This is how science works. Sometimes you are right, sometimes you are wrong. Sometimes your 'wrongs' lead to the most amazing 'rights' (and not always by the same people) and sometimes they stay wrong. For example, Geoffrey Hinton was 'wrong' for years (though he didn't publish anything claiming he was right and had cracked something, but different field, but lots of people had already given up and he persisted) and look at him now.
Reputation matters, so don't commit fraud and don't try to trick others. That is the sort of thing you won't be recovering from. But being wrong is fine, even if you truly believe(d) that you are right. Note that this whole saga was not started on the timetable of the people that have the most at stake. I'm hoping they are right, I'm fearing they are wrong and if it turns out that they were wrong then I hope that they will not be dissuaded by that and that they and many others will continue the search. There are a lot of things that came out of materials science in the last two decades that we'd have never had if not for people searching for them. Not all of those searches will pan out, that's pretty much a given. Think of it as sifting for gold in a mountain of junk. For every piece of gold there are piles and piles of junk. And sometimes stuff that looks very much like gold, but ultimately isn't. That should not affect the reputation of the seekers. They are either going to try again, or maybe they'll give up. But what others think of them doesn't matter all that much.