We (FE'rs) have already done much to disprove RE (a simple search will prove that).
Not really.
Clearly you didn't search...
We however do not need to try to disprove our own theories, FE'rs do a great job at that.
What?
I don't need to try in vain to disprove FE, the RE'rs already have done that and so far failed.
This is all besides the point since the burden of proof lies on the RE'rs shoulders.
Actually, it doesn't.
To make a theory scientifically valid it is the burden of the scientific community as a whole to attempt to disprove it. The same goes for RET.
There is no burden of proof. There is a universal burden of disproof.
Yes, you must prove that x doesn't work in science. We have already tried and failed to disprove FE as a "community".
Okay you need to work on remembering whether you're talking about FE'ers or Re'ers. You keep typing FE when it seems like you mean RE or vice versa and it muddies your entire point.
I really want to critically respond to your post. Really. But I can't if I can't work out who you're talking about.
And you're also one of the debaters that greatly restricts themselves by considering RET as disproven form the get go.
Newsflash: All FET has done is prevent counter-theories. None of them have been shown to be superior to RET yet. ENaG was the closest attempt to do that, but Rowbotham's math was wrong.
I also have no idea what you're saying in relation to the "community" statement, mainly as a result of your aforementioned name trouble. So I'll respond to that if you can fix that statement to make it so I know what you're talking about.