My past studies of literature make me wonder how the American writers and philosophers Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David through would perceive this thread. Both were outright champions of an individual holding fast to a belief in the face of overwhelming opposition. Emerson's
Self Reliance is the best statement of that ideal. The more famous is the part of Thoreau's
Walden in which he says, "If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away."
With those ideals, it is likely that they would admire the persistence of someone who holds to a belief despite the fact that he faces 100% opposition to that belief over more than 250 posts in a thread. I would never have such courage myself.
On the other hand, both firmly argued that we should live in accord with nature, so they would in this argument be well within that opposition. They would celebrate the OP's willingness to cling to a belief while firmly disagreeing with that belief themselves.
Both Emerson and Thoreau met with Walt Whitman during the height of his being attacked for his latest controversial additions to
Leaves of Grass, and based on the advice they gave him then, I believe they would point out a key part of Emerson's "Self Reliance," in which he said "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." In other words, if you have been proudly and strongly proclaiming a belief and then one day realize you are wrong, it will be wrong to persist in that belief for the sake of consistency. Speak what you believe now with the same fervor with which you said the opposite the day before.
Putting it all together, the wise individual, the true transcendentalist in Emerson's terms, is the one who can hold a belief in the face of stern opposition and yet be not afraid to reverse course publicly and without shame when he or she realizes that the opposition was ultimately correct.