a Message from an Ex Flat Earther

Yeah. I was a Flat Earther for about one year (2018-2019). During that period, I used to believe in the geocentric flat Earth model of the world. But how and why? And what changed my mind later "back" to the scientifically-accepted spherical Earth model?

This is a message for everyone who engages or is willing to engage in discussions about the world model (flat, spherical, etc). This could be applied to any other Science vs. non-Science argument in general.

First, many people do criticize flat-Earthers and the Flat Earth model in a unsophisticated and stupid way, exhibiting the notion of having the truth instead of seeking it. Another thing is that most of people don't understand the flat model as well as the spherical one. Both sides are committing a variety of logical fallacies, from straw men to appealing to authority, and these uneducated way of discussion and refutation had made it harder for me (and probably everyone who is interested in the real shape of Earth) to realize the truth.

Hence, I recommend people who are wishing to join these discussions, to study both models and understand why some people come to believe in a flat Earth and deny the scientific evidence. Flat Earthers are not stupid or anything, they just have another philosophical stance. Some flat Earthers are stupid, just like some spherical Earthers. The thing is that people are making very stupid arguments when they consider that 50% of people think the Earth is flat and 50% think it is spherical. 'Cause that's stupid!

The debate over the shape of Earth will never get to an end. Both models can explain a lot, the difference is not scientific, it is philosophical. So, "scientific" debates over Flat vs. Globe earth are literally nonsense, science itself have stated it a long time ago. However, another philosophical stance will discard the scientific consensus. Both parties are right. I didn't mean to be relativist here, but the truth is just a delusion. There is no truth. The world can be shaped in someway or another, philosophical debates are to be read by people, just to decide which side they should lean to.

Because people are not debating over "the shape of the earth", what they are actually debating over is "the shape of the universe/the world". Flat-earthers (and non-globe-earthers in general) do not accept the current science about the universe. Essentially, flat-earth and other models (except the globe one) do not fit in any of the scientific theories. Science is globe-earther, sorry.

That's why I come to call it a philosophical debate. In scientific debates, people use evidence (empricism) and logic (rationalism), under the shadow of naturalism (that's how science really works), to support their own arguments and refute other's ones. On the other hand, in philosophical debates, people use a very primitive form of logic, and do many manipulation of terminology and cultural science, to support and refute philosophical arguments. The flat earth won't fit in the spacetime of the universe presented by the most recent scientific theories. The flat earth is another different philosphical stance (called Zetetism) where people discard naturalism completely (because, who the hell created the flat world? where is that world laying on? why? how? etc.)

For me, I'm not 100% sure that science is right about the world model. I just don't any reason to deny it. People who deny science often do so because they believe in something more "truthy" (in their own views), like religion. Or they just want to be special by being the center of the world (that's why, if you don't believe we're special, you can quickly conclude that religion is created by mere humans.)