wegs: Sure! Science, for instance, is full of quite unexpected discoveries of things that were previously thought to be impossible or at least implausible. Who would have thought, for example, that entire continents could move around over time, completely altering the global geography of the world's land? The idea of "continental drift" was scoffed at by many when it was first proposed. But separate lines of evidence accumulated to the point where it no longer became tenable to deny that continent drift happens. Today, all competent Earth scientists accept the theory of plate tectonics and, indeed, regard it as among the fundamental effects that have shaped Earth's geology, climate and biodiversity. The idea of "x-ray vision" existed long before x rays were discovered and named as such. However, the notion that people would one day be able to see inside the human body without breaking the skin would have been laughed off by many educated people - right up to the accidental discovery of x-rays. What led scientists to accept the existence of x-rays was, as usual, the accumulating evidence for them. In principle, anybody can build a working x-ray machine, given suitable instructions and materials. So denying the reality of x-rays is no longer tenable. These days, most of us accept the reality of plate tectonics and x-rays without batting an eyelid. Both of them seem like "ordinary" things - just part of our shared, accepted reality. But at one time, both were considered "extraordinary". In a sense, they still are, but we have all the evidence we need to accept that, extraordinary as these things might seem in the abstract, they are very real. The idea of alien spaceships has been with us for centuries. It is the claim that, right now, alien spaceship are visiting Earth, that is extraordinary. The difference between alien spaceships and x-rays, though, is that it's easy to produce convincing evidence for x-rays (now). But nobody has managed to produce convincing evidence that any alien spaceships are actually real, yet. Having lots of evidence doesn't necessarily convince everybody of the reality of a thing, of course. There are still plenty of climate change deniers and Young Earth creationists, even though there are mountains of evidence for anthropogenic climate change and mountains of evidence against Young Earth creationism. But climate change deniers and creationists aren't basing their beliefs on evidence. What they have in common is a refusal to look objectively at the available evidence. Similarly, a lack or absence of reliable evidence doesn't necessarily convince everybody to withhold their belief that a thing is real (which is the prudent and logical thing to do). People believe lots of things without having good evidence, often for reasons that don't stand up to scrutiny, as we've seen time and again with Magical Realist's ardent UFO and other woo beliefs.