Back on the topic of Occam's razor, the wiki article is misleading at best.
Occam's Razor asks us which explanation makes the least number of assumptions. The explanation which makes the least number of assumptions is the simplest explanation. Occam's Razor works in favor of the Flat Earth Theory.
Occam's Razor has more than one edge. One of the edges is that the explanation should be as simple as possible.
The other edge is that THE EXPLANATION HAS TO BE SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN THE OBSERVATIONS.
Because flat earth theory cannot explain sufficiently a very large number of observed phenomena, it is not sufficient.
Once flat earth theory attempts to explain planetary motion, eclipses, etc, then it starts making MORE assumptions than round earth theory.
Here are some assumptions of flat earth theory that not necessary in round earth theory:
- Nonstop flights between Sydney and Johannesburg don't exist. Or, jet airplanes can fly at any arbitrary speed and pilots choose speeds to make round earth routes appear true, despite the huge variance in fuel costs this would provide.
- NASA is all a consipiracy. Oh, I guess ESA and the Russians also must be part of it. Oh, whoops, private businesses are also launching rockets? Let's assume they are making it up as well.
- Perspective does magic things, geometry is wrong, etc.
Here are some things that I've not seen ANY FLAT EARTH EXPLANATION for:
- Two high tides per day, timed to match the moon
- Gravity not being uniform throughout the earth, but depending on latitude
- The sun not setting in the right place in the southern hemisphere
- 24 hour sunlight on both poles
- The night sky (south celestial pole(s) and intersections of their systems)
- The sun moving at a constant 15 degrees per hour
Occam's razor would admit the simplest explanation for all these phenomena, but no such explanation from the flat earth side is available, so Occam's razor indicates it is a failed theory.