[A]ll they really have is enough data to show the ball earth as wrong,

How do you know this? How have you validated and verified these claims?

All the photos of earth are faked, or photoshop.

All is quite the assertion. Composites aren't fake per se. False color images are edited, but not pure imagination. How do you know?

Every test to measure the curvature of the earth has failed.

That's a pretty emphatic statement. Can you support it? Eratosthenes reportedly disproved your assertion thousands of years ago with incredibly rudimentary means.

The first guy, took data from the govern-cement published books on how far away a light house could be seen. And computed that some of the number put the light houses over the edge of the horizon. The "scientists" got a famous mathematician to prove him wrong. All he said was, his mathematics is correct.

That's a massive [citation needed], and one anyone should be able to test even today with active lighthouses.

One of my better theories is that the earth is a flat 3D space (all the axis at right angles) and this space is folded into higher dimensions. So, we literally can't tell from the inside. Light travels parallel to the earth's surface, because to the light, that is flat / straight.

That looks a lot like word salad, and not a coherent hypothesis, at least to me.

Finally, images without source links don't help much, and it's painfully obvious that pictures of a sphere taken at different distances result in different percentages and degrees of distortion even without any lens effects or computerized manipulation involved.

None of this proves the Earth is a spheroid, of course, but at some point I inevitably grow weary of assertions presented without evidence, or with only one possible interpretation presented as the only interpretation. Are you as skeptical of these NASA debunkers as you are of NASA itself?