> Either it is correct; or it is not. Perhaps it is somewhat correct, but then it may not be fully correct, so it would contain wrong information.

I don't understand your criticism.

It makes complete sense that the researchers are worried about the research being oversold. It's routine for media to take a scientific finding and grossly exaggerate its impact, i.e. "New research proves you can exercise your way to a fit child" or whatever.

This is science, we don't know if anything is "correct." The more compelling the research, the more we can adjust our priors as to what is "correct."

> There are examples of where theories were lateron shown to be wrong.

There are also lots of examples where theories were later not shown to be wrong. What's your point?

Do you have an actual, concrete criticism of the methodology of the epigentic research in TFA, or are your just bloviating?