Scientific paradigms keep changing, almost by definition

Via Winchell Chung. The short version is here :
http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/if-you-think-science-is-the-enemy-you-dont-know-what-science-is

"When Newton said: ‘If I have seen farther, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants’, he wasn't merely being modest; rather he was emphasising the extent to which science is cumulative, mostly building on past achievements rather than making quantum leaps."

He probably wasn't being modest at all - he was saying it as an insult against a shorter colleague. Just because you're a genius doesn't mean you can't be a jerk as well.

"Caffeine was also bad, a verdict that has been increasingly reversed – but only up to a point. Wine, especially red wine? Bad. Well, actually – good. So long as it’s not overdone. Sugar? First OK, then not. And now, so-so. And don’t get me started on gluten.... Some of these unseated certainties will not be missed, at least not for long: it is relatively straightforward (although not always easy) to keep changing our diets."

Well, not so much. People are creatures of habit. Plus the "paradigms" of nutritionists seem to be changing so rapidly it's hard to see them as paradigms at all. Seems more like a disparate set of ideas that haven't really converged on a consensus yet. At least that's how it feels to me as an outsider. On the other hand, public education is usually many steps behind the forefront of research. I bet you could still find textbooks showing that different parts of the tongue are sensitive to different tastes.

" A mere hint of such anthropomorphism was a kind of third rail in animal behaviour research: touch it and you might not get electrocuted, but you certainly wouldn't get a research grant, or tenure. ...Once denied by science, animal minds are now legitimate subjects of research, under the rubric of ‘cognitive ethology’."

An unfortunately good example of a closed-minded academia. Yes, the paradigm shifted eventually, but really, how hard is it to accept that animals can think ? Answer : not at all, it's bloody obvious. It's not something that requires a billion-dollar space mission and a team of 200 people to answer. You just need a dog and a stick and about five minutes of spare time.
http://aeon.co/magazine/science/why-scientific-paradigms-keep-changing