The OP cited a METR study... if you don't think they're credible, fine, but it's hard for me to see how it could be intellectually honest to cite them when their research is helpful to your argument and discredit them when it's not. One might even call this approach "fooling yourself".

The OP is not citing their claims, but their commentary. Do you understand why I find that to be different than citing their findings? We're not talking percentages here.