Chuck Missler makes at several outright blunders here.
The replacement of phlogiston theory by atomic theory, the lack of evidence for Earth's movement throught the aether, and the measurement of the speed of light, all demonstrate the superiority of empirical studies to speculation.
He also gets the nebular hypothesis mixed up. Kant's hypotheses used a nebula (or gas cloud) condensing into the Sun and planets. Swedenborg's suggestion of emanations was quite different. Apparently, Missler doesn't understand the difference.
So Missler's title claims the opposite of what his examples demonstrate. One must assume that Missler is ignorant of science and its history.
Here's another:
What is particularly astonishing about this "dark matter" is that it apparently constitutes about 95% [sic] of all the matter in the universe!
He can't even get the ordinary/dark matter/dark energy distribution correct. He's off by roughly a factor of 4.
If Missler wrote that in a paper in Astrophysics class, he'd have gotten an "F."
One who would, would be mistaken. Do a little research on the guy.