Why are some people always reluctant to believe that mainstream scientific theories are reliable?

Some theories are indeed not credible, because they appear for the purpose of an individual or group, and are not summarized and used by others after they have been put into practice.

Some theories seem to be untrustworthy, but in fact, when these theories are summarized, they have not experienced enough practice and have not encountered the vast majority of situations, so the conclusions drawn from the summary will have limitations, and when they encounter situations that they have not experienced, these conclusions often appear to be worthless. In fact, this part of the theory is valuable and credible, but it is given a scope, and these theories are credible in the face of the problems that have been experienced.

Theory must be combined with practice, and there must be the ability to apply and innovative thinking, so that it can be of practical significance. Scientific theories are truths that have been tested in practice, and they are certainly credible.

If you feel that many theories are not credible, it means that you have not really studied the theory thoroughly, and everything that can be taught into a theory is a conclusion reached through practice and repeated summarization, and you are too far from the theory, so you feel that the theory is not credible.

Theories are also conditional and limited, and they are constantly changing with the deepening of scientific research, so your feeling is rational, and this kind of thinking is also very good, you should question the theory, but you can't drill the horns, you still have to learn it after questioning, and then use it well.

Theoretical things are two-sided, as long as you are cautious to verify, if you can prove that the theory is wrong, you will also bring cognitive progress to everyone, if you just doubt and do not prudently verify, then the doubt itself is worth doubting.

Because many theories are just theories, and theories themselves are not truths, only when they are practiced and certified in reality can they become truths and be credible!

The theory is one-sided, not implausible, but incomplete.

Now scientists have confirmed that the earth is round, but in the world, there are still a large number of people who do not believe that the earth is round, but say that the earth is square, and they have also collected some evidence.

The earth is round, this scientific truth has been proven for countless years, but unfortunately there are still people who do not want to believe it. Among them is the famous NBA star Irving, who has repeatedly expressed in public that he does not believe that the earth is round, and the earth still has many loyal fans.

The first is: the speed of light is the limit of speed, is the fastest speed in the universe, I believe many people know this is a fact, the speed of light is the speed of light waves or electromagnetic waves in the vacuum or medium propagation, the speed of light is the maximum speed of the movement of objects in nature, when the speed of the object is close to the speed of light, its dynamic mass will be infinite, so there can be no mass greater than 0, but the speed of light is the speed of the object, and the object with a mass of 0 is found only light waves.

The second is: the ancestors of humans were Australopithecus.

3.The soul doesn't really exist.

4.Free will does not exist.

What are some scientific theories that have been proven plausible but are ridiculous?

Why are so many people reluctant to believe in science? First of all, science is for questioning, and this is the driving force behind the continuous development of science. But it is more important not to use "questioning" as a cover to indiscriminately question scientific theories.

There are two important prerequisites, one is that you need to know the mainstream scientific theories very well, and only then can you be qualified to question them. It's not just about questioning, it's about having relevant evidence, that is, the reason for questioning!

This may be a change in the environment, in fact, the environment has changed people rather than people who don't want to believe in science, if someone has told you since you were a child that science is not correct, you have been growing up with this kind of words, and you will believe it compared to others who have not been exposed to it. It's like what others say about science, isn't it the biggest superstition?

Just like Copernicus's heliocentrism, many people don't believe it, this is a good example, now we already know the mysteries of astronomy, and we also know that the earth revolves around the sun, and the people in ancient times they didn't know, they thought that the earth was the center from childhood to adulthood in the environment at that time, and suddenly this heliocentric said that they didn't believe it, their three views had been formed, so they naturally didn't believe it, and they couldn't bear the fact that their worldview was destroyed. That's why they're against it. Of course, there are some smart people who accept this fact, so why don't many people believe in science?

Environmental problems are one thing, many people grow up in their own circles, and their worldview is stereotyped, and they have not been exposed to the outside world, so they can't believe in science, and this is the first type of people in the above example. And there is another type of people in this circle, they also grew up in this circle, but they accept science, but they behave as if they are the first type of people, they are still the same as the first type of people in the conversation, they are the second type of people in the above example, smart people, they know science and believe in science, but they are limited by the circle and cannot reflect it, so they are smart and not smart, this is the second type of people.

"Mainstream science" is not a good word in many cases. The mainstream science community may be seen by a science journalist as a temple that can intimidate all beings, but for young people who dare to think and do things, if you tell him what mainstream science thinks, his first reaction is how to prove it wrong.

In a sense, "mainstream science" is synonymous with self-containment and even oppression of power. The second reason why many people don't believe in science is the influence of society. People's knowledge has a small reach and poor ability to collect information, so they believe a lot of unscientific things under the influence of **, which is the second reason, information deception, their own information deceives themselves.

Because of ignorance, ignorant people only believe in themselves, and as they know more things, people feel more and more insignificant and set a qualified position for themselves.

It is because the theory of science has been actually detected and proved by facts, so many people believe it.

Because these people are very superstitious and think that some things can be explained by superstition, they don't believe in science.

In fact, it is caused by our vision, in short, it is déjà vu, but things or scenes that have never been experienced seem to be a sense of déjà vu that has been experienced at some point, according to some information I have learned on the Internet, there are probably two kinds of people who do not believe in mainstream scientific theories, and the level of these two kinds of people is exactly two extremes, one is the people who have discovered the shortcomings of mainstream scientific theories and proposed better theories, these people are real masters of science.

The other is people who do not understand the mainstream scientific theories, or even many basic knowledge, these people are civil subjects, obviously, the discipline requires the latter category, and the number of civil disciplines is indeed much higher than the number of masters of science. There is no doubt about why civil science is wrong, because the official science is correct, there are still many arguments and articles, in fact, I personally have written a lot of such articles, but the interesting thing is that no matter how many articles there are.

None of them can change the minds of the civil sciences department, so the topic here asks why civil subjects are so stubborn, not why their ideas are wrong. I think it's mostly a psychological issue. In this world, after satisfying the basic needs of dietary survival, people will pursue higher levels of needs, which is the result of Maslow's famous hierarchy of needs theory, from low to high five levels of requirements.

Physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, respect needs, and self-actualization needs. The choice of civil science professionals seems to put the need for respect and self-actualization in their own scientific research, therefore, I personally am here, can be summarized, because many people believe that truth, he is not necessarily the mainstream of society, because the question of evolution does not stand up to scrutiny, so it leads to the continuous development of science in constant questioning and verification.

The question of why some people are always reluctant to believe that mainstream scientific theories are reliable is explained here today.

I don't have much education, I don't have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, I listen to everyone else, I don't think about myself, or the environment I live in is closed, I don't receive the latest news, and I am more feudal and superstitious.

Because these people are so confident in their hearts, they will choose to trust their own experience rather than mainstream scientific theories.

This stems from their ignorance of science. They always believe in what they see in front of them and have no deep understanding of the essence, that is, they believe in what is commonly known as illusion, and pseudoscience mostly explains illusions, so they believe in pseudoscience more.