In this thread, we observe that it's perfectly fine for REers to not have all the answers, but still expected (by REers, of course) that FEers have a valid answer for every little aspect of the theory, or else we are "wasting time", and it's a severe blow against our theory.
Ladies and gentlemen, yet more evidence of the general hypocrisy of the RE mindset. Thanks for the demonstration, fellas!
I see your point, but I don't entirely agree. For the most part, the admittance to the fact that we don't know everything there is to know and probably never will (this goes for both RE'ers and FE'ers), RE'ers in here generally rely on evidence tested again and again through decades, even centuries, and are continuously being confirmed. Furthermore, the mindset of what you define as RE'ers is in general, that if there's something we don't know, we investigate.
FE'ers rely heavily on Rowbotham, and I'll even leave some credit for sandokhan here: He's 100% right when he states that the classic FE theory, including the one in the wiki, is shot down again and again even by RE'ers with a high-school level of RE understanding. His AFET seeks to address most of the issues. The problem is that sandokhan, and ONLY sandokhan, measure the success of his AFET in how many debates he has "won" on this site. The real issue is that it relies heavily on science that has been disproved ages ago. That his AFET is in line with the thought lines of the likes of Tesla, even brilliant men can be wrong, and aether physics as it is used in sandokhans AFET has no evidence to back it up. Sandokhans AFET itself only has the "numerous of victorious debates" in this very forum to brush off it's shoulders.
So, even if we agree that we're being stubborn on both sides, and even if we pretend that there's grounds for an actual debate about the shape of the Earth, the main difference is that RE'ers rely on evidence. FE'ers, as Tom Bishop has mentioned plenty of times, relies on Rowbotham, mixed with out-of-context citation of modern scientists and asserting that every single photo from space is fake. It doesnt help when people like Tom Bishop defends zetetic science by saying that it's based on reproducible tests and observational confirmation, only including what's directly in front of you, ignoring what we know this day.
Zetetic science in this regard reminds me a bit of the dress-gate: Is the dress gold and white, or blue and black? Nearly half the people saw a white and gold dress, so that's evidence that it is white and gold, according to Tom Bishop. The dress was indeed blue and black.
Source