For all of its flaws, the scientific method is clearly the correct way to perform such criticism.  It isn&#x27;t perfect (it isn&#x27;t close), but it is orders of magnitude more effective than any other approach humans have ever tried - assuming applicable area of study.<p>So that leaves us with the critics.  If you can&#x27;t be bothered to do the work and are taking potshots from the sidelines there really isn&#x27;t likely to be much value in your criticism.<p>It&#x27;s not impossible that there is value there, but the odds aren&#x27;t very good at all, so you can&#x27;t really blame people for not engaging with it easily.  I agree it is unfortunate when people are quickly dismissive of an idea with &quot;Because Science&quot;.  But it remains true that by far the best answer to &quot;Because Science&quot; is, &quot;Not, so fast, what about Science&quot;.<p>Picking at potential flaws in a study rarely adds much signal.   Suggesting improvements and helping make those happen has potentially immense value.<p>Arguing about it on the internet usually has negative value.