Underpowered implies that given enough data you can make stronger claims. The argument the above poster made can be made with any amount of investigating up to and including 24x7 surveillance. In other words if you are going to make an argument about data being underpowered you need to describe what additional data would be necessary to provide enough power. If you don't you just sound like the pseudoscience people who hold on to unfalsifiable claims.

"Underpowered" would have been damning enough, and a reasonably fair accusation to make.

But it wasn't good enough for Horvath: in order to get her point across -- and to play with your head -- she needs you to believe that you to believe there was "no investigation."