It isn't that I question the validity of the results because of how they were produced, but because I can produce many other quite different results with minima

It isn't that I question the validity of the results because of how they were produced, but because I can produce many other quite different results with minimal effort that are no easier to dispute with sound reasoning than the 'official' message presented. It is like a theory that, while explaining the results we saw, would just as easily explain any other results. Such a theory wouldn't be worth any further consideration unless the supporters are able to give it more sound structure so that we can actually have a reasonable way of saying 'no, that is wrong' or 'yes, that is right'. As it stands, if there is a boat, I could say the boat is representing something feminine because boats are like sheathes and provide protection from the harshness of the sea like a mother or I could say the the boat is representing something masculine because it is piercing the water and representing historically masculine ideas of exploration and conquest. Any such analysis is largely useless as I can get what ever result I want.