imo this is very telling of the internet. the nature of how it shapes communication. what gets popular and what gets copied.
another case is, maybe it has always been like this, and wherever and whenever there are humans a certain percentage of them are going to think there are crazy conspiracies. there will always be that media market. it could be that this is really the case and the internet just makes it easier for crazy people to find each other/connect/communicate/collaborate.
still, a flat earth has its appeal. for one, there are many classical models to draw from, and you could easily go down a rabbit hole Wikipedia searching historical examples. personally i think Stanley Kubrick or an experimental film artist in the 60s could have easily replicated fabricated those images themselves. but i still believe they went to the moon. i read "Return to Earth" and "Invasion of the Moon" and the photography debunkers are out of their minds. think about it. it doesn't seem that far-fetched. we can do nuclear weapons, we can go to the moon.
one of the flat earth arguments is that they even admitted to using computers to fill in missing gaps. which is, like, duh, they are using computers to fly these rockets into space in the first place. some of these images have to be composited from multiple shots, since the camera is on a satellite that is spinning around a sphere, they may use shots from multiple passes or yes even generating computer imagery at times. this tends to be a good thing though, as computer generated imagery still references geological/topographical data.