Are those who think too much of themselves proven wrong more often than those who think too little of themselves? Why?

What isn't subjective DB? What possible thing can you think or say that doesn't reflect YOU? Can you separate yourself from what you say or think and be completely objective? If so you should bottle it and sell it. So admitting that everything that comes from every person is subjective (if you do) what would your answer be to my question? I guess some questions are unanswerable. Perhaps this is one of them. Thank for your reply.

An objective argument would be something that is beyond dispute: i.e., the ocean is wet, 2 and 2 is 4, the sun is bright, mammals breathe oxygen, death is inevitable.
As plain as they are, these examples defy the slant of opinion. 

You do know that you are talking about science  right? You also know that it is NOT beyond dispute in certain religions. For example some folks believe with all their hearts that the earth is 6000 years old. Those who rely on science would dispute that. Also what is also disputable is evolution to some. And global warming/climate change. And that man is responsible for much of the "bad" done to this world. Now there are scientists who  believe in God. How they reconcile evolution with God creating everything I do not know. For people like me I believe in a something else above and beyond which some call God and some call universal wisdom within the context of science. That is to say I believe the earth is billions of years old. That humans are responsible for much of the ills in the world. And also that there is something out there we wil  never understand that started everything. There are either 200 million or 200 billion galaxies in the universe. How many other earths are there out there among them where thinking beings exist? All by accident happenstance chance? No beginning? THE BIG BANG started it all. From nothing comes something? How? Just a few thoughts of mine. I have thoughts like these all the  time. Perhaps in an alternate universe  2 plus 2 is 42. We are limited by our perception of three dimensions. If there are 30 you can see why we don't understand so many things. So we  try to make sense with we see/hear based on the tools we have at our disposal, the main one of which is intellect. It varies among us from very low to very high yet no one KNOWS all the answers. So we opine and have conjectures and ponder. Are you open to the possibilities of multiple dimensions don and parallel universes and doppelgangers? How do you  explain quantum entanglement? It's a lotta stuff some of which seems cut-and-dried only because that's all we can comprehend. The simple. The plain. The basic. What else is out there around us we can't access?  Inquiring minds wanna know these things. Thank you for your thoughtful reply apologies for my meanderings. It happens!  :) This post was edited by RosieG at September 25, 2018 4:54 AM MDT

I personally have not found science and religion are at all reconcilable. The latter arose in the absence of the former. Creationism is not science, is anti-science, and has been, IMO, sufficiently debunked. 

The examples I gave fall short of scientific, but are simple and definable enough to present objectivity. That was all I intended. 
Your post was interesting nonetheless This post was edited by Don Barzini at September 30, 2018 2:22 AM MDT

There are scientists who believe in God or some supreme power DB. They are the ones who have to reconcile it. If GOD is the source of all creation that would include evolution right? Anyway I'm not a scientist so I don't know how their brains work. Thank you for your reply and Happy Sunday!  :)