I could be guilty of it as well and that experts are only human so. But I think for some people trying to prove a point without additional evidence or data (albeit one not outsourced from peer-reviewed data and/or written by actual experts on things one’s enthusiastic about), they’re going to shoot themselves in the foot. It’s not that they’re stupid but rather a case of accidental hubris.
That runs contrary to researchers who not only have direct experience with these but if they’ve published something they have to provide additional proof of it, including bibliography with similar essays and data as well as handy hyperlinks. Even Wikipedia does that. Even if they forgot to add those, they still have to report about it.
Admittedly the same can be said of enthusiasts. The only problem with them’s that sometimes they let their emotions get the better of them. Researchers and reporters aren’t any less opinionated though that also gets complicated by limited data and that they contradict each other. But with the latter, it’s a matter of trying to be objective.
If not objective, then well-researched at that. Larry Sanger’s well aware of this phenomenon. (Though it could be me doing a lot of research as well.)