[ska]

For all of its flaws, the scientific method is clearly the correct way to perform such criticism. It isn't perfect (it isn't close), but it is orders of magnitude more effective than any other approach humans have ever tried - assuming applicable area of study.

So that leaves us with the critics. If you can't be bothered to do the work and are taking potshots from the sidelines there really isn't likely to be much value in your criticism.

It's not impossible that there is value there, but the odds aren't very good at all, so you can't really blame people for not engaging with it easily. I agree it is unfortunate when people are quickly dismissive of an idea with "Because Science". But it remains true that by far the best answer to "Because Science" is, "Not, so fast, what about Science".

Picking at potential flaws in a study rarely adds much signal. Suggesting improvements and helping make those happen has potentially immense value.

Arguing about it on the internet usually has negative value.