I need to get rid of the menu icons and only use text, because of interactions of the icons with some visual problem accommodation. I can't find anywhere to choose which I want on my display.

I need to get rid of the menu icons and only use text, because of interactions of the icons with some visual problem accommodation. I can't find anywhere to choose which I want on my display.

I appreciate the ability to view global data - especially circulation - on a non-Mercator projection, but as a long-time teacher of cartography I think that the use of the term "3D" is highly misleading - at least when I clicked on a "3D" button I was not expecting simply the use of a different projection (all projections viewable on a flat screen or on paper are inherently 2D). Within cartography, what you have is really "2.5D". This means that each location has a 2-diensional location marker, with an additional attribute being "draped" over that location. A truly 3D representation would use each point in the dataset being represented by a 3 dimensional location coordinate (for example, northing, easting and elevation). Most 3D data would then have the attribute draped over that 3-dimensional locational grid.
A projection is a mathematically precise way of locating the locational grid on the surface that you find most useful: it introduces some kind of distortion - there is no "perfect" projection. Since computer cartography, you can choose from a huge variety of projections, adjusting the distortion to some very precise requirements, and you can introduce reprojection on the fly. This means that as one clicks and drags the centre of the representation, the distortion varies from one place to another.
I don't know the precise parameters of the projection you have chosen for your new projection; the choice of distortion seems to be such that the human eye will assume it is looking at the globe from space - this means you are compromising among all the distortions: an actual measurement of location towards the periphery of the map will be hard to do, but it will probably not matter too much since the viewer will choose to put their place of interest near the centre of the map where this effect is not required and you can extract accurate information quite easily (there is little distortion there).
I could go on forever about projections, and how to use distortion to best convey information. But my point is that they are all, as generally used and as you are using, inherently 2D + an attribute (or multiple attributes represented by different map symbols). Since 3D can be a reality (as in representing in a single diagram the attritbute - say temperature - at a range of elevations without changing anything - I think you may be shooting yourself and your subscribers in the foot as far as future improvements in information representation goes: if we already think we have true 3D (or 3.5D) then why work towards real 3.5D? BTW, there are lots of cartography/projection blogs out there for the true geeks and researchers!