My complaint isn't that you don't provide research. My complaint is that you use "IMO" to make a claim that could easily be substantiated instead.

E.g. "in my experience async/await can easily result in bugs that can be hard to detect" or "when teaching beginners, I've found that they have a harder time wrapping their head around async/await than when learning about agents" or "async/await still requires writing imperative code, requiring the programmer to pay attention to behavior that agents can abstract away through declarative code". Now, I don't know if any of those statements are true or if they reflect your experience but these are examples for what you could have said, assuming you didn't just want to say "I don't like JavaScript and I prefer Elixir or Erlang".

And yes, people just dumping strong opinions with little more substance than gut feelings is very much a problem in Software Engineering. That doesn't mean we can't work on that and practice a little more hygiene and respect for each other.

EDIT: To be clear, saying "I don't like X an I prefer Y or Z" is perfectly fine too as long as you are honest about this being your own preference rather than some grand truth about the universe. The problem comes from insisting that everyone else is wrong for not feeling the same way.