I've finished reviewing your post and again, I thank you so very much for your exhaustive research! Again, I'm pinging PatrickHenry and Aric2000 because they were interested in your views and may be interested in these additional tidbits. Most of the differences between our views is related to the translation. It appears the translation you are using is one of the older ones:
Enoch Calendar Testifies of Christ, Part 1 One of the three copies was presented to the Oxford library. The first English translation was published in 1821 by Archbishop Richard Laurence, who had been a Professor of Hebrew at Oxford. Later translations included that of George Schodde in 1881, of R.H. Charles in 1913, and by E. Isaac in 1983.[7] The first three translations are now available on the internet. Quotations and links in this article are to the original Laurence translation, because it still appears to be the best overall translation.
The translation used in Charlesworth’s Pseudepigrapha Volume 1 is E. Isaac’s. This is from his introduction to the translation:
My primary base text (A) for this translation of Ethiopic Enoch is a fifteenth century Ethiopic manuscript found in a monastery in Kebran, in Lake Tana. I obtained a copy of this manuscript from a microfilm (A) now found in West Germany. Though I have chosen to use as my base text a single manuscript, instead of an existing eclectic text or one created temporarily as the real basis of my translation, I have continually compared A with another Ethiopic manuscript of the late eighteenth century (B) found in the Garrett collection of Princeton University as well as with the text of R. H. Charles (C), and, in a few cases, followed them instead of A where the latter is clearly wrong or unintelligible. I have been as faithful as possible to A, following it when B and C and all other known witnesses, attested by the variations of other manuscripts given in the apparatus of Charles (EC) disagree with it, except in clear cases where A obviously transmits grammatical, syntactical, or scribal errors. Only the most significant or relevant variations of other witnesses are shown in my notations. If B or C are clearly erroneous (scribal, typographic, grammatical) I do not always give them as variations. Wherever possible or necessary I have also been able to compare A with the texts of the existing Greek fragments as given in the Charles edition of 1 Enoch: Ga (the fragments from Akhmim – Ga1 and Ga2 the duplicate passages of the same if they exist), G5 (the fragments preserved by Syncellus), and Gp (the Greek papyrus as edited by Bonner). The Qumran Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch have been consulted but have not influenced the following translation… The domed flat earth picture you included was from this article:
The Flat-Earth Bible When I first became interested in the flat-earthers in the early 1970s, I was surprised to learn that flat-earthism in the English-speaking world is and always has been entirely based upon the Bible. I have since assembled and read an extensive collection of flat-earth literature. The Biblical arguments for flat-earthism that follow come mainly from my reading of flat-earth literature, augmented by my own reading of the Bible.
Except among Biblical inerrantists, it is generally agreed that the Bible describes an immovable earth….
The article claims that the Bible supports the flat earth view and then uses 1 Enoch to further argue his theory. From Genesis to Enoch, the author argues for his interpretation of the passages. Personally, I reject his interpretations both of the Bible and of Enoch. He fails to recognize the important difference between statement, parable and metaphor in revelations. Like the book of Revelation, Enoch must be read with considerable discernment. 1 Enoch begins
The blessing of Enoch: with which he blessed the elect and the righteous who would be present on the day of tribulation at (the time of) the removal of the ungodly ones. And Enoch, the blessed and righteous man of the Lord, took up (his parable) [the extant Gk. text reads analabon ten parabolen, “he took up his parable” So also 4Qena 1:1 (Milik, the Books of Enoch, p 182.)] while his eyes were open and he saw, and said, “(This is) a holy vision from the heavens which the angels showed me: and I heard from them everything and I understood. I look not for this generation but for the distant one that is coming. I speak about the elect ones and concerning them.”
Enoch, Revelation, Daniel, etc. – are all prophetic passages and thus intermingle metaphors and parables with benchmark statements. And of course different people will have their own interpretations. Personally, I see the strangely accurate statements in the book of astronomy much like the statement in Revelation that the bodies of the two witnesses will be seen by the people of different tongues and nations for 3.5 days. That was taken as a metaphor until the recent advances in satellite telecommunications.