We haven't even addressed the distortion that negative results, such as the results of failed experiments, are never published, yet are extremely valuable. Perhaps scientists wish to condemn their peers to fighting battles already lost.
IME, scientists have wildly different outlooks here. Some are all flowers and unicorns "we're doing it to better humanity" etc., others are fighting vicious (if imaginary?) battles against their scientific peers (=competitors) about who can publish the most (impactful) papers.
For the latter group, if you manage to trick your competitor into a year-long wild goose chase, all the better.
