@ReluctantMathematician @QuestioningMind
Let us start with a stone, a piece of rock.
The stone is tangible, observable and so on. We could do a lot of scientific test in regards to the stone. The stone is objective, because when I say "There is a stone", it is the case, that it is an act of expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations; a case of of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers; and a case of having reality independent of the mind.
The stone is objective and we can use science on it.
Now ridiculous as the claim, that the earth is flat,
is ridiculous.
We do the same as with the stone. This time it is not objective and we can't apply science on it. Ridiculous as deserving or inviting derision or mockery. To claim something is ridiculous, is not science. It is a first person subjective act of expressing a feeling. Namely that it deserves derision or mockery.
So here it is: You 2 demand evidence of other humans, but you don't do it yourself. You are as subjective and not scientific as those claims, you ridicule.
If you want to do science, learn not to use feelings. That is not science. Further in the strict sense of true/with evidence, it is not the case that the claim, that the earth is flat,
is ridiculous. There is no evidence.