While I don't understand it myself, I've seen a study showing how some scientists can compartmentalize and apply different standards of evidence between their professional life and personal beliefs. In other cases, scientists conducting rigorous lab controlled studies have been deceived by fake psychics doing simple magic tricks (and not nearly as well as a competent magician). For example, Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ at Stanford Research Institute being fooled by Uri Geller. While Puthoff and Targ were trained experimentalists having worked in laser physics, their parapsychology study designs had poor controls and lacked statistical rigor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology_research_at_SRI

As a long-time skeptic, I've learned to avoid broad appeals to authority because relying on "a scientist said..." is ineffective when a true believer can cite a credentialed scientist spouting nutty stuff. In recent years the situation around military assessments of UFO sightings has also changed dramatically. In the mid-2010s, some UFO enthusiasts already in the military managed to work their way into positions as UAP investigators, largely because "UFO Investigator" was a role no serious military careerist wanted on their record. Suddenly, what were once hundred page dry, technical assessments boiling down to "inconclusive" (which no one cared about) became artfully crafted, overly-credulous reports highlighting sensational (but poorly supported) "possibilities." This coincided with a political recalculation from some members of both parties in congress and the White House during the past two administrations to stop fighting the tiny but highly vocal UFO community as it was a no-win battle and instead basically leverage UAPs as a sideshow either for attention or distraction. And it's working.