I don't think this is correct. Willingness to accept theories based on our limited understanding of the underlying facts and our observations has led to widespr

I don't think this is correct. Willingness to accept theories based on our limited understanding of the underlying facts and our observations has led to widespread, incorrect belief before. Descartes and Galileo accepted atomism because, based on their limited understanding of chemistry, it made sense. It wasn't until experiments like the cathode ray tube experiment and the gold foil experiment revealed more elementary particles and forced people to revise their beliefs. Philosophers of science like Karl Popper like to focus on falsifiability over induction precisely because we tend to become complacent in beliefs that don't tell the whole story and otherwise obscure more interesting, less intuitive underlying phenomena. I feel like, if we had it your way, we might still be atomists.