[wsay]

I think the inadequate data is the key point, especially as we've only seen two of these types of things so far - the best we can probably hope for now is to go "This object seemed odd in several ways - let's increase our observations for these kinds of objects and see what the majority turn out to be and importantly if we encounter anything which is odd in similar ways which we can identify".

So when the question is posed "What is a responsible scientist to do in this situation?" I think the answer is clearly, accept it as an "out-there" but currently not disprovable hypothesis, and if you feel strongly that it's incorrect, dedicate effort and time to showing with evidence (at least quantifiable empirical evidence) that this is the case, ideally in a published and peer-reviewed paper.