You know, at this point, I probably would. But I'm a depressed person about to graduate into the middle of what looks an awful lot like the end of the world as we know it, so...
> Is it really that hard to distinguish reassuring rhetoric from a scientific claim?
Nope.
For instance, if you can differentiate survivorship bias (which this fails to even reach up to) from a valid statement supported by objective evidence, you have, in fact, literally distinguished mere reassuring rhetoric from a scientific claim.
Some statements are intended to inspire you to influence the future for the better, not to provide "valid statements supported by objective evidence" to describe the present. Further, there are no valid statements that can be guaranteed to accurately describe the future because it hasn't happened yet. The choices you make and the attitude you embrace will in some part determine what that is.
Like, if you got laid off and your friend said "Hey man, it'll be ok" do you demand a peer reviewed study proving it?