This article is somewhat ironic, because there is not support provided for this theory. The paper cited is basically an essay, and Davis only considers social ideas. It may very well be true that sociology is vulnerable to this effect, however, I don't think it's likely to be the case in physical sciences, and I am not sure that we can walk away with a lesson learned.

When I hear something interesting, my first reaction is to ask: Is it true? Science is about the search for truth, and discovering something that holds true is very interesting.

If I were to say that people became sleepy at night because the moon drops sleeping dust, you wouldn't be much interested. Freud's theories have become less scientifically interesting as their faults have come to light. They were scientifically interesting at the time because they advanced the notion of the subconscious, which brought new and useful ways to talk about the mind. Freud's theories will long remain historically interesting, but that's not the same thing.

Sunsets are interesting. They are red because the light travelling near the horizon into your eye has traveled through relatively more of the Earth's atmosphere, which dis-proportionally filters out photons of shorter, bluer wavelengths. It looks bigger when it sets due to the Ponzo Illusion.