Why is that? Do you think they are less sensical than non-users? Or are you implying that the author was under the influence at the time of writing?
What seems likely is that they're very potent tools to change how the mind works, possibly for the better if used in the right way.
Upon what specific past information consumption activities, and in what quantities, do you base this claim (and others)?
I pose this question literally, not rhetorically. You've exhibited significant self-confidence and strong judgement of others, it seems fair that you are held to the same standard.
I have a feeling you have less knowledge in this domain than you think.