Then why all the attitude? I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the actual "article" in question. It didn't appear to me they were calling for the GTR to be abandonded but rather more openly questioned.
They made a point which I think is valid, that the "wide acceptance" of GTR as fact, rather than theory, could retard progress in that field of science. Just look at the knee jerk reaction the suggestion of GTR's fallability has solicited from you. Attacking anyone who points out the fallability of the GTR theory is no way to go about finding a new, and better, theory.
I'm not claiming GTR is wrong, I think it is the best explanation out there so far, but the reality remains that it has not been proven to be a fact (true). To ignore it's contradictions with known scientific laws is illogical.
Here you are saying that because many people believe it to be correct, that it is more likely to be correct. That is illogical.
If you want to argue that something is more likely to be correct because a great number of people believe it to be so, then the God analogy is very apropos.
That's nonsense. Only if you wanted to replace the current theory with your another would you have to both disprove the first and prove the second.
