I don't find that true as I believe in scientific principles.

I think using flawed research is worse than using no research. In this case, kecanoe is a credible source of information to me, so I would give more weight to it.

Just like anecdotes, there is another side to research. Health research is a prime example, where someone constantly conflicts/disproves previous research. Simplified-eggs are bad for you, but no, they are good for you. The next article says they are bad for you. Remember, the FDA has had simple carbs on the top of the food pyramid for years and years--based on research. This has been proven to be wrong time and time again.

(Also, I've worked in a field where research is widely applied and the results are a disaster in many cases; worse than if no research was used.)