Answer:
most likely that (2) the replicated experiment was performed incorrectly.
Why, u ask? u dare question me:
1- The initial experiment invalidness cannot be proven.
2- <em><u>t</u></em><em><u>h</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>o</u></em><em><u>n</u></em><em><u>d</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>a</u></em><em><u>n</u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u>w</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>i</u></em><em><u>s</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>o</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u>r</u></em><em><u>e</u></em><em><u>c</u></em><em><u>t</u></em>
3- Different labaratories does not effect the outcome, as long as the parameter and environment of the replicated experiment is the same as when the initial experiment was conducted.
4- Already knowing the data and errors would increase the precision of the replicated experiment.
5- Change in variables should still be in the objective (or purpose) of the experiment, thus, major difference in the outcome should not happen.
happy learning!
B is the answer to your question
