He or she must also pass muster with experts in the field. The manuscript reporting on a study' s results will be scrutinized by other scientists who will look with highly critical eyes at techniques and methods, procedures and mathematics, assumptions and conclusions. Their task is to find any flaws in thinking or presentation, and they are keen hunters. No reputable journal would publish a report that failed its peer review. If the reviewers' missed anything, the readers are very likely to find it.
Nothing human is foolproof, of course, and scientific publications have had their embarrassments.
But Himelbloom's concern that the public press is not really publication is well taken. The researchers may be right in asserting the natural superiority of wood, but all scientists would see it as a claim not proven until it is published in a peer-reviewed journal.