The frontiers of science are also the points at which we start to tacitly agree that new scientific discoveries shouldn't impact our basic ontology. Past a certain point in the history of modernity, new discoveries about the nature of the world, up to and including findings that should have led to radical shifts in culture and philosophy, start to be ignored and/or treated as resources for political and market dominance.
I only started to realize this while reading Sharon Bertsch McGrayne's book The Theory That Would Not Die, and learning how much of Bayesian statistics basically got held back from the public due to the strategic concerns of warfare, or because they were being developed as proprietary tech within private corporations. It's a case where a state secret or a trade secret can literally just be sound reasoning.
