I'm not sure about the overall world becoming rife with BSers, but I wouldn't doubt it. 10-15 years ago, we had an evidence tech at the lab who would happily answer questions from the submitting officers about the testing of the evidence. She did it because she thought she was saving us (the chemists) time. Or that was what she said (I think she wanted to feel like she was almost like "CSI" and knew things they didn't). Problem, of course, was that she based her answers on the 5 % of info she actually had on the subject. The other 95% is pretty important in forensics. I can't count the number of times I had to run out of the building to chase down a guy and give him the right info or call afterwards and set someone straight. In several cases, it caused a real delay in analyzing the evidence. And it almost always made the lab look bad because the officer had gotten bad info from someone there. They didn't really understand that the evidence techs were just HS grads who had a relative in the state police.
And we were always taught to say "I don't know" when asked a question that we didn't know the answer to. Especially in court.
I also once had a co-worker call me in the middle of the night to ask how to do a certain test because a judge had just signed a court order saying we had to do that test on a suspect at a scene (not sure if it had been the judge's idea or an attorney's). The test was one that had been ruled inadmissible in court before I was born. So much fun telling a judge he can't order us to do a test that he can't allow in court (and that we didn't have the materials to conduct).