Those are not very strong objections, and no one really seems "baffled". Furthermore it seems clear the magazine author contacted them and tried to get them to

Those are not very strong objections, and no one really seems "baffled". Furthermore it seems clear the magazine author contacted them and tried to get them to say "bad science", it's not like they volunteered these positions out of the blue. The first guy predicts how he thinks the first xenoarchaeologists in history will behave upon finding an alien head, not too dissimilarly from a lot of archaeologists in the past, running roughshod over a site and grabbing what they can. He thinks this is unrealistic, but he's an archaeologist not a xenoarchaeologist so what would he know. The second guy, geologist, doesn't have any strong objections to the actions of the geologist in the movie. The third guy, biologist, criticizes the killing of an alien that is trying to kill them. He is wrong. Killing the alien that is killing you is a realistic thing to do. The fourth guy, physicist, has a criticism of seeing FTL ships underway. This is reasonable, but on par with criticisms of hearing explosions in space in Star Wars or seeing laser blasts as they move through the air, these are common tropes to show the audience something that in real life is invisible or silent. And the fifth guy, psychologist, supports as realistic the movie's setup of having the scientists meet for the first time at the site, have problems, go crazy, and get killed.