[marsh2]

I have come to the conclusion that scientists have to argue so that they can continue to be funded to "prove" their (contrarian) theory.

[Fedora]

> I have come to the conclusion that scientists have to argue so that they can continue to be funded to "prove" their (contrarian) theory.

LOL! I have come to a similar conclusion :) My observation is that scientists and other scholars working on their Ph.D. are under constant peer pressure to propose a "new" theory to justify their dissertation, which cultivates a contrarian attitude. Once they actually get their Ph.D. this attitude carries over into their work, where the funding issue reinforces it.