If scientists always seem to be 'proving wrong' the current favorite theory, what is the point of all this research if in the end we never establish anything as being True?

This is, in part, a fantasy concocted by the media to sell papers. The public LOVES to hear about ideas that have been killed, theories that have been overturned, textbooks that have to be re-written. This is what sells papers, and is equivalent to our fascination for murder and intrigue, which also sells papers.

The truth of the situation is that our best explanations for how things work are extraordinarily robust and resilient already.

Quantum Mechanics is a theory, and for 70 years it has survived test after test.

Special relativity is a theory, and within its domain of applicability, it has survived over 90 years of testing without a fault.

General relativity is a theory, and it has survived a dozen tests; failing none.

Big Bang cosmology is a theory which has a spectacular track record.

The Theory of Stellar Evolution which has been refined steadily for over 100 years.

We have many 'theories' of galactic evolution, but these are still being refined as new data comes in.

Science is concerned with looking for clues that tell us how nature works in various patterns woven through space and time. At the same time, it looks for the weak spots in our current understanding and both of these together drive theories to ever greater degrees of accuracy. We can never prove a theory to be absolutely correct and True, but we can reduce its errors of prediction and forecasting so that they are always below what current measurements can provide as tests. The end result is a theory that meets all observational tests TO DATE, and makes predictions for the next round of technological advancement.

I see this is as the best possible progress that, like an arrow, will arrive as close to the Truth as a society is willing to muster new technologies to test it.