Science is based on observations (facts). For a hypothesis to become a scientific theory, one needs to find a way to test the theory in the laboratory/field. And then the test must be repeated over and over and peer reviewed. If the test agrees with the hypothesis it can become a scientific theory.
Scientists then continue more experiments to either prove or enhance the scientific theory or falsify the theory. They realize a scientific theory is not absolutely unlike the way you and a lot of your friends on this db have to believe (at all cost) in that literal reading of the Book of Genesis. Thus, scientists never shut down all rational discussion as you have suggested. If they did we never would have got where we have in all sorts of scientific fields including inventing this computer.
What gets me is that we have no problem saying that people invented cars and computers but woe be the person that says some life form invented us and the matter around us. I think it is like when people thought everything revolved around the earth until later we found out that our puny, little planet revolved around the sun. More and more people are realizing that macro-evolution has huge problems and that this universe does not exist by chance.
I am waiting for the day when the ACLU demand the title history be changed because of the religious connotation which stands for "His story"--that's why everything is B.C. or A.D. (Before Christ or Anno Domine "In the year of our Lord")