Let’s not confuse reading stuff on the internet with ‘research’, a term which we should wisely protect the status of. In science ‘research’ is not the gathering of facts in support of some interpretation of data, or conclusion. It is the opposite. This is why we have the (admittedly easily captured or misused) process called ‘peer review’. Peer review is a process where a selection of experts in fields related to the research under review are tasked with formulating every fierce attack they can that draws the data and conclusions into question. The ‘researcher’ must then respond to and settle each concern in order to achieve publication.

Science, when engaged with according to the true spirit of the endeavor, the ‘researcher’ works diligently »to disprove their conclusions and deeply question the data.

Have I ever even met a »single person who does this?

No.

Not one. Not yet. I am sure some do, having cribbed this technique from scientific inquiry. But I do not know anyone who regularly carefully attacks their pet pronouncements about the nature of phenomena, ideas, or biases.

Occasionally I have employed this technique, but even myself… I am, like most of us, prone to fall in love with my pet theories, and parade them around as if I had discovered aliens in the cereal box of my own mind.