科学家需要模型以帮助他们设计其研究和解释其结果。 研究的结果将或者倾向于要么支持模型或破坏它。 然而，一个模型的盲点是对实验结果的解释，均根据模型的条款与假设。一个模型的 对手可以看到这些盲点并发现其中的谬误及其提倡者的盲目之处。 这就是为什么应当对与此相反的模型的提倡者批评拟议中的模型的发言权。 库恩指出了模型的盲点所造成的问题。 他说，如果一个模型成为普遍范式，并豁免本身接受批评之后，模型的盲点会随着时间的推移而进一步恶化。

The evolution establishment refuses to allow intelligent design scientists to criticize the evolution model in the scientific journals. For this reason, evolutionists are increasingly blind to the weaknesses of their model. The problems with their model are gradually increasing as those problems remain uncriticized and unfixed. Kuhn pointed out that gaping holes in an established model are openings for advocates of rival models to demonstrate how their model can solve "anomalies" (facts that contradict a model).

生物进化论的共同体不让生物智能设计科学家在科学期刊上对生物进化论模型提出批评。 基于这个原因，生物进化论者正越来越看不到生物进化论的模型存在的弱点。由于这些问题得不到批评与纠正， 生物进化论模型的问题也越来越严重。 库恩指出，一个已经建立的模型敞开的漏洞成为竞争对手模型支持者证明他们的模型如何可以解决 “异常 ”（与模型相矛盾的事实）。

A successful model is a candidate for becoming a theory. A theory is a model that has been accepted by the science establishment. An extended process is required in order to elevate a model to the status of a theory. This takes time. Human institutions process facts, concepts, and opposing arguments in a slow, cumbersome way with many technical, procedural, bureaucratic, political, and ideological barriers to surmount.

一个成功的模型是成为一项理论的候选者。一个理论是已经被 “科学共同体 ” 所接受的一个模型。需要一个 延续的过程以便将一个模型提升为一项理论。 这需要时间。Human 人类的机构一种缓慢的、繁琐的方式处理事实、观念和反对的争论，并且还要克服许多技术性的、程序性的、官僚、政治和思想上的障碍。

A good theory that is lacking in political support can perish in the labyrinth of the science establishment. Kuhn wrote The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), which chronicled some of the political wars between two opposing models. The best model does not always win. Even if the better model wins, science suffers a loss as the positive contributions of the losing model are lost. A common misconception about science is that the growth of scientific knowledge is a smooth endless process of increasing and accumulating knowledge and understanding. This is the myth of progress. Scientific revolutions are messy and involve both gains and losses for science. New successful models often enjoy rapid advances in science in the short run, but gradually bog down as the blind spots grow.

一个好的理论，如若缺乏政治支持，可以在 “科学共同体 ”设立的迷宫中扼杀掉。 库恩撰写的结构的科学革命（ 1962 年），记录了一些两种对立的模型之间的政治战。 最好的模型不一定每次都赢。 即使较好的模型获胜，科学往往因失去了失败了的模型的积极贡献而遭受损失。对科学的 一个常见的误解是，科学知识的增长，是一个平稳永无休止增加和积累知识和理解的过程。 这是对于科学进展的神话。 科学革命是凌乱的，涉及科学有得也有失。 新的成功模型往往在短期内享受快速科技进展，但随着盲点成长而逐渐陷于泥潭。

接续篇：-> 9) What is "normal science"? 什么是 “ 正常的科学” ？