Groupthink?

To me, given the weak evidence, it's mind-boggling that Cornell could publicly claim conclusive proof that the Ivory-bill had been re-discovered. I don't see just a niggling concern here or there among the evidence--I see red flags, and lots of them. How could this happen?!

If Cornell is wrong, groupthink may partly explain this situation.

Here's a snippet from the groupthink link above:
----
Janis cited a number of antecedent conditions that would be likely to encourage groupthink. These include:

• Insulation of the group
• High group cohesiveness
• Directive leadership
• Lack of norms requiring methodical procedures
• Homogeneity of members' social background and ideology
• High stress from external threats with low hope of a better solution than the one offered by the leader(s)

Janis listed eight symptoms that he said were indicative of groupthink:

1. Illusion of invulnerability
2. Unquestioned belief in the inherent morality of the group
3. Collective rationalization of group's decisions
4. Shared stereotypes of outgroup, particularly opponents
5. Self-censorship; members withhold criticisms
6. Illusion of unanimity (see false consensus effect)
7. Direct pressure on dissenters to conform
8. Self-appointed "mindguards" protect the group from negative information

Finally, the seven symptoms of decision affected by groupthink are:

1. Incomplete survey of alternatives
2. Incomplete survey of objectives
3. Failure to examine risks of preferred choice
4. Failure to re-appraise initially rejected alternatives
5. Poor information search
6. Selective bias in processing information at hand (see also confirmation bias)
7. Failure to work out contingency plans
   

----
I think a number of the points above may apply to the Cornell search team.