During a recent talk at a top US university, I was about to present my data, when a colleague interrupted and suggested that I skip that part and go on to the conclusions. ``We trust you.'' was the explanation. Flattering as that was, it shows a disturbing misunderstanding of the scientific process (or someone in a hurry). Any scientific claim is initially suspect and must be examined closely. Imagine what would have happened if physicists hadn't been skeptical about the claims by Ponds and Fleischman regarding cold fusion.
Frankly, I'm continually surprised how much the computer industry and sometimes even university teaching relies on so-called ``experts'' of all kinds, who fail to back up their assertions with evidence. Science, on the other hand, is built on healthy skepticism. It is a good system to carefully check results and to accept them only provisionally until they have been confirmed independently.