I'm not a research scientist and most of them go over my head if I'm honest. I'm happy to admit that (although tbf I've not read any of his links for ages).
What I've usually found with the information posted is that usually that the person who has written it is either not in any way scientifically trained (for example one of the links posted above was written by a guy who studies music composition and runs an SEO website, or are a contrarian in their field and foe every doomsdayer you can find I would be able to find 50 others that disagree/have an alternate view.
That doesn't make them wrong as such - but if they were wrong and
@mon was just mindlessly regurgitating misinformation, then he would have absolutely no way of knowing that.
So choices about - do you 1) admit your own ignorance and lack of knowledge or 2) post literally every substack link you find that agrees with your preexisting position without really having the scientific/research chops to critically assess what you are reading.
It's a tough call.