The "currently accepted wisdom" is, ideally, based on the evidence we have.
Ideally, yes, but dogma is an all too common human pitfall. Sometimes even "extraordinary" evidence will not sway the stubborn. Halton Arp's work, right or wrong, was deemed so threatening that he was denied computer and telescope time, his papers suppressed; blacklisted so brutally that he had to go to another country to continue his work.
There are also cases where utterly unremarkable evidence has "extraordinary" consequences (e.g. two tiny Mars observations led the way to Kepler's Laws).
Quantum physics, like Newton's gravity, is more a description of nature than an explanation. Actuarial data.
It's not "dogma" to refuse to throw away a useful model that's backed up by mountains of empirical data just because somebody thinks they have a better idea. If someone believes they have a better model, they'd better have some solid evidence for it. Arp didn't--and still doesn't.