In your example the facts didnt change, only the explanation. The implication yo

In your example the facts didnt change, only the explanation. The implication you’re making by stating facts change is that induction is possible from facts when you later demonstrate its not.

Instead, both possibilities were supported by the facts, yet the facts were insufficient to disambiguate the completing explanations to sufficiently provide decidability between them. As such facts dont change, and induction isn’t possible, only the falsification of alternative explanations.

This said, yes there is a great deal of bad science, and many studies are the product of junior people publishing nonsense, vying for attention, to satisfy a job or grant related requirement – though the perception is as much a product of journalists as scientists. 😉

Reply addressees: @TheRealVerbz