On a more serious note, I get your sentiment with that reply, and as a Scientist I do like a healthy dollop of self-doubt dished up by people I trust. I am however not grasping your idea fully, or to better explain - whilst claiming pure truth for everything in dispute is fundamentalism, saying "this is true" or "this is false" when it has been shown to be empirically so, is absolutely necessary, and ascribing variability to that which has none, is dishonest. That is where you end up with people starting to talk about such things as "it is my truth" and "Nobody knows 100% for sure that gravity is real" or "I have made a version of bubble-sort that is quicker than Merge-sort". In short, when it is so, there is nothing wrong with saying it is so, and when it isn't so, saying it is so on a public forum will (and should) produce exactly the kind of medicine that is needed to remedy such delusion. One is always better off tackling/attacking the subject of what is said to be just so, rather than attacking the habit of saying things are just so, for the latter is doctrine and not argument.