[lutusp]

> What about credible results- should things require less evidence if they support the status quo?

Not in science. The problem with accepting credible results is that they may create an atmosphere of credibility where none really exists, and over time become the status quo without any real basis.

There are any number of stories in science where an expected value was reliably detected in a replication only because it was expected, and later, after the expected value changed, so did the replication results.

Remember that, in science, the null hypothesis is the default position -- in other words, there's no effect until persuasive evidence contradicts that assumption.