I agree that if you have “tangible” evidence of a fact it makes it easier to disprove a claim. I would still be wary of this logic, as chain of events can be unintuitive as well.
For instance some politicians make a bold move that has clear and immediate positive effect. Yet if it has huge indirect and long term consequences that only surface once they are out of office, from your perspective they will get all the credits and none of the blame.
Having different perspectives from “experts” is in my opinion important. The problem is of course to find the right experts, and to have an insight on their limits or their biases, which is usually the beginning of become a kind of expert yourself.
