Shouldn't those issues be addressed head-on for the field to flourish though? It seems to me that if peer reviewers in the field hold this perception, many more

Shouldn't those issues be addressed head-on for the field to flourish though? It seems to me that if peer reviewers in the field hold this perception, many more outside of the fields do as well. If a paper makes a claim that a technology solves a problem, and then fails to support that claim to a sufficient degree such that it cannot pass peer review, that sounds like way more than a nitpick.