> In phsyics, there are two well-established paradigms (relativity and quantum mechanics), which establish what counts as ordinary, and what counts as extraordi

> In phsyics, there are two well-established paradigms (relativity and quantum mechanics), which establish what counts as ordinary, and what counts as extraordinary. Actually, I would say that these well-established paradigms establish what counts as extraordinary. In other words, relativity and QM are examples of extraordinary claims that we believe because we have extraordinary evidence for them. Both of these theories say all kinds of extraordinary things, and most people who first encounter the theories start out thinking they can't possibly be true. We believe them not because they are just ordinary, but because we have taken the time and effort to accumulate extraordinary evidence for them. In that light, the replication crisis in other areas of science is easily explained: they allow extraordinary claims to be published without the extraordinary evidence that those claims would require. So of course many of those claims turn out to be wrong.