Yeah it's all Eugene Levy in Splash until someone finds a mermaid, and then it's suddenly the Sackler Chair of the Department of Astroarchaeology at Columbia.
I'm not saying 'the system' doesn't suck, but it's undeniable that anyone else would have been strongarmed into removing the part even implying/suggesting ET intelligence as a possible explanation for the possibility of the object being a 'pancake' sail rather than rotated oblong. Would it be awesome to be true? Absolutely. Do we need more data? Yes. Does it require more research? Ditto. Do I want to believe? Hell yeah! But because of the implications of this work, skepticism has to be on the all-time high. Back when the topic was fresh, I was being dismissive of quite a few rebuttals to Loeb, saying how "adding these 15 parameters gives a better explanation" is a worthless statement on par with "my gf is homeomorphic with a torus, so is Liv Tyler, therefore I'm screwing Arven on the daily, therefore I'm Aragorn." Now? I want to believe, but don't want to be reckless or show any less scrutiny than I'd give to my research, neither on the record nor off. Which I suppose is exactly what you want in a scientist. I just became far more wary of Loeb('s persona) with time.