I find that the major objection is that people think great science is done by luck. It's all a matter of luck. Well, consider Einstein. Note how many different things he did that were good. Was it all luck? Wasn't it a little too repetitive? Consider Shannon. He didn't do just information theory. Several years before, he did some other good things and some which are still locked up in the security of cryptography. He did many good things.

At first, everything was moving very slowly, but despite the slow progress, I kept going. Now I see that slow progress doesn’t necessarily mean bad progress. In fact, sometimes it’s good and gives me hope because it makes me see that everything is achievable and that any task is possible, even when it seems incomprehensible and daunting at first.

[...] I concluded that although starting something might be hard, continuing it shows you that nothing in the world is truly difficult, and you can enjoy starting anything.