okay, here's your refutation on cosmic rays
<a href=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3419975.stm">BBC summary of the Eos article
The important point here is that the discussion of cosmic rays is being carried out in your hated peer-review process, which can occasionally fail and let shoddy papers through, but in the long run will eliminate the bad arguments and produce a consensus. I'll count on that process to work out the cosmic ray issue one way or another.
I shouldn't say eliminate the bad arguments - people with financial interests and political axes to grind will continue to make them, but they'll be almost entirely outside of the peer review.