Is There a Paradox in Credibility When it Comes to UAP Researchers?

I’ve noticed and have also been influenced by an odd contradiction in the credibility of paranormal research, researchers and enthusiasts.

Paranormal Rsearch, including, though maybe to a lesser extent now, UAP research is one of the only fields in which the more experience a person has, the less credible they seem to be. At least to a general demographic.

I’ll give an example. A video of a UAP filmed incidentally by a person with no prior interest in the topic is generally perceived as outwardly credible. A video of a UAP filmed by a person with a longstanding interest in the topic, who claims to be an authority and has built a career or gained a following based on this position, is immediately more suspect.

They have a vested interest in producing something that justifies the time they’ve spent, and gains them more exposure.

When a guy who believes 100% that Bigfoot exists and has spent 20 years looking for him films Bigfoot, it raises an automatic red flag. Some random pair of hikers filming Bigfoot, though, seems at first more legitimate.

It’s really the only field I can think of wherein the more experience a person has, the less credible they become. Or, least, the less credible any evidence they present becomes.

Is this fair, or is it a backwards bias? This is mostly speaking to the general public instead of those already interested in this.