You shouldn't just "take her seriously", you should take what she says *critically*. Hear the information and opinions, then decide for yourself whether to accept them.
This sounds awfully similar to the “do your own research” defense that is often used as a cop-out disclaimer for quackery topics.
When someone presents themselves as an expert on a topic and invests a lot of time into making convincing videos about their beliefs, defending them with a “do your own research” feels like a tacit admission that they’re not actually the expert they present themselves as.
This feels somewhat like the high-brow intellectual equivalent of Joe Rogan making confident statements about COVID and then defending himself with “I’m just a comedian, do your own research”. You can’t have it both ways.
It's easy to know whether to internalize what she says when you view it critically. Ask "does the presented research seem legit, complete, and impartial?" and "is her conclusion logical?". She gives you the receipts to check. This is not the same as deciding whether to put blind faith into a comedian's off-the-cuff anecdotes and opinions.
I often disagree with her conclusions, but at least she makes it very easy to validate her chain of though, find where our views diverge, and only absorb the information I trust.
Someone speaking provocatively and authoritatively on topics they don’t have credibility in is where you should think critically and turn it off.
I appreciate that she makes her videos so easily verifiable, by prominently showing her research, that it was easy to see the point when this started happening and tune out. A lot of opinion-faucets on the internet try to be irrefutable by hiding their sources.
I don't trust Sabine intrinsically, but I trust that I can notice when she under-researches a topic or makes a leap of logic. She conveys enough good information that I find it worth my time to watch.