FWIW, you're probably not being downvoted because you're challenging Einstein and there are blind devotees in this sub. You're probably being downvoted because of the pretension and lack of self-awareness. The inclusion of "logic" in your reasoning is a dead giveaway, and you've constructed quite the strawman narrative about how Einstein is being perceived. I don't think even he, nor most serious cosmologists, would say he had it all figured out. He died refusing to accept that "hidden variables" weren't at work with QM, which is largely accepted, and few still hold on with them, so he's quite clearly NOT perfect, and NOT understood as such... by anybody but your hypotheticals (and perhaps people largely ignorant). That right there shows you're reasoning with some constructed Einstein that isn't quite true to how the rest of us understand him, so from there the "logic" is flawed.

Beyond that, what is the rule saying he couldn't, within a few hundred years, get it right? I'm sorry, I didn't realize there was a speed limit to these things. No, the proof is in the pudding, and the reality is he was pretty damn good at figuring it out, regardless of how far in time he was from heliocentrism. Those theories just so happen to have predicted objects and processes that have since been observed all on their own, so they're good enough for that, and that is what makes these so hard to discard, particularly when those other theories cannot do the same.

I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make. It's not as if something else has come along and done it better, and this is just some political or egotistical resistance. Literally anybody can wax poetic about dogmas, but the more work you actually put into proving said dogma is wrong (and/or seeing all the reasons why that dogma is powerful in the first place), the more humbled you'll be.

I know enough to know when someone actually has a grasp on physics greater than mine... and I can tell you're firmly in my league when it comes to this stuff - and I know next to fuckall about it. This is why you're being downvoted. It's not a pro-Einstein conspiracy or knowledge industrial complex which somehow implicates us all... It's you out of your element. Logically, which is more likely???

Thanks for the tip. I've referred to that as "epistemological awareness" before, but never got too in depth with it; I've just over time become increasingly frustrated when people make claims that they do not seem to recognize the complexity involved in verifying (if possible at all), as well as fully understanding the constructs and limitations of the types of knowledge they're wielding.

An obvious example off the top being "there are no gays in Russia". Like, obviously a ridiculous statement, but also absurd to claim to know, even if it was somehow true because how on Earth are you going to gather that kind of data with integrity? You need access to peoples' lives we simply do not have. Further, "gayness" can manifest in a myriad of ways, so you have to first define a set of acts that you can actually bear witness to, then go about doing it. But gayness cannot always be seen, so you have to go about defining gayness in such a way that you can notice it. At that point, you might as well retroactively define it as exclusive to Russians. "Sure, Russian men might suck each other off, but that's not gay because they can't be gay, they're Russian!" It's all just absurd.

On the other side, being conscious of this (empowered by my irritability of dealing with it in others) has really dialed in my own thinking.

As much as I grow tired of philosophy that is layered in centuries of not even arguments, but like systems and methods of discourse of a few dudes that you need to be a graduate student to parse... if this is the alternative, we'll, it's obvious why we continually need to validate "philosophy" as a valuable endeavor.

Although, of course, if one were to successfully do just that, it'd put people in the philosophy industrial complex out of work so maybe that's the unspoken rule???