Tweaking the inputs would help one to identify what factor is causing the difference, which allows you to focus on that. It doesn’t mean you permanently leave it out.
And it does not make a credibility issue. This is how science works — it is a process that strives to be as accurate as possible, not come up with a static answer and stick to it (that’s what religion does).
The ability for science to change and adapt is what makes it so strong. That is the message that needs to always be driven when discussing science; not throwing hands in the air and saying “why do these scientists keep changing their answers? They obviously don’t know what they’re doing”
And it does not make a credibility issue. This is how science works — it is a process that strives to be as accurate as possible, not come up with a static answer and stick to it (that’s what religion does).
The ability for science to change and adapt is what makes it so strong. That is the message that needs to always be driven when discussing science; not throwing hands in the air and saying “why do these scientists keep changing their answers? They obviously don’t know what they’re doing”