As far a Science is concern, it can only claim “scientific realness” never absolute realness, i.e.
“Whatever is real in relation to Science must be qualified to its inherent Scientific Framework and System (Scientific Methods, principles, peer pressure, etc.)”
Note there is no absolute realness for Science because Science made provision for a certain degree of uncertainty and falsifiability
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
that its theories can be changed if new justifiable evidences are brought forth and this allowance for change has been going on since Science emerged within human cognition.
Because Science is open for changes, its established scientific theories will never ever be real in the absolute sense but merely relative real subject to the Scientific Framework and System and awaiting changes to the theory or its termination.
So if a change to a scientific theory is necessary or be discarded it can only be done subject to the requirements of Scientific Framework and System (Scientific Methods, principles, peer pressure, etc.) and nothing else.
Scientific facts can only be ‘scientific facts’ and not general facts.
the fact is that Science cannot function at all unless it accepts that some things are in FACT real.
At most Science merely ASSUME general ‘realism’. An assumption is never a fact. Get it?
Scientists don’t give a f… to your claim they cannot function unless some things are FACT in accordance to your views. What is their concern is they must comply with the basic and relevant conditions of what is within the Scientific Framework and System as agreed with their peers.
How else could an experiment be conducted and measured?
Why not???
As I had stated as long as experiments and measurements are made within the requirements of the Scientific Framework and System [agreed by their peers], then they are scientifically valid. What is so complicated about this. If there is a non-compliance, it will be rejected in a peer review.
Don’t bring in ‘Solipsism’ which is an idea from the philosophically immatured.
iep.utm.edu/solipsis/#H7
If insisted regardless, Solipsism is an incoherent and stupid idea.