Not all questions are created equal and not all questioning of science is scientific in nature. And if you're not writing down results and using controls, your questions aren't really coming from a place of scientific intrigue in the first place.

Im listening to this podcast "History of philosophy without any gaps" and in various points in History a group of people starts arguing against philosophy, but you can't really argue that philosophy is dangerous or useless, without seeing yourself doing philosophy for that.

It's only science if you're willing to accept the conclusion the observations lead you to even if they prove your idea wrong, because the point of science is to learn and gain understanding, and that is done by being wrong about things and investigating to find the correct answer.

It's no longer science if you're not willing to accept the conclusions because they prove your idea false, which ultimately is the problem that happens with science deniers, they are unwilling to accept being wrong.