The article makes a bunch of assumptions but it does point, indirectly, at an interesting element. Ideology. Empirical science via the scientific method is one

The article makes a bunch of assumptions but it does point, indirectly, at an interesting element. Ideology. Empirical science via the scientific method is one thing. We can have a hypothesis, show through experimentation that the hypothesis is true or not in a repeatable manner, and come to understand what's going on. For things that happening in the past we cannot do that. We end up doing forensic science where we mix observation with assumptions born out of beliefs (ideology). Sometimes there is no observation but there is beliefs that a scientific idea is true. This second part is where we often end up with the divide. Yet, we don't talk enough about the assumptions and because they are often coupled to beliefs it's hard to let people with different beliefs run wild with their ideas. I wish there was more discussion on the assumptions.