> However, if you do the painstaking work of combing through someone else’s published work, and discovering that they are riddled with serious errors, including hundreds of incorrect predictions, you can post a pre-print to bioRxiv that will not receive even a fraction of the citations or views of the original.

This is not a unique phenomenon to AI, a study a few years before AI exploded showed that sensational but wrong papers had a higher chance of being published in top journals, and were cited more than papers that showed they were incorrect. This is an outcome of the bad incentives in science publishing these days.