I'll promote this and suggest narrowing the focus to your first step:
First step: understanding better what exactly science-types think of as "knowledge"--what is it and where does it come from? This includes questions like:
When we request each other to provide evidence in an argument, should we be referring to source papers that contain original data, or is referring to authorities good enough?
If it's good enough, when and why is that the case?
Is scientific knowledge the set of all source data in the literature, or is it the set of inferences and conclusions that have been generally agreed upon by the scientific community, based on those data?