It is annoying to see a retort "scientists always end up being wrong". But I don't think science should sink to the level of fake-confidence "everything going according to plan" of non-science, I think it should embrace its honesty about its mistakes.

Over time people can't help but depend on science's results, and new generations take it to heart. It's actually similar to how people can't help but depend on open source tools/platforms, as much as they hated "free-tards" and said "you get what you pay for" in the past.

Well, the whole point of science is to falsify past theories and produce better theories. So of course the majority of scientific theories will end up being wrong at some point.

So it's pointless to try to rebuke the "scientists always end up being wrong" like of argument. If anything, I think scientists should just bite the bullet. Theory proven wrong? That's proof that science works!

But it is a reason to be skeptical. Further, in recent months and years, we've learned the peer review system is completely broken.

Until it's been reproduced and validated by a few outside - and hopefully disinterested - third parties, we shouldn't accept it as fact but as a theory that could be replaced.

Peer review has never been a designation of fact, just "you must be this tall to enter the fighting pits."

Confusing peer review with fact is a public-perception problem, and a lot of that comes down to various antiscience groups whose work isn't even peer reviewed, let alone tested and challenged.