There is a fundamental difference between scientists and flat-earther you forgot to mention:
Scientists know they are most likely wrong.

You're saying this is the case wrt to shape of the Earth?

A good scientist always considers the chance that they're wrong and whether they've perfectly proved something, indeed.

With shape of the earth, I see some of this from the skeptics but rarely from the round earth side.

Also there is also a fundamental difference between science and the flat-earth conspiracy theory:
Science works throughout our universe, wether it exists or not.

I don't get what that means. Or why you're comparing "flat earth" to "science".

Science is a process or a method. Using that method, we learn things, i.e. shape of the earth.

There's no dichotomy between the two. So I don't get this, or what you're trying to say here.

It almost seems like you're doing the thing where when you hear flat earth, you take it as a disagreement with science.

Flat earth only works if everything scientists and even our own eyes tell us is wrong.

Ya, it would mean scientists of today told us things that were wrong.

Your eyes see round? When I go outside and look around, I see flat.

And even in that case there could be infinite other possibilities than flat-earth.

I mentioned that and agree.

I would believe you if you brought a high-resolution picture.

Ya, that would be a form of you knowing it scientifically.

(If it's me photoshopping and drawing composite sketches of what I claim it looks like, then it's still a story.)

You can actually observe the distance to the sun, earth's rotation, earth's radius.
You can even observe the thousands of satellites(like ISS, Hubble, …) brought into orbit.

I think you're conflating people telling you things with observation in a lot of this.

Distance to the sun seems hard to measure accurately. Maybe you can, idk, but I don't see why that would show roundness.

Earth's rotation? What do you mean? You've actually observed it rotating?

Radius.. did you drill a hole and go to the center?

I don't see the satellites. 🙁 And that's another one that doesn't seem like it would show roundness any more than flatness.

Splain this please.

I never saw someone from NASA at my school :D
Also take a look at my first paragraph…

I never saw Charles Dickens at my school but I still read his book.

I already fielded your first paragraph. (And I don't remember much "it's a theory and the earth might not be round" in school.)

How will you differentiate VR and reality in that future?
At any point you could say: "No I don't believe!", but don't you think the assumption, that what we see is real and what many others also see is real, is the most important before you can do any form of science? Trusting your senses versus trusting thousands of other human, who have a far better understanding of science than you will ever have. The latter seems to me much more reasonable, as you know the first can be really easy fooled(called a dream).

This kind of highlights a lot of the error and assumption you made when you read my post.

Trusting what other people tell you might be a reasonable choice. Trusting what other people tell you is a fact of life and if we never did it we'd never get anywhere. But it's not science is the point.

A scientific event has not occurred when you decide it's probably right.

You can say they say so, and you believe them, and can't imagine the world working in a way where the prevailing thought about this would be wrong. But you can't say it's science unless you got there scientifically.

If you google the scientific method, it has to do with observation. So it isn't even about me thinking that using my senses is more reasonable, it's that just is what science is.

I'd agree that it feels far-fetched that there would be a hoax or a misinformation like this. But that's probably what it would always feel like from inside the mania.

For all you know I could just be a computer program. Why do you still believe I was a human, as you certainly do, otherwise you wouldn't waste your time with that post?

Believe it or not, I didn't write the post with you specifically in mind 😃

You could be a program. Obviously you aren't, but I wouldn't be able to say I know it scientifically if anyone challenged me. If you pop out and say hello then we'll know for sure.

A difference here is intuitively I can easily judge that you don't seem like a bot, whereas round earth I don't think your instinct means much of anything, and doesn't seem any more intuitive than flat earth would be if that's what I was taught from the beginning.

So you really have no mechanism to have a strong belief about shape of the earth, besides just not believing there could be a conspiracy like that or whatever.

Thanks for your reply. I don't get too many disagreement comments on here. Good to keep me on my toes.