settled science

In conventional RE (and the rest of science with which it is interwoven), science can be divided into two categories.

Settled science is things like F=MA, acid + base -> water, a salt, and heat, the periodic table, etc etc etc. Although one can go into solipsism and argue not much can be known, most scientists, engineers, students, and others live their lives as though these things were 100% true. Millions of people for hundreds of years have treated Newton as true, and they have done amazing science and engineering using this science. This stuff is in textbooks and taught everywhere, pretty much 100% consistent. Engineers confirm it by making gadgets, students confirm it with experiments.

Then there is thew controversial edge of science, things like quantum, string theory, big bang. Scientists argue and disagree, sometimes much like FES, usually more restrained and careful.

Clearly, FE science has a controversial edge to its science and is equivalent to RE science in that way.

Does FE have any equivalent to RE settled science? What things about FE have been used, tested, and found by all FEs to be consistent with all that is known about FE?

What things about FE have been used, tested, and found by all FEs ...

Since FEs have no unified position other than "the earth is flat" you will be hard pressed to find any non-RE hypothesis agreed upon by all FEs.

It's questionable to call it "science". It's more like the science they had in the days of the ancient Greeks.

Truth: The Earth is flat
Philosopher: But how do we know?

Look out your window

There was no scientific method, there were established truths and an intuitive answer to support those truths.

Here's my list for the flat-earth truths

• The sun is above us. We know this because our shadows are on the ground (they often argue that shadows on the underside of clouds are impossible and photoshopped)
• The sun is the reason for daylight. Sounds obvious but with weird things like 24 hour daylight in Antarctica, there's no support for it being lit up by something other than the sun.
• The sun and moon cycles follow a pattern. Despite the RE's claim to predict solar/lunar eclipses with a model, FErs claim tables like the ones that were used before models are just as good at predictions. Neither side disputes the underlying pattern
• A north pole exists. Meaning that there is no dispute of compasses and also that the earth has some kind of 'center'

That's all I got for now.

Flatorange, your entire list is things that are pretty much describing RE. You are saying that the only things FEs agree on is what FE has in common with RE.

Also, FEs may be able to cite "cycles" as a way to predict eclipses, but REs can explain what causes those cycles.

Flatorange, your entire list is things that are pretty much describing RE. You are saying that the only things FEs agree on is what FE has in common with RE.

Also, FEs may be able to cite "cycles" as a way to predict eclipses, but REs can explain what causes those cycles.

No. The FE beliefs are like a child's understanding of technology. All they know is the apps show up on the device, they can't tell you how.

A comparison to RE beliefs:

• The sun is above us. The sun is not "above" us. RErs know this because we have a bigger picture of the way it works than someone that can only comprehend what's visible to the horizon
• The sun is the reason for daylight.This one sounds like RErs and FErs are on the same page. But what is the reason for moonlight? In RET it is again, the sun. FErs have no settled science on the matter. Have you read about moon shramp?
• The sun and moon cycles follow a pattern. Another childlike understanding. RErs put a formula to explain the patterns while FErs just think it's an unexplainable phenomenon.
• A north pole exists.Another half understanding. RErs know there's both a north and south pole. FErs do not agree on a south pole.

Science is never settled. It is "settled" science that is most in need of investigating. That is where the lies hide unchallenged.

Science is never settled. It is "settled" science that is most in need of investigating. That is where the lies hide unchallenged.

If the lies are hidden and unchallenged how do we know there are lies there at all to be revealed and challenged?

Science is never settled. It is "settled" science that is most in need of investigating. That is where the lies hide unchallenged.

So you think we should call into question whether the sun is responsible for daylight?

Do trees really provide oxygen?

I'm certain it's settled science when they propose that splitting an atom will let off a ton of energy and then they make a bomb and it does just that. It's not a coincidence!

Science is never settled. It is "settled" science that is most in need of investigating. That is where the lies hide unchallenged.

Aside from the shape of the earth and things that relate to it, what are these lies you are reffering g to? Could you please expand. In addition could you provide thetruth for each of these proven lies.