How much is /sci/entific debate just an impatient cope with the slow inflow of empirical data?

>physics debate
>le theory of everything
More efficient manufacturing, higher-performance computers, better technology decade after decade ---> Bigger particle accelerators, more powerful telescopes, smaller-scale observations, more numbers crunched

>biology debate
>le abiogenesis, the creationists and exobiologists are making me cry wtf
The old-ass 19th century concept of decade-by-decade machine efficiency increases ---> More molecules are known and understood, more micro/nanoscale data is collected, more simulations are run, more evidence is pulled up from underground

>psychology debate
>it's literally the mind, you're playing with philosophy wtf
Expensive info/bio/neurotech data collection gradually improves over decades ---> the transformation between the brain and the mind starts out hazy and simply gets more and more detailed, and the qualia on one side of the transformation is described in more precise detail

>>16733215 (OP)
Almost none of it but to you, an outside who engages with science merely as a form of entertainment it will inevitable seem so. You could ask the same question about a TV show, why do all of those people work on it so hard when they can just wait till the next episode comes out out the TV? That seems reasonable question to you because that's how you engage with the system.