system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I believe most people today have an unreasonable expectation of our current level of knowledge and understanding CMV

It is an extremely common attitude today to act as though our current knowledge, particularly regarding scientific understanding is some kind of absolute truth.

If someone expresses any doubt in the absolute accuracy of current understanding about the formation of the universe, particle physics, human history etc many people will treat them in the same way as a fundamentalist with no rationality.

This is exactly the kind of unscientific attitude that impedes human progress. I think it is extremely, profoundly unlikely that current theories about events that happened >1 billion years ago or >1 million light years from Earth have any reasonable degree of accuracy that will stand up after another 500 years of scientific investigation.

If theres one thing we should have learnt from human history its that our knowledge will change over time and an absolute attitude towards anything is flawed. We had models of the universe that stood up for hundreds of years because they were useful at making accurate predictions and apparently verified by observation. As it turns out by current standards they were wildly inaccurate, although much less so than previous models.

I believe that our understanding should be based on observation and rationality and not intuition or arguments from authority. I also believe that absolute faith in current scientific consensus is just as damaging and bullheaded as absolute faith in anything else.
gpt
So here's the thing.  Our scientific models are damn good.  Like, they're "all of human history has led us to this" good.  That doesn't mean that they're flawless--of course they have flaws.  Of course they can be improved upon or in some cases replaced entirely.  

The thing about science is that it's a process that iteratively moves us towards the truth.  That doesn't mean that our current scientific knowledge *is* the truth--it just means that it's the closest we're able to get right now.  You'd probably have to ask an expert in the field to determine how certain "we" are about the accuracy of a particular theory.  

I know, we're edging towards "argument from authority" territory.  It's sad.  But (to use an example that was a big deal a few years back) if you want to find out whether the Large Hadron Collider is going to produce tiny black holes that will swallow the earth--most people just flat-out aren't qualified to figure that out on their own, and can't become qualified without several years of work.  The issue arises when people assume that because *they* wouldn't know how to figure it out, that must mean that *nobody* knows how to figure it out, and so the issue must be very uncertain indeed.  In fact, people *did* know how to figure it out, and it wasn't uncertain at all.