with my volume of posts over the past dozen years or so.  I've even asked Matthew to make a Ladislaus exception so that snowflakes like yourself can downthumb away ... because I could hardly care less.  Those numbers that you see between up- and down- are fairly representative of the ratios that were even before this change of algorithm, except that some downvotes have disappeared as users have gotten banned for one reason or another.  There was a flaw in the previous algorithm where the only restriction was that you could only be responsible for 1/5th of a user's total downvotes.  Well, for someone like myself, who have over 4,000 downvotes, a user with a vendetta could sign up for an account an hit me up with 800 downvotes, and in fact things like that were happening.  But if you want to suggest some other algorithm that doesn't require a Ph.D. in math, I'm sure that Matthew's open to it.  If I could, I'd downthumb myself by your request to demonstrate how little I care about it.

Dr S admitted in his own book of his bias against FE.  So he can't be viewed as an impartial observer.  So any claim of being unbiased is dishonest.