There's a book I came across the other day entitled "Wrong: Why experts keep failing us" by David H. Freedman. His 'experts' are, scientists, finance wizards, doctors, relationship gurus, celebrity CEOs, ... consultants, health officials and more. Briefly he describes how, for instance a medical journal might publish the results of a study which indicate a particular finding, which is seized upon by the media and hailed as a triumph of scientific research. Often only months later other results are published which call into question the original claims. For reasons unclear these latter publications are ignored or treated as irrelevant and the public advised to dismiss such evidence as unreliable.
These studies were presumably carried out in a rigorous manner and designed to obtain data which would allow careful analysis and result in the replacement of the conjecture and careless assumptions which had preceded it. So just because some inconvenient truths emerged there was no need to ditch them in favour of the first one.
This reminds me of the assumptions made by our old friend Hermann von Helmholtz that "the perpetual motion has been demonstrated by experiment to be impossible". How do you prove an impossibility?
Good luck in 2015! Remember "Science is a commitment to a belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman.