SBF: Simply making the assertion that most things are unaware, and any other view is ridiculous, is not an argument.
Perhaps it is not an argument, but it is--I believe--the more reasonable approach.
As a student of the history of science, I am well aware of the fact that many things which we (humans alive at any particular time in history) have believed were wrong. I alluded to some of these in an earlier post: the flat earth, the geocentric universe, the phlogiston theory of combustion. The list is long.
But science does not progress by merely asserting a differing idea. There must be some evidence to support it. From that experiments and/or some other means of data collection must be performed to either disprove the new hypothesis or give it support. To do otherwise is unscientific. And yet advances in science also require creative, original thinking.
The ancient Greek philosopher Democritus (c. 460 – c. 370 BC) proposed the then novel idea of the atom--doing so many centuries before John Dalton could, in the early 19th century, provide experimental support for it leading to our modern atomic theory in chemistry.
PS: You will be interested to know that John Dalton is also known for his research into colour blindness, which is sometimes referred to as Daltonism in his honour.