We're talking on a casual forum. This isn't an academic discussion. Blog posts are a lot more approachable than most journal articles. And blogs often contain references.

Not everything is a formal academic debate. Most things aren't. Note, you didn't reply to the parent commenter demanding that they provide journal articles for their point. You just saw something you didn't like about my comment and decided to demand a journal article as a citation. Usually when people who aren't participating come into a discussion to demand peer-reviewed sources, it's done in bad faith. They demand high quality sources from one side while not extending the same requirement to the other.

Here's another blog posts that address the original topic. You can look up the primary sources if you are so inclined.

https://www.newhopecg.net/post/so-your-brain-actually-isn-t-fully-formed-at-25

Or if you want to improve the quality of discussion, perhaps add your own sources instead of demanding others provide them.

And note, even you don't provide academic sources for your claims. You claim you're seeing blog posts linked everywhere, but where is your journal article defending this claim? Where is your paper performing a statistical analysis to prove that people are citing blog posts more frequently than in the past?

And I would argue that linking to a blog post is far from pointless. Blogs are less rigorous but far more approachable and digestible than journal articles. The real purpose of linking to them is so that a commenter doesn't need to spend the time greatly elaborating a point that could be made simply by linking to a larger outside discussion. That has value. And a blog post certainly has more value than a random short Lemmy comment. At least if someone is taking the time to write a blog post dedicated to a single topic, it shows that they've put the time in to consider the subject.