To you perhaps, being biased. To me, the most simple explanation is the one coming from the source it self. That way, you don't have to hypothesize. If anything, it has strengthened his brand in my opinion. "Shaq picking on people with no sense on reality" - There's a fair amount of humor to that
The source made two contradictory statements. One of them was under durress. I find it hard to believe why anyone would think that a duressed statement is more credible over one which was not.
"One of them was made under duress. I have to believe that, otherwise it would appear we made a mistake" you mean.
I believe he gives less shits about public opinion on this matter than you obviously do.
But you know what Tom, I'm not here to change your view on the world. In that regard, you're way out of reach. We both are. I'm here to talk about the science of flat earth. To get explanations and facts that globe earth doesn't explain. Testable, verifiable theories and facts. I've seen exactly zero of those. For a community having such a hard time explaining even the most simple observations in a satisfactory manner that globe earth doesn't explain, one would think you have bigger problems than debating whether or not a basketball star played a trick on the public.
I guess the tiny, tiny battles are worth debating for you because you make so little impact. Social Media statistics are all cool and dandy if you're a TextWarrior, but you guys are making no impact whatsoever, simply because your explanations reek of unicorns.
Shaq obviously knew that.