They are not perfect, but institutions like peer review or universities do provide a framework and incentives for quality.
If you are spending time, money, and risk based on a claim, verification still helps to cull info that is deceptive or done with methods so shoddy it might as well be lying.
Sure, you can verify through your failures, but that isnt great. You company goes belly up and you can confidently say the blog was bullshit.
The main difference is reproducibility and peer review process.
Were they peer reviewed and reproducable?
And what's the point of claiming there are peer reviewed reproducable studies that show this, if you don't bother citing those studies for your peers to review?
On the first, I mostly don’t care.
On the second, that’s mostly unavoidable if they want to keep their IP.