False results, yes, but it doesn't have to be due to mistakes but can also be due to innocent unlucky sampling. If the effect is so strong that hardly ever hap

False results, yes, but it doesn't have to be due to mistakes but can also be due to innocent unlucky sampling. If the effect is so strong that hardly ever happens, then it should also be so strong that there aren't many papers showing only a weak effect, but there's a huge amount of them. Maybe they're all botched but got published because their results agreed with the accepted idea whereas a contrarian botched paper would get more scrutiny and be rejected?