There's a lot that is compelling about geocentrism, I agree, but there's enough that I feel is more beautifully explained in a flat earth system that I ultimately keep going back to that.
Seriously? Like what? RE geocentrism (REG, for short) explains basic observations like sunrise/set, moonrise/set, solar and lunar eclipses, the seasons and even planetary motion far easier and more elegantly that FET ever could. REG can even explain the sinking ship effect without resorting to unproven physics like bendy light.
Please, name one thing that FET explains better than REG.
FET explains the sinking ship with the proven physics of looking out your window. I don't see parallel lines extending infinitely into the vanishing point, never touching, as the theories of geometry suggest, and upon which physical theories are based. No one has seen that. What is seen is that things disappear at a vanishing point, and that two parallel lines will touch. The vanishing point can be seen in railroad perspective photos.
Furthermore, sinking ship effect has been reversed, by looking at the ship through a telescope, restoring the hull to view and proving that the ship was not really hiding behind a 'hill of water'. These observations are unexplained in RET.
It cannot be assumed that the imaginary world of geometry is valid if its predictions have not been observed in reality.