Dear Skywise,

your point of view is correct - the scientist must be skeptic in all cases to confirm the results of previous authors and to find the discrepancies, which can help to improove the theory.
In the same way I found the gross errors of previous works about the relationship between tides and earthquakes, when authors put into one basket apples and pears. I found the opposite result when I made the analysis in 3-D tidal phase space.

But, the show, which did you made and others on this Forum, is not the skeptic access, but Constance council, which made the statement before the knowledge of the theory, without the knowledge of our results of the measurement. No questions about the tilt development before EQs, no questions about diurnal thermoelastic waves. Only contempt and disparagement.