First, "epistemological taste" is an oxymoron. Second, believing something with overwhelming evidence is not 'rubber stamping mere authority'. Third, if someo

First, "epistemological taste" is an oxymoron. Second, believing something with overwhelming evidence is not 'rubber stamping mere authority'. Third, if someone wanted to not 'rubber stamp authority' why would they start with the earth being round? That's almost like not believing in gravity. There are so many fights to pick where conventional wisdom might be wrong or actual authorities could be lying or omitting the truth, why pick something with no evidence?