The valid point is that the find was hyped as something it was not. Of course people make mistakes, but hyping the find before validation was not an accident, it was a political ploy. Trumpeting a find as more than it is and later quietly retracting the claim is a tactic that belongs to the NY Times, not the scientific community. That is, unless there are similarities by necessity.
Regardless of what side a person holds to, intellectual dishonesty is pathetic and suggests either self centered arrogance, a lack of faith in the validity of ones own framework or both.
That is a problem with science today in general. Lots of “peer reviewed journals” a complete joke.