There is no point in this argument, I can sum up in two short sentences:
============================================================================
RE: But what about satellites, hams, gps, directv, multiple space agencies, etc etc etc?
FE: Fakes, conspiracy, and super secret advanced (alien) tech can explain everything.
============================================================================
And they can. FEs are absolutely right. If you start with the premise that anything might be true, any tech you need exists, and giant secret conspiracies are acceptable explanations, then you can prove anything might be true. RE can never win this argument. FE can't be disproved.
RE can't be disproved either. We are stuck permanently with knowing that anything might be true. This is the FES situation. Anything could be true, any inconsistency can be explained by conspiracy, incompetence, and alien tech. This is theoretically true in the abstract case. Epistemology is highly arguable. Yet we all have this sense that we can and must find truth about things like where the city we want to travel to actually is.
That would be at least crazy making and at worst would cause major, very real problems if people used FEpistemology in daily life. Luckily, there is another form of truth, operational truth. This is the "truth" engineers make when they design nav equipment. The globe, google, gps, nav equipment, geodetic survey, car odometers, time/speed/distance of airline routes, sextant/celestial nav, they all match up. And FEs and REs all use them daily.
FEs may bla bla bla about FE, but when they travel in an airliner or use gps or many things, they are using the operational truth of RE. If FE wants any operational truth, they must do things like produce nav equipment or maps that use FE. Waiting. Until then, the best FE can do is "Well, it could be!"