I agree that there should be reasonable restraint at the initial discoveries. It would be better to hold applause til after tests/more information/peer review etc.
But the important issue is that there is a process in place that can consistently objectively evaluate claims and hold them true/false based on established rules of evidence.
“creationists were right in initially stating that it wouldn’t turn out to be a missing link.” really? and based on what testable evidence did they proclaim that this wasn’t the missing link? com’on you’re better than that-evolution is a priori incorrect in many creationist world view. So any finding that supports it will be initially (and in the face of overwhelming evidence,IMHO)and continually called false.
happens in findings supporting religious finds as well-remember the ‘lost ark’ discoveries?
I’m aware that scientists don’t like the reasoning but that doesn’t change the fact that they were right.
Even though the process is in place to evaluate claims etc, either the announcements of the finds should be held back until a thorough examination is made, or the retraction should be by those who made the announcement and as publicly and widespread as that.
It doesn’t seem that the retractions get quite the coverage as the announcements, and all that does is lend itself to accusations of agenda and cover-ups.