I recall "back in the day" some HEATED discussions/seminars/publications/etc. about a problem in chemistry that amost led to fisticuffs in one incident. The odd thing is that the issue wasn't all that important, it's was purely theoretical. One side was championed by a professor at Purdue named Herb Brown, who was not liked by much of anyone. The other side had a number of proponents. Each would publish one finding, and the other would publish another. It got rather amusing, to me anyway.
Brown's real point, he said later, was that folks were too eager to agree on a thing, and any junior faculty who disagreed couldn't get their stuff published. Brown was well established (he later one a Nobel). He also had a legion of Indian post docs in his group so he could crank out papers (and did). No Americans wanted to work for him, apparently.
I don't think it was ever really decided, though I think Brown's "side" lost out. I had occasion to speak to him very briefly at a conference, he actually spoke to me first, I was two seats over, a young lad probably looking out of place.
I did think he made his overall point, which was a good reminder. Consensus can be reached all too quickly because it's comfortable.
