Re: Remember...
I remember being a student and insisting on such things as facts and proof, as exactly the means by which studying provides any useful result. I was, and am also quite sure of having my mnemonic faculties intact, and I am absolutely sure of the things I did or did not do, For instance I never killed any neighbours pet, set fire to government buildings or shot the prime minister, no matter how badly I wanted to.
Be as absolutely sure as you like. You're still wrong. It is vanishingly unlikely that any human being's "mnemonic faculties [are] intact" in any useful sense. Decades of experimentation have amply established that.
And even before those experiments, we have philosophical ones like Descartes' "Evil Genius", which quite rightly points out that it's impossible to prove that someone hasn't by some means deranged your senses or reasoning faculties.
Are the researchers trying to have us believe that none of what we think is real actually happened, thus paving the way for total denial, and the annihilation of science itself?
Spare us the sophomoric solipsistic anguish, please. The researchers are just confirming prior results about the ease with which false memories can be established, and what rhetorical maneuvers are useful in doing so. Reasonable scientists will adopt a probabilistic outlook as they always have. That can either be frequentist ("the evidence of my senses (in interpreting my instruments) is usually consistent, and the results of my reasoning usually coincides with what others report") or Bayesian ("I'll assign small probabilities to adverse causes such as derangement"), but in either case we Just Get On With It. The lesson here is to be critical, not to throw our hands up in despair. Scientific Epistemology 101.
(This September sure is September.)