Why is a scientific theory not rejected completely when a new unexplained discoveries are made?

A scientific theory is not completely rejected when new unexplained discoveries arise because theories are based on a robust body of evidence and are often adaptable. New findings may highlight limitations or necessitate modifications to the theory rather than invalidate it entirely. The scientific process values the refinement of theories over outright rejection, allowing for the integration of new data into a broader understanding of the phenomena. Additionally, a theory that has proven successful in predicting outcomes remains valuable, even if it requires adjustments.