@thoughtful, it should clear too that some of these problems are undebatable. It is obviously the case that there are more than just 2 published studies. We can debate interpretation of data, but this is not a matter of interpretation, but of fact that you can directly verify.
You can learn who is trustworthy by how they manage errors like this. Do they quickly and publicly acknowledge the error and correct the record? Or do they do nothing? Or do they repeat the error? Which response to do you feel is most trustworthy?
Closely related, it is undebatable that Jeanson misrepresented me: Would Jeanson Please Correct A Clear Misrepresentation?. Why has he not corrected this? Do you feel this is trustworthy?
I’ve publicly acknowledged and corrected errors in my book (https://peacefulscience.org/wrong-on-monophyletic/), so I 'm not stating an unreasonable standard.
There can be legitimate debates about the interpretation of data, but that is not what we are dealing with in this particular situation.