> if requiring dark matter to explain galactic physics can be dispensed with by a distance correction
It's not that simple.
First, as privong pointed out, our estimates of distances to all galaxies would have to be wrong, and we have no evidence that that is the case.
Second, dark matter explains more than just galaxy rotation curves and other observed parameters. It also explains why our universe has structure at all (galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars) even though the data on Big Bang nucleosynthesis puts a strong limit on the amount of ordinary matter (baryons) in the universe, and it's far too small to account for the amount of structure (gravitational clumping) that we see.
It's not that simple.
First, as privong pointed out, our estimates of distances to all galaxies would have to be wrong, and we have no evidence that that is the case.
Second, dark matter explains more than just galaxy rotation curves and other observed parameters. It also explains why our universe has structure at all (galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars) even though the data on Big Bang nucleosynthesis puts a strong limit on the amount of ordinary matter (baryons) in the universe, and it's far too small to account for the amount of structure (gravitational clumping) that we see.