While watching these I could see the strong bias that the scientists had and how they were posterchildren for peer review. They land on a unique place on the p

While watching these I could see the strong bias that the scientists had and how they were posterchildren for peer review. They land on a unique place on the psuedoscience spectrum where they're well trained yet pursuing their work for personal gain. They aren't in it to learn something but to be important. They want the truth to be exciting and they want to be the people to find it. That's not what motivates people of science. I could see all of this being a person of science and seeing all of the ugly aspects of academia. I'm not sure the average viewer will pick up on these things. It's irresponsible to publish without better context. I do give the creators credit for having the scientists speak and have a lot of camera time. It allows for these judgments to be made. If they hid behind narration and drone shots it would be much more difficult to pick up on these things.