Wow, very cool that hot headed discussion could turn into what is, apparently, a well regarded theory.
On the other hand, Alvarez's method was really unbecoming of a scientist. I mean, he really shouldn't be "holding arguments in his pocket" to make someone feel foolish and drop an argument. He should take any and all criticism of his theory and use it as an opportunity to strengthen or drop it. Of course, he's also human... but still, that seemed more like a trick politicians use than scientists.
Actually, it's a pretty useful thing to do. Had he "laid his cards on the table", there's a good chance his partner would have never thought about the star hypothesis. His goal was to get a fresh point of view, which you can't if you fully describe your position.
On the other hand, Alvarez's method was really unbecoming of a scientist. I mean, he really shouldn't be "holding arguments in his pocket" to make someone feel foolish and drop an argument. He should take any and all criticism of his theory and use it as an opportunity to strengthen or drop it. Of course, he's also human... but still, that seemed more like a trick politicians use than scientists.