Scientific consensus supports the idea that living organisms require oxygen. Then, a scientist discovers a type of bacteria that
metabolizes sulfur instead of oxygen, and thus survives in environments without oxygen. The scientist concludes that a diverse
group of many different organisms could live in an oxygen-free environment. Why are some scientists skeptical of the scientist's
results and conclusion?
The results are different from the scientific consensus.
The conclusion shows the scientist is not open-minded.
The results will be difficult for scientists to reproduce.
The conclusion needs to be supported by more evidence.