With great respect for Ethan Siegel and this article, the problem is not error but complexity. Ffor most people, most of the time, following the scientific consensus in any specific area is the safest bet.
Once upon a time this was a far better bet than now.
We are overwhelemd by pardigmatic change (See Kuhn referenced below) that creates scientific arguments and crisis. Human knowledge is metaphorical or based on models. We are in an era, the anthropocene, that is a product of numan effect on our planet based on errors in our past models. We must now understand our effect on reality as a model as we adjust that model and that model adjusts us.
This means that the complexity of what we must understand relies increasingly on logic and our individual evaluation of others' logical models. This sis beyond the exponential grwoth in relevant information for that model. The grain of salt becomes so large that people choke on it but we have no choice but to learn enough to sort through growing diversity of truth while avoiding death from poisonous lies.