The "all Science is top-down" fallacy.

 People thinking that "all Science is top down" are the same people that had been stuck with a failed String Theory for more than 40 years, or the same people that talk about a "post-empirical Science", or talk about non observable things as dark-matter or a multiverse as something real.

 Any ideas without a solid empirical base usually will degrade in inconsequential conclusions and a huge waste of resources and/or professional careers as the String Theory fiasco clearly shows.

 Detachment from Reality is frequently very expensive and many times very dangerous, but theoreticians had fallen in that trap over and over again, they continually had disregarded history of Science lessons and continually had made the mistake of identifying their models of Reality with Reality itself.

 If even in the "simple" model of Natural Numbers the amount of "truths" is a lot more than the number of "explainable truths"(theorems) do you think that for Reality we will have a "better" situation?

 In the same way that to discover mathematical truths a constant observation and "playing/testing" of the given mathematical model is needed there is no way around a constant observation and testing of Reality to know about Reality, dogmatic theoreticians always had ignored this simple fact.