Do you think that I am asking for a physical model like a diorama?

Lol. There is a lot of equivocation fallacy (often unintentional) surrounding the use of the word “model”. Most people have no idea what a scientific model is, how it is made, or why. For instance, you are under the (common/popularized) misapprehension that they are used, or can be used, to prove things about reality (either inside of science or outside of it).

None of that seems to exist for a flat earth

In the scientific sense/use of the word “model”, no. There are many maps, conceptions, physical “dioramas” etc. available, however - but that is NOT the same thing, as you correctly point out.

What you are missing is that having or not having a model is meaningless. The earth remains the shape it is regardless of what our contrived models depict. Did you understand the point i was making about the geocentric model?

Just vague claims and 5-hour long videos with more vague claims.

There is more than that (what you describe above, which i generally consider the flat earth psyop) but the heavily advertised (i.e. funded) flat earth psyop obfuscates it. That is one of its major purposes, ostensibly.

Earnest researchers, what i call flat earth researchers, do exist - and like most researchers - often do not make any videos. In any case, i loathe the 5 hour infotainment junk too.