I have formed my opinions based on others' critiques of his work and his methods. If I had all the time in the world, I would do it all myself, for every one of the people who persuade the country that something that is not true, is. Alas, I haven't got that time, so instead I trust the opinions and knowledge of others in the field.
There is another approach: don't hold opinions (or at least strong opinions) on things you haven't checked out yourself. You don't have to have strong opinions on everything, and opinions that lack justification aren't worth having.
(At the risk of being a bore: I studied philosophy at university, prior to which I had strong opinions on a wide variety of subjects. By reading philosophy I rapidly realized that nothing is obvious, everything is open to question. Because (when new to the subject) I would read one paper, think it made an overwhelming case for X which must surely settle the matter, then read another paper which appeared to refute X completely. And indeed, philosophy questions all the everyday certainties (from the laws of physics to the foundations of logic). Which is not to say that there isn't a fact of the matter - just that it is elusive.)
Last edited: