I mean that's what investigative journalism is. Do you only read political pieces written by political scientists? Or articles on accidents & disasters from exp

I mean that's what investigative journalism is. Do you only read political pieces written by political scientists? Or articles on accidents & disasters from experts in those fields? The author cited experts & scientists, asked them questions and well... investigated? I just don't see how that's problematic, and while I don't usually think that appeals to authority are fallacious, suggesting that only scientists should be listened to regardless of the arguments presented by the author is a perfect example of a fallacious appeal to authoritity imo. Especially when the author presents quite a few scientific sources to support his claims. You can obviously argue that those sources are not valid, which is obviously possible and even likely, but we should focus on attacking the argument not the person presenting it, seemingly in good faith.