“Let’s stay flexible” is often a polite way to keep bad explanations alive.
That false virtue has a real operating cost. If an explanation can be adjusted after the fact, criticism stops being about what is true and starts being about who has status. The discussion gets softer on the surface and more political underneath.
The hard-to-vary test corrects for that. An explanation holds up only if its core cannot be reworded or modified without losing its ability to explain the facts and make a risky prediction. In practice, write down what facts it explains, what parts cannot move, and what would prove it wrong later.
Now the argument has edges. If the prediction misses, the explanation takes the hit. You do not need a villain, and you do not need a coalition.
That is the point: sharper criticism with less blood on the floor. If you want a less political culture, stop rewarding explanations that can survive everything.