Think about it. This is absolutely true.

Being able to "call BS" on something is TOTALLY SEPARATE from being able to counter with the full truth.

I could give dozens, if not hundreds, of examples.

Correct logic.  As you know, I've called it out within the context of the FE debate.  This is a fallacy related also to "false dichotomy" as well as "begging the question".

Globe must be true because FE model can't explain X, Y, or Z -- pay no attention to the fact tht Globe can't explain A, B, or C, since I'm going to beg the question that globe is true and can explain everything (while filtering out any contrary evidence).

Globe can be falsified on its own terms without any reference to FE.  You could claim FE is wrong and then propose a tertium, a third different view, e.g. a sphere that's 500 times larger than what we're told, since that could explain the phenomenon of how we can see too far.

But if you have two positions, A & B, issues with B do not prove A, nor do issues with A by themselves prove B.  A and B must each stand or fall on their own, but it's also possible for BOTH to fall.