I don't know what it is that make people think of science in an over-confident binary (yes or no) manner. If you read the original article, you'd see that the

I don't know what it is that make people think of science in an over-confident binary (yes or no) manner. If you read the original article, you'd see that the idea of experiments about quantum supremacy is an important issue. The whole reason they want to conduct such experiments is to prove that quantum computing actually works empirically. The question is not whether "I think" quantum computers won't work. I don't "think" anything, I'm not an expert in the field and as such what I personally think is irrelevant. Scientifically, there aren't enough empirical experiments to conclusively prove whether they work. Whatever I "think" or you "think" are pure speculation. The chances of QC working and scalable to non-trivial number of qbits might be pretty good, but they haven't built a machine that can break RSA yet for example. And yes of course the theorists could be working on the "wrong" theory all the time. It happened with Newtonian physics. You can't build accurate GPS systems with Newtonian physics without taking into account relativity. Similarly, we already know QM does not take gravity into account. Is it possible that quantum-computers-as-we-know-it are not possible under a gravitational field? Unlikely(?), but it's possible. You can't just take your personal speculative belief as truth and call everyone else flat earthers.