RE: The New Cancer of Pop-Science Pseudo-Intellectualism
Many people prefer believing in something over the scientific methods; maybe because it is easier, maybe because we are pre-programmed that way, maybe because they can't handle the permanent insecurity of science.
The idea that real-world observations may force you to reject your theory's hypotheses and thus force you to change your theory is alien to most people; it is much easier to religiously defend your belief system and blame the real world for not complying or insert a few "No True Scotsman" arguments into the discussion.
The religious approach to models and theories is much more user-friendly when you are a science groupie rather than a scientist: it requires no reasoning of your own, just a re-hash of other people's opinions you can find ready-made on the interwebs, and a mocking of those you see as heretics.
I sometimes wonder if we are pre-wired to be religious to the point that we need replacement religions when the older god-based religions are no longer hip. Or is it just laziness or the all-consuming want to be part of a safe group of people who agree on everything?
My apologies for my digressing.
We are wired by default to carry religiosity. Look carefully enough throughout life and you will see that we are constantly performing rituals, see patterns and follow trends.
Also laziness. Thinking consumes energy and the brain by default avoids to engage.
In most part religion is just an excuse for brain to transfer a part of responsibility to some entity or higher power at the same time reducing load and emotional stress. There are also different other form to do that, but different brains have different capacities and "pain thresholds". We think of ourselves as of something very special, in a way we are, but that is highly influenced by complex biological engineering and evolution. Or devolution.