The following model will discuss "rigor" while I attempt to avoiding being tedious. So, if the model itself seems
to be unrigorous while discussing rigor,
well... shrug.

Real science: theories and hypotheses are advanced; criticism is invited. Both useful and useless criticism may be received. Useful
criticism successfully describes errors found.
Unuseful criticism might include praise.

Dr. Dick science: criticism is invited.
Praise is preferred. Dr. Dick can refine his
paper further upon further reflection. Its conclusions should give comfort enough because
having understood the cosmic underpinnings should
give any part of the universe a way to proceed -- even if it be a mortal sentient window that understands the cosmic underpinnings. Is Dr. Dick such a window? Ego is involved in the science itself.

Yanniru science: has been correct before; therefore he might like to be given the benefit of any doubts. He gives useful criticism in his own "main" field, but does not seem to like to receive useful criticism on comments he makes outside physics. Ego is involved in the science.

Mike science: simply being critical without involving ego in the science. Has an ego though.