Scientists often fail to adhere to the method, but that does not disprove the method. How does the scientific method mean those theories you list should be thrown out?

The laws of thermodynamics and gravity are consistently borne out in experimentation, and serve as accurate tools for predicting outcomes of experiments.

Theoretical physics is complicated, but reportedly gravitational lensing and other predicted effects have been observed. I am willing to suspend judgement due to my personal ignorance of the field, but on what basis do you outright declare it false?

The spheroid earth is demonstrable, and seismological data reportedly demonstrates a molten core.

The Michelson–Morley experiment was designed to demonstrate and measure the effects of aether wind theory, and failed to do so. If anything, it confirmed that the idea was a dead end, and its results were better explained by relativity.

What is the benefit to a massive scientific conspiracy? "Keeping us ignorant" of what? Revision in light of new information is hardly proof of conspiracy or erasing ancient truths.

The education system is a mess, but for unrelated reasons based on the Prussian model of education.

If A is in error, does it mean A is completely wrong, or an incomplete theory? If A is wrong, does it automatically prove alternative B?