Funtarctica.

There are far simpler explanations than flat earth that do not require mental gymnastics to attempt to explain vs. observable phenomena.

A water ball spinning at 2000 mph requires much more mental gymnastics than a flat Earth. Talk to some airline pilots and theyll set you straight. They're told on the first page of the pilots training manual that they will be flying over a flat plane.
Flat, calm water would be impossible on a spinning globe. The Earth's atmosphere would be sucked into the vacuum of space if Earth was a globe in space.

My father-in-law is a commercial airline pilot who definitely believes the earth is round.

Water can't fly off into space because Earth's gravity pulls it down in the same way the moon pulls it around to create tides. In addition, Earth has an atmosphere and a strong magnetic field, so the vacuum of space isn't sucking anything anywhere.

The oceans may appear flat, but you can easily notice the curve by watching ships sail into the distance. They disappear from the bottom up because they sail past the 'hump' from your line of sight. Same thing is visible watching cars drive away on the salt flats.

Put a single drop of water on a flat surface and take a look at the top of it. Water can definitely curve.

Think about a flat earth, the distance that pilots or sea captains would need to cover in order to navigate below the equator would be noticeably longer than above the equator—how would they not ALL have gotten suspicious?

If gravity was strong enough to keep the tremendous weight of the oceans glued to the Earth then how do birds fly? How do small children stand up against the strength of gravity? Or anybody, for that matter. We'd all be flat on our backs struggling against it. And how does a magnetic field keep the atmosphere from being sucked into the powerful vacuum of space? A vacuum can suck a boiled egg into a small bottle.
How does water stay calm on the surface of bodies of water on a ball spinning at 1000 mph? Try spinning a basketball and pour water on it. Even if the water didn't fly off, would it lay there placidly?
When you see a boat disappear over the horizon it's because it's reached the vanishing point of your vision. Videos taken by a Nikon camera with the highest zoom distance available. It shows the boat coming back into its viewfinder after it's no longer visible without zoom. So, no, the boat didn't go below the horizon. You can see Chicago across Lake Michigan 75 miles away. Ho

If you drink a beverage on a plane (without turbulence), the liquid sits placidly in the cup even though you are moving hundreds of miles per hour. In the same way, since the earth rotates smoothly, everything on its surface keeps pace calmly because of inertia. The water would only slosh around if there were sudden acceleration or deceleration.

Birds fly because they have gigantic muscles and hollow bones to give them the lift they need, but in truth, gravity is a weak force only noticeable when objects get massive. We stand because we have strong muscles and bones.

I don’t get the impression you are interested in considering round earth at this point, so I’ll leave you alone. Not trying to provoke.

You're comparing two different types of motion. Think of what happens when you carry a cup of water across a room compared to spinning the cup in a rapid circle. Try it now. The spinning cup throws out water. It's called centrifugal force. That's what i meant by globe earth not following the laws of physics, therefore a lie. Your research should start with learning the laws of physics and counting how many the globe breaks.

If you are genuinely interested in challenging what you’ve read on flat earth, you may find this compelling:

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/07/flat-earth-follies-but-you-would-fly.html?m=1

That said, my biggest objection to flat earth theories is really this: why? Who benefits from this enormous conspiracy? There are lots of simpler explanations that could explain why we can’t visit the south pole, so I have been unable to come up with a motive that would make sense. (This is a real question, not an attack.)

The lies we've been told about Earth and our history are numerous. The ones behind it consists of many different groups of people and organizations, including the Masonites, the 12 evil families, Jesuits, and are mainly driven by the Khazarian mafia. Their reasons are to demoralize mankind and remove God from our lives. Flat Earth is described in the Bible and the very nature of it is proof of a creator and higher power that makes us stronger and healthier through natural means. But those too have been hidden. There's a lot of information available about the past which explains the mud flood, ancient technology that was destroyed and so on.
A big bang resulting in planets removes God from our creation and leaves us alone in the void of space, a result of pure chance from evolution. I doubted flat Earth all my life, but like everyone else who believes it i had to convince myself through research. I went from 10% sure of it to 100% over a years time. It's now obvious to me.

A big bang doesn’t eliminate God because it doesn’t explain the origin of what went “bang.” It explains how things started behaving after they were created, but it still requires a miracle to go from nothing to something.

The “where did it come from” paradox remains for both theories, so deceiving people as to the shape of the earth wouldn’t defeat a belief in God.

So this isn’t a strong motive, IMO.