Most of what you mention, while probably true is not the issue I was replying to. >Finally, even when results may be found, they will be attacked as being untr

Most of what you mention, while probably true is not the issue I was replying to. >Finally, even when results may be found, they will be attacked as being untrustable because the author must've been biased to even go looking for such results. Sure, and that may be the problem of looking for a predetermined outcome that haberman was referring to. If your testing methods are poor enough that spurious results are likely, then the fact that all your hypothesis are somehow biased is a problem. Though I'd say the problem is more with the testing methods than with the hypothesis. Using the LHC example again no one could attack Higgs for being biased as an argument for the boson not existing after the LHC results were in. The provenance of the hypothesis should be irrelevant if the testing methods are good enough to provide strong evidence for it.