a truly scientific mind would go out and proactively search for all evidence available on any topic he feels is worth validating one way or the other.
Applying critical thinking skills only to what comes across his desk would be more a sign of a simple critic.
Why shouldn't the burden of proof be upon the claimant? As well as the burden of the research?
The claimants of things such as UFOs and Crop Circles do very little good research. Instead, they do about as much "sitting at their desk" as the critic.
Good research with proper scientific method would make it necessary for a critic to go to the field to do the research if he/she wanted to be thorough. As it is, there are enough flaws to criticize without going anywhere.
But for the record, I'll be happy to do the leg work if you fund the work It'll have to be sufficient enough to forgo my Treatment Director position and lucrative enough to post-pone a semester of college......