You claim to have reproduced the Bishop experiment.
You don't explicitly say what your result was but a combination of your comments on McToon's video and the fact you are a flat earther led me to assume what your results were. They clearly led you to believe that the earth is flat, or are part of why you believe that. That is surely a fairly reasonable assumption. If you got any other result then why would you be a flat earther? If my assumption is incorrect then please correct me.
It's pretty reasonable to believe people should check things out for themselves.
Up to a point - and that point being people realising their limits, not everyone has the skill or understanding to check everything out for themselves. You only have to look at some of the FE idiots on YouTube to see that - I'll admit that the level of understanding of things on here is generally higher.
The thing I really take issue with is you saying:
those who prefer the scientific method over the Zetetic method expect us to write our experiments up in great detail to save them the hassle of having to actually experience the world for themselves
No!
The whole point of someone writing up the result of their experiments, and the method they used to obtain them, is
so other people can try it for themselves.
It allows other people to check your result and method. Maybe you made a mistake somewhere which led you to a wrong conclusion. How do I know unless I know what you did? How do you know if you made a mistake, come to think of it.
Sure, I can do my own tests but if I get different results, then what? Maybe I made a mistake but how will you (again, or I) know unless I've documented things so other people can check?
How do we move towards consensus unless we have both documented our methods and results so we can try and understand between us why we got different results?
That is how progress is made.
The attitude that comes across is
"I believe the earth to be flat because of tests I've done, but I'm not going to show you the results of those tests, you should do your own".
The first part of that, your conclusion, is so revolutionary that my immediate reaction is you must have made a mistake. It doesn't make me want to do my own tests, it makes me want to understand more about what you did that led you to that conclusion.
I believe it's counter-productive to want people to do their own tests if you're not going to document your own. Partly because your claim is so extraordinary - most people's reaction is going to be that you are mistaken. And partly for the reasons I've mentioned, progress is made by people cross-checking each other's work.
I have no criticism of you. I just disagree with the notion that you publishing your results will make others less likely to want to do their own tests, my view is it would make people more likely to.