The best I can say is that there are a lot of perverse incentives in the business of science. I think 'untrue' is a bit harsh, but I also think that we're often put in a position where we have to speculate too much on what results 'mean'.

I would say that when I review papers, I generally recommend that at least two thirds be rejected out of hand, due to the fact that the results look sloppy, unfinished, etc. Sloppy results abound, sadly.