I do not believe there is a right or wrong opinion to this issue unless we want to continue in endless argument which could lead to bandying of insults.
Yep, let's not go to that :) Just one final comment on something you wrote just now:
Reasoning can be subjective without evidence and the only way to prove it is to provide evidences against such reasoning.
Yes, and the null hypothesis is that we reject the claim until it has been proven with evidence. The whole point of the null hypothesis is not to hold unsubstantiated beliefs like this one. That's why I find it frustrating that you would talk about the null hypothesis 100% backwards like that.
I respect your view too, but my honest opinion is that you are objectively not making a sound point here and are not using some of the terms properly.
Cheers! :)