The ideal scientist should have a passionate dispassion about the conculsions of his theories. It is what it is, nothing added or subtracted. As much attention, experimentation, and theory, press, and horn blowing, should be expended to prove life and species as having been spontaneous as has been exhausted on proving it's not.
Some suspect scientists, fair or not, of being members of a good ol boys club more interested in getting stroked by their peers, than rocking the boat by looking in unauthorized and unpopular directions, and certainly taking no risk of being toss'ed from membership in the club.
This leads, fair or not, to the perception that scientists, in limiting the scope and direction of their research out of haughtiness, has placed humankind in a postion of having been robbed of needed accurate information and their dollars being wasted on useless but popular pursutes that have been a circular route back to "we don't know", and, "there appears to have been a sudden spontaneous eruption of species".
There's no such thing. Scientists are human too; they just tend to get excited by learning new things. I would say that insatiable curiosity and a keen sense of humor are why they become scientists in the first place.