The author doesn't really get epistemology, it isn't that philosophers are out there mocking geologists and think that such ice ages probably didn’t exist and a

The author doesn't really get epistemology, it isn't that philosophers are out there mocking geologists and think that such ice ages probably didn’t exist and are just “nice ideas”. We are trying to establish frameworks of justification with explicit and rigorous criteria that we can use to determine when something is knowledge, and so far the double negative (non-falsifiable) is the closest we can get to an affirmation of scientific fact. This isn't some whim of epistemologists, this is because the task is very hard and simple 'its the current year' rhetoric does not resolve the problems with knowledge justification.