Imo, this jumping to conclusions is endemic of evolutionism, and thus the claim of most papers being incorrect, when evos tend to tout unsubstantiated claims (like widely publicizing Pakicetus as aquatic or semi-aquatic before enough data was in), is an important consideration.
Have you ever heard of cold fusion? Or poly water? Or have you heard that coffee is good for your? Or that coffee is bad for you? Or that coffee is good for you?
All scientists speculate. They put out their bold hypotheses, with some supporting evidence. Then other scientists try to knock them down. The hypotheses that can't be knocked down might lead to important progress.
Often this all takes place between colleagues, and doesn't get into the research journals. But in some cases it does get published.
Your mistake is to assume that something devious is happening.