My case against Creationism and Infinite regression

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

But then other scientists examine that evidence, replicate the published experiments and try to recreate the results. If the evidence is faulty, the peer-reviewed results will discover it. At some point, someone else will probably find another, valid, explanation and that will gain more traction in the literature. The original flawed data will be marginalised and eventually forgotten. It doesn't matter what the first scientist's motives were; the science will correct itself.

To provide an example, statistics can be used to show to mean what they don't mean. It is mostly done very subtly that people don't really realize it. I wish I could provide an instance but I can't remember the exact last time I encountered one of these intentional misinterpretion, I'll be sure to post it next time I see one.