I can’t think of any reason to give a confident, high precision story that you don’t even believe in!
Datapoints generalize, a high precision story holds gears that can be reused in other hypotheticals. I’m not sure what you mean by the story being presented as “confident” (in some sense it’s always wrong to say that a point prediction is “confident” rather than zero probability, even if it’s the mode of a distribution, the most probable point). But in any case I think giving high precision stories is a good methodology for communicating a framing, pointing out which considerations seem to be more important in thinking about possibilities, and also which events (that happen to occur in the story) seem more plausible than their alternatives.
Datapoints generalize, a high precision story holds gears that can be reused in other hypotheticals. I’m not sure what you mean by the story being presented as “confident” (in some sense it’s always wrong to say that a point prediction is “confident” rather than zero probability, even if it’s the mode of a distribution, the most probable point). But in any case I think giving high precision stories is a good methodology for communicating a framing, pointing out which considerations seem to be more important in thinking about possibilities, and also which events (that happen to occur in the story) seem more plausible than their alternatives.