I claim that he saw the curvature. I can point to various other citations (and other pilots) if you want me to prove that Google still works for me.
I claim that he would not admit as you claim that he could not see what he did see. Your outlandish claim is 1) unsupported and 2) invalidated by the citation. You claim that he admitted that he could not see the curvature during flight, but have produced no evidence.
I never claimed that. Don't put words in my mouth. I am simply trying to point out that an article that says "he saw the curvature of the Earth" is not evidence of anything. The pilot didn't even say those words, so how the hell are you deeming this as proof that he saw the curvature of the Earth? I can't believe that I have to explain this to you again but, "he/I/they/it saw the curvature of the Earth" is a common rhetorical statement referencing flight. It comes from round Earth ideology, yes, but it is still not grounded in reality. It's like someone saying "looks like the cat got your tongue". It doesn't literally mean that a cat has latched on to your tongue.
Are you telling me that if I created my own article and said "Earth is flat", that would be irrefutable proof? Because by your logic, it seems like it would.