What do you think such an understanding would look like? A youtube rando may well have been researching something for a decade too yet be completely wrong (see:

What do you think such an understanding would look like? A youtube rando may well have been researching something for a decade too yet be completely wrong (see: many conspiracy theorists), research time is often not particularly relevant. Stepping to authority over youtube randos on the other hand seems like a flawed idea too, 'authority' is often a biased group of the old guard. And in the most controversial topics, you'll have widely varying opinions on who the authorities are. Evidence then? Evidence can be cool, but is often really easy to spin whichever way the talking head wants. And that is if isn't outright doctored. The scientific process, including peer review? Maybe, but this doesn't work particularly well on some of the most important things we want to discover truth in such as politics an recent events Even in some kind of ideal world, where we can theoretically try to find the most truthful answer, we'd struggle hard. Let alone in our chaotic society where what's loudest and most catchy is surely going to outcompete whatever is the most truthlike