I dunno why this blog keeps be voted to the top. Yeah, current physics research is lacking in some areas .since when was it perfect?
I watched that with Sam Harris. He seemed to have interesting ideas but now he seems just to be good at debating. Same for Jordan Peterson.
It's more like everyone is doing the marketing for her
The field of physics has gotten bigger overall, including experimental physics. It's not like physics is 100% theoretical , untestable stuff.
Unfortunately the untestable stuff gets the most press. If you talk to experimental physicists in university, they'll tell you all that stuff isn't treated seriously by them, but reading the press you may get the impression that things like string theory are widely-respectable and that there is only some disagreement, usual science stuff. The press really distorts the picture of what most physicists think about these topics.
(Also, I wouldn't use the term "theoretical" for untestable stuff. I would use "speculative". "Theoretical physics" does not imply unfalsifiable speculation, it can actually be fruitful scientifically.)
Almost by definition people who are mildly interested in string theory don't talk about it unless asked.
String theory has the potential to work, and doesn't involve as much parameter-hacking as other models, whereas its main competitors don't even work "in theory".
It's also worth saying that a lot of "string theorists" are actually working on consequences of things like holography rather than banging their head against a book trying to work on the very essence of the theory.