Author seems to be throwing a polite and courteous tantrum lacking serious intellectual rigor. Kuhn and Poppler left lasting marks because they were, in the aut

Author seems to be throwing a polite and courteous tantrum lacking serious intellectual rigor. Kuhn and Poppler left lasting marks because they were, in the author's apparent intended sense of the word, expressing facts. There are 10,000 things wrong with this whole approach. The point, I assume, is that we do have some vitally important things that need doing sometimes, and wasting enormous finite resources trying to achieve even consensus, nevermind unanimity, has been rendered impossible or senseless or horrifically dangerous. Yep. That's a real problem (one might call it a fact). This avenue is a dead end, though.