>"this doesn't immediately make them "junk" just adds another data point in support of the null hypothesis" Unless the null hypothesis happens to correspond to

>"this doesn't immediately make them "junk" just adds another data point in support of the null hypothesis" Unless the null hypothesis happens to correspond to someone's actual hypothesis, chances are your study was designed to be junk from the beginning and anything of value that occurred was despite that. For example, no one actually believes humans have exactly zero impact on climate, or smoking has exactly zero impact on cancer incidence. Yet the vast majority of studies on these topics will be testing those "hypotheses". That is the junk.