> One can understand something and not believe it is true Of course. "Belief" is subjective. It requires no fact or reasoning, and is independent of "understa

> One can understand something and not believe it is true Of course. "Belief" is subjective. It requires no fact or reasoning, and is independent of "understanding", so can correlate with it or not. > I'm sure flat earthers understand the concept of a sphere or more specifically a oblate spheroid. Your example isn't quite what I was talking about. A rational person can understand and believe in a relationship between spinning and oblate spheres, without logically concluding that the Earth is a sphere, spinning or oblate. Relevant "understanding" questions would be, do they understand General Relativity? The Higgs field? The Coriolis Effect? Gravitational density maps? The topology of airport locations and travel times, the topology and latencies across the internet, land, sea and orbital, the ring of geocentric satellites? Etc. Understanding any of those things, means understanding: why large masses pull themselves into (spinning oblate) spheres, that Coriolis torque is a measurement of speeds varying across latitude, or that travel and communications map to a sphere, or that anyone can directly view an unbroken circle of satellites directly above the unbroken ring of the equator, etc. All without getting mired in someone's unilaterally subjective "beliefs".