Facts and reasons cannot in most circumstances settle scientific controversies. The main issue is a matter of interpretation. One person can interpret data and observations differently from another person. This is where the problem lies. Pride and scientific interpretation can keep a controversy going even when facts and reasons may seem to prove one side false. Also, if there is more than model and those models each have some kind of positive evidence, then they each have a point to argue from. So what in the end will prove one more true over the others? In some cases it is social belief's that will bring an end to a controversy. Other times it will end because other scientists will drop their model and give up on trying to convince that theirs is the correct model.

Pasteur's real world question was; how to create sterile air so that spontaneous...