Calling a flat earth or a geocentric universe "statistically correct" at past historical points is really inane, don't you think? In doing so, you abuse the notion of what statistics is supposed to represent, which is, generally, a statement of an estimate (and/or distribution), as well as the precision of that statement. Since "correct" is binary, it carries an implied precision of 100%, which renders the notion of "statistically correct" is pretty absurd.