They do the experiment again, double check all their calculations, then they come up with a new theory if it's necessary. That's why there's no such thing as a scientific fact, only scientific theories.
use scientific evidence to support your answer
modify the theory or discard it altogether.
If new evidence does not support a scientific theory, scientists will most likely
draw conclusions
The two factors that help maintain a scientists believability is evidence and logical support. These are the ones that are considered to be scientific credibility factors.
Like all accepted scientific theories, there is a general consensus amongst scientists across the world that there is enough evidence from observation and experimentation to support it.
The strongest piece of evidence for the endosymbiotic theory is the fact that mitochondria and chloroplasts have their own circular DNA, prokaryote fashion, and can still replicate, transcribe and translate some proteins. Their ribosomes are also fashioned as a prokaryotes would be.
peanut butter
You obtain objective evidence to support it by undertaking experiments designed to test the veracity of the hypothesis.
When the evidence in a scientific experiment does not support the hypothesis the scientist:Confirm through repeated experimentation that the evidence is validReject the hypothesisDevelop another hypothesis that is consistent with the valid evidence
The results of his experiments did not support his hypothesis.
i dont now