> Being thruthful [sic] about the non-discovery

> Just make some shit up

Is that how it works in the scientific community? I'm not actively involved, but I feel like publishing my findings, one way or another, would require explaining how I arrived at them in a manner that would be reproducible (and thus, verifiable to an extent) by others. What am I missing?

Not asking rhetorically, by the way. I'm just genuinely curious.