Sure, but skepticism should decrease if there are a community of experts are saying the same thing. As an example, anti-vaxxers often claim skepticism and that they have done their own research. The reason we don't trust them is because we think doctors have a greater expertise in the subject than them (it is, either way, trusting someone). Unless you're a virologist you probably don't actually have the expertise to actually verify vaccine claims.

So sure, you are right, but in the context of this discussion you're implying that the vast majority of ML researchers (myself included) are charlatans. I'm not sure what the meaningful difference here is. We're publishing results, people are actively reproducing them, and then some person on the internet that doesn't understand the subject comes along and says "you're full of shit." We can even disprove the claims being made (e.g. I've explained why the network can't be memorizing the game in another comment). That is literally happening in this thread (GAN Theft Auto is in fact a replication/extension effort). Is that meaningfully different from the anti-vaxxers?