I have no factual information, but I know that when I write papers where I want to invite discussion, I don't make blatant statements based on a subset of the e

I have no factual information, but I know that when I write papers where I want to invite discussion, I don't make blatant statements based on a subset of the evidence I have and then expect people to dispassionately pick them apart for me. Rather, I present my honest assessment of the strengths of the various pieces of evidence, pro and con. If I "want to be proven wrong", I certainly wouldn't present a falsely certain argument. That is not arguing in good faith. And that's how I would argue a scientific question, not an argument about my coworkers ability.