[dennis_jeeves1]

Correct, I cannot verify if the earth is round, flat or trapezoid.

(I'll give some credence to astronauts, pilot, astronomers etc. who have relatively direct evidence that someone like me with a desk bound job)

[AkshatM]

The Greeks knew the Earth was round because they could look at ships appearing over the horizon and observe that the tops of their sails would appear first. Eratosthenes was further able to calculate the radius of the Earth to a decent first approximation simply by using the shadows cast by two sticks at reference locations. If they could do it, you can do it too[0].

The idea that you "cannot verify" is a very pedantic comment, and using flat Earth as a basis only makes it more comical. Of course you can't know anything "with absolute truth", but nobody cares about that. The relative distribution of evidence strongly disconfirms some hypotheses, there is already a culture of strong distrust and independent verification in the hard sciences (see the LK-99 saga), and you can rely on the long-term output of that process in the same way you can rely on your GPS to just work without needing to independently launch your own satellites. Needing to be your own scientist now is like needing to be your own farmer: completely unnecessary for most people.

[0] Yes, flat earthers claim these results are spurious because of optical illusions caused by hot air or the like. But the relative distribution of the evidence for _that_ hypothesis is pretty darn slim, which only furthers my point.

[dennis_jeeves1]

>Needing to be your own scientist now is like needing to be your own farmer: completely unnecessary for most people.

I wish I could tell that you were right. But you are wrong. This tell me more about how much you have spent time on a even a simple subject like food if you lived in USA. How can I even have a more nuanced conversation on a complicated subject?

[ethanbond]

Yet despite your inability to independently and directly verify it (which actually you could do), it’s foolish to look at all available evidence and come to the conclusion “we don’t know,” or “we shouldn’t make engineering or policy decisions on the basis of this hypothesis.”

[dennis_jeeves1]

>Yet despite your inability to independently and directly verify it (which actually you could do)

No you cannot, unless you are willing to spend a few years on it. I can tell right away that have not explored any subject in depth.

[wenebego]

You can, you just choose not to