How can a scientist make his results more reliable and

...Why would a scientist who carry out experiments that is funded by a biofuel company be no good?

Well, im just came out from our biology class and here it is:

To make the scientist's results to be more reliable well he must be truthful to his findings. An experiment tells what happen not what the scientist want to happen in a particular phenomenon. Then he should test it many times to finalize it and learn from the past scientist who also know what field his/her study covered at.

In the second question,the only thing why the experiments that are carried out by the scientist that are funded be no good because they might be BIASED. These scientists are funded by these companies and they are paid to make a "reliable information" that could be use in their product and cover the negatives. To show that they are scientist, they are the "authority " that they prove that the product is effective.This breaks the rule of honesty.

The question makes the supposition that science funded by industry is 'no good' and asks why. Well, it should be more open and ask what the pitfalls might be rather than assuming they are there and that scientists are all frauds. Lots of work is funded by industrial partnerships and money, but that doesn't mean it is no good - the majority is high quality and relaiable science. The way science works is that results are only generally aceptable after they have been published in peer reviewed journals. That's the independent quality check. Internal reports and other publications are generally considered to be untested to some extent. So, as well as sample size, and replication, peer review is an important element in ensuring the work is solid and not biased.

If by more reliable you mean make sure his findings are accurate, he'd do lots of tests or do the experiment lots of times to confirm the outcome is always the same.
If he's funded by a big company then he might have been asked to prove something specific that benefits the company and ignore any side effects or outcomes that would be bad for the company..?

ok this is simple question as im a biology student :D

1. keep the conditions the same for every test
2. do different trials of the same experiment
3. have more than one scientist over look the whole thing