You made some pretty strong claims suggesting that my theory (or the theories of people in my reference class) was making strong predictions in the space. I corrected you and said "no, it doesn't actually make the prediction you claim it makes" and gave my reasons for believing that (that I am pretty sure are shared by many others as well). 

We can talk about those reasons, but I am not super interested in being psychologized about whether I am structuring my theories intentionally to avoid falsification. It's not like you have a theory that is in any way more constraining here.

And it seems you expect this behavior to stop because of the capabilities of the models, rather than from deliberate efforts to mitigate deception in AIs.

I mean, I expect the observations to be affected by both, of course. That's one of the key things that makes predictions in the space so messy.