not neccesarily? It depends on what the claims are. If prior art says 'this is impossible' then a study with one result that is hard to replicate is an interesting insight about the margins. If it is commonly accepted wisdom, we may need to address what that is. If it is your experiment, it doesn't mean your result is wrong but it means it should be significantly questioned. If I say its more that is on me...if I say it is what it is then the results are the results.

I think it is a growing, and problematic, misconception that science is about just reporting facts. It is about adding knowledge...soemtimes that is new facts, but more often it is theories, observations, and questions increasingly at the margins of randomness and probability as our species grows and learns.