That was the most blatant example, but I see members of the university Senate voting for what they "know" over what they have evidence for on a regular basis.
(And the philosophers aren't the problem... although that might be partly because our philosophy department is quite strong on logic.)
Many English-speaking philosophy departments are, largely because Bertrand Russell got tired of this shit 100 years ago:
"Hitherto the people attracted to philosophy have been mostly those who loved the big generalizations, which were all wrong, so that few people with exact minds have taken up the subject."
Better-read with good probability, better-educated with good probability. But no specific reason for them to be more intelligent, because there is no process to make that especially likely.
It is a job one gets by deciding to do it, sticking to it, paying one's dues over a long period, cultivating connections, building a personal brand. Like so many other jobs...
Professors should be respected in direct proportion to their actually demonstrated knowledge, and only in the fields where that knowledge has been demonstrated... other than this we should not respect them more than teachers of high school or elementary school, who usually have greater expertise and dedication in teaching.
(And the philosophers aren't the problem... although that might be partly because our philosophy department is quite strong on logic.)