Read a different way, they have a hypothesis they set out to prove or disprove. Their experiment was flawed and the data thrown out, so the hypothesis is neithe

Read a different way, they have a hypothesis they set out to prove or disprove. Their experiment was flawed and the data thrown out, so the hypothesis is neither confirmed nor disproved. It's still a hypothesis, and one backed by more anecdotal evidence. It would be disingenuous to suggest it's false without evidence supporting same. I think they were transparent and logical in their reporting.