I didn't say it was always true, I said it was almost certainly true. I stand by that.

Untrained amateurs are right from time to time, but given that they have almost no basis for their assumptions except gut feelings, it basically comes down to chance.

I'm not arguing that scientists can't be wrong, certainly not. I'm arguing that believing they are, or even believing you have a valid criticism, without understanding on what they base their arguments, because "it sounds reasonable" or "scientists are sheep" is deeply intellectually dishonest.