https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03775-z
Every scientific forecaster understands that their forecasts must include a correction to take into account their own previous forecasting errors.
To do otherwise is to believe that you are not an agent.
Reporting the truth of nature rather than your interpretation of that truth.
This is an exercise in persuasion, not science.
It is troubling that some of our most respected traditional sources of science should be so corrupted and so corrupting without shame. It is however an opinion not an article and thus lacks peer review. Take it as especially flawed opinion.