Well, yeah, because when you have dedicated your life to 12+ years of rigorous university study and, more importantly... peer review
(Peer review is super-important. Here is a link that will explain why), and then gone into a professional life where you have dedicated your life to obtaining
reliable and repeatable experimental results and following the most rigorous scientific methodology you can, based on international best practice, the individuals involved have actually bothered to really engage with the information at the deepest level possible. Now compare that to most amateurs, or worse, actual frauds, and you can see why the academics are skeptical.
Now I won't say that there isn't a bit of professional jealousy involved, and the astronomers and physicists aren't protecting their professional territory like a medieval guild privilege, but they also guarantee us a much higher and more reliable measure of quality than the amateurs. More importantly, the professional academics have generally replicated their results multiple times, and anyone following in their footsteps can achieve the same results. Very few amateurs ever do that, but that is not the same as saying that
no amateur scientists do that, for example, here is a short list of some very famous and successful amateurs:
Famous amateur scientists link.
The main thing that I rely on academics for is to ferret out frauds via peer review.
As to the black hole photo, once you come to terms with how amazingly difficult even that "blurry photo" was to take, is seems miraculous. For a start, black holes are black, and space is black, so there's that. Then you have the issue that black holes swallow even light. Then there is the issue of the incredible distances involved. The fact is that the glowing part is merely the light particles being sucked into the black hole, and in fact the, black part in the middle, which is the
actual black hole is not blurry, and would normally be completely invisible.