This sort of moralizing is counterproductive, wrong, and dripping with irony when you talk about shutting down discussion. "Idea is only a theory," when talkin

This sort of moralizing is counterproductive, wrong, and dripping with irony when you talk about shutting down discussion. "Idea is only a theory," when talking about science is almost always a misunderstanding of the word theory and a conflation with the words hypothesis or hunch or guess. Mars previously having a magnetic field isn't dogma. It's the best explanation we have for the evidence. It is knowledge. Dissent is more than welcome if it can offer new evidence, prove why the existing explanation is wrong, or better explain the existing evidence. Until then, it is much more correct to say "Mars had" than "Mars didn't have". "It seems" undersells it and is pointless hedging akin to saying "It seems species change over time in response to environmental pressures due to natural selection." > (again, imho, if so-and-so was so certain about thing x we now know is wrong, why should I believe anything they’ve said). Because you're not an irrational loon? Who do you know who has never been certain and wrong about anything? In the case of science, look at the evidence. No one is asking you to believe the boy who cried wolf when he tells you the sky is made of marshmallow.