[SpinnerWebb]

Richards and his colleagues marshal evidence for their theory...

HERE is the key statement in the article.

They have a theory, so they go out and collect evidence that supports it, rather than looking at ALL the evidence, and trying to come up with a theory.

[expat2]

You are too harsh. Science has successfully used the following process:
1. Look at the evidence available,
2. Develop a hypothesis to explain that level of evidence,
3. Develop experiments or new areas of evidence which would prove or disprove the hypothesis,
4. Repeat steps 1-4

They were carrying out step 3, and did fine. It is true that scientists get 'hooked' on their own hypothesis (an old boss used to say "Every man loves the smell of his own farts"). However, other scientists have an incentive to prove him wrong, thus providing a correction process.