I think all Mike was trying to say is that everyone at some point will "fall in love" with an idea and will ignore, try to refute, or bend in circles to make fit with their ideas, any evidence that could be used as well or better on the other side.
And I think Mike is right about that.
That is exactly why the process of science is so messy and contentious. Only by having a battle over ideas can the best survive (implicit analogy is deliberate)
It works partially because of the honesty and work of individuals and a little bit in spite of the human failings of the same individuals.