You write, "An explanation can appear to be settled science by its widespread acceptance and repetition." We have so many examples of that, and I'm appreciating this additional discussion of how explanations are not the same as settled science, and that there are ways to understand how and why some things can become settled, or known, as opposed to postulates. Also your point that the absence of alternative explanations is not the same as empirical confirmation. This brings us back to the question about the possible limitations of our instruments of observation and measurement and the knowledge generated when multiple different kinds of measurements either confirm/shape a model or sometimes reveal something not previously comprehended.
You write, "An explanation can appear to be settled science by its widespread acceptance and repetition." We have so many examples of that, and I'm appreciating this additional discussion of how explanations are not the same as settled science, and that there are ways to understand how and why some things can become settled, or known, as opposed to postulates. Also your point that the absence of alternative explanations is not the same as empirical confirmation. This brings us back to the question about the possible limitations of our instruments of observation and measurement and the knowledge generated when multiple different kinds of measurements either confirm/shape a model or sometimes reveal something not previously comprehended.