While the FE idea is interesting in itself, after reading through the FE Wiki I couldn't help wondering why FE people also seem to support the idea of the Earth centred solar system, quoting distances for the Sun, Moon and stars which are way out from RET and even suggesting a transparent Moon. If the Earth was flat would it make any difference whether it was orbiting the Sun or not?
Why does it matter what the Moon looks like or whether it is transparent or not? Surely FE people have got a big enough challenge on their hands trying to convince us that the Earth is flat without concerning themselves with what the rest of the Universe looks like.
These are theoretical assumptions which are needed to explain observations which FE theory is forced to accept. Examples
1. FE theory accepts that there are different time zones and that noon occurs at different times. But it also claims that no people live underneath the earth. Hence the stars, sun and solar system must be rotating above the flat earth, hence the earth cannot be in 'orbit'. Nor for the same reason can the flat earth be rotating. For another thing, everyone would fall off. (There is another hypothesis called 'universal acceleration' according to which the earth is accelerating in a direction opposite to what we call 'down', which causes us to stick to the ground. On this theory I suppose the earth could be rotating as well, but theoretically difficult to model).
2. Transparent moon required to explain eclipses, I think.