Non-Scientifically Speaking...

The observance that people throughout history have believed in unproven ideas is the main evidence for the preponderance of anti-science. To the historian it would seem that the ancients were either religious fanatics or simpletons, because their practices were constantly based on the most popular hocus-pocus of the time. Interestingly enough, their actions and beliefs served to form a notable part of the world that we live in today, complete with inter-deity relationships that trace back to the first recorded historical accounts. This serves to spread given beliefs and make religion sustainable.

In general there is a lot of activity surrounding concepts that have no bearing on rational thinking, and people have needed and continue to need belief systems. Those systems may be approved or disapproved by local scholars, priests or politicians. In the end, most people subscribe to the developing thought system of the day.

This could mean one of two things is occurring. The first is that people are gradually becoming more reasonable as time goes on, allowing their studies to evolve and become more factually-based; and that ancient religions are simply a relic in the overall progress of intelligent beings. The second possibility is what makes the scientist shudder, and is simply the opposite of the first. It would be proposed that science and technology are systematically eliminating well-established knowledge of the universe, resulting in eventual ignorance.

Now we're getting anti-results!