I agree that our knowledge will advance and some of what we consider "settled" will have to be revised.My reply was in relation to Saltys quote and statement that pure science does not exist.
Perhaps it is better to say absolute answers do not exist and that is the beauty of science.
Nor does pure math exist.
We are pretty sure their are absolutes but we never know.
There is a computer right now probably carrying PI out to the giga place hoping to prove it eventually repeats.
The problem is we live in a world that closes discussion with the words "It is settled science" and expects no further investigation of the matter.
Any scientist, or mathematician for that matter, says "this is the be all end all" isnt really following the tenent of their science.
Copernicus knew he was right while knowing everyone else was wrong.
Unfortunately, many non scientists equate that with having being "wrong" when it mostly means that we expanded the domain of validity.
Einstein did not prove Newton wrong. He extended Newton's equations and theorems to be valid at larger and smaller scales, speeds, etc. For most daily tasks on Earth Newton's equations are plenty accurate. It's when you are zipping around at light speed that they break down.
Unfortunately, when we discuss things in normal life, we do not start statements with "Assuming this, that, and the other...", we blurt out "I think that..." without regards of the assumptions and whether these assumptions fit the problem at hand.
We have no prior experience with Covid-19. All we have is results from similar diseases and models that we know to describe these events correctly. Is to be expected that we are going to err with some of the parameters we plug into these models. This is uncharted territory. That does not mean however that these models are wrong or that the people making the predictions are all motivated by evil motives.