By that extension, why not just have faith that everything someone says is correct, facts be damned. What is stopping someone like MOS from declaring that I wonder. (I do know many like him do in fact take everything on faith. This is how you get people believing that Orwell was not a Socialist, Obama is a secret Muslim and on and on)
Morons will always want to moron.
Most people do rely on "faith," as opposed to evidence, when attempting to assert if a claim is true or not.
In order to really decide if a claim is true or not, takes a LOT of work. You have to read both sides of the argument. After reading both sides of an argument from reputable sources, you then have to determine the flaws of each study--this is necessary, in order to take into consideration any biases that may occur during the study. Then, when all that is said and done, you may or may not rely on some form of personal experience to shape your opinion about the claim. As long as your personal opinion doesn't inherently interfere with the objective evidence.
Obviously, the above statement is just a brief overview of determining a claim. But that's a lot of work. Most people don't have time. Further, most people do not know how to accurately analyze a peer-reviewed study anyway, i.e., taken into consideration effect size, population size, statistical analysis, method of analysis, etc (basically, different forms of construct validity, statistical validity, externa/internal validity, etc.). As such, its much easier to just google an answer.
