IMO what you are really complaining about zmjezhd is an enthusiasm for words.
I just read "How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life" by Thomas Gilovich. One chapter concerns the face on Mars and other related phenomena. The author describes the causes, the implications, and the research literature. He does not use the word pareidolia once. It's absence is not even noticed.
The fact is, any "special" word can be described by means of other, more pedestrian words. Not only are the special words not necessary, it is often best to avoid using them. People will not understand them, and you may even look like a blowhard or a wiseacre or worse for taking the trouble to introduce them.
That is why people like us—who feel that words are interesting in themselves—come to places like this. And if our unflappable insistence on finding a word for a thing is sometimes a little overarching, that is hardly our fault. The poster, by asking a question, announces his ignorance respecting it, and therefore cannot be expected to know when his question is pointless and when it is going to be validated by an answer. The language is too vast and too complex to make reliable presuppositions about what is and what is not a stupid question.
A lot of the words I collect are as dead as a lepidopterist's butterflies—I will never use them in speech or writing. But I like them, and so I'll keep on looking for them in strange places, even at the expense of coming off however it is I come off by wanting to know words for sounds or by grailling after the single lexeme.
