There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published. There is a syste...

I was able to eliminate the other answer choices but had issues with these two. The stimulus states that poor scientific work isn't harmful so why would A weaken the argument? If poor scientific work isn't harmful, then what is the problem with it taking a long time to disconfirm it? I picked C because I thought if scientists were under pressure to make their work accessible to replication then they could potentially find a way to make it so their poor work passes the initial sniff test even if it is of poor quality.