Yeah, there are actual studies that show that highly intelligent people are far more effective in coming up with reasons to support their position even when their position is wrong. In fact, their advantage over less intelligent people is greater in that case (more bluntly, dumb people only make good arguments when they're right, while smart people can make good arguments right or wrong). High-IQ people also are slowly to change incorrect positions than low-IQ people are, either because they were so good at coming up with arguments to support that bad position or because they're just more prideful.
It's one of the reasons you so often see smart people on both sides of an argument. Or on occasion even see perceived "smart" people all ganging up on the same side of an argument that in historical retrospect was clearly wrong.
To use a recent example, whenever Stephen Hawking is speaking on anything other than theoretical astrophysics, he comes off as profoundly clueless. He's not just wrong, he's ignorantly, blindly wrong, just talking out his ass. But because he's so intelligent in his field, he believes that his views on other subjects will also be correct, even though he hasn't spent even 0.1% of the time learning them that he spent learning physics. So he'll spout off on something to the media as if his views on the subject matter, and they'll all cover it because a "smart" person said it, with deference to his opinions, even if they're ill-informed and poorly reasoned. He's entitled to his opinion but they really shouldn't be covering it. Needs to shut up and calculate event horizons.
It takes a ton more work to be both intelligent and intellectually humble. To be a constant learner and constantly reevaluate your positions. if you can do that though, and disseminate your findings in a manner that educates others, you can be a huge asset to society.