No matter what the outcome of this will be, it's always exciting to see some new research stir up the established scientific facts.
"Big Science" doesn't do new and exciting. They want what will push they're agenda. Facts be damned.
Your argument is invalid and shows a remarkable lack of understanding on the methods of science. This kind of thing is more in the playing field of organizations that rely on dogmatic, unchangeable foundation on ideological basis. Science doesn't have such basis, only observations of nature to base hypotheses and craft theories on.
EDIT: Also, it's not "they're", it's "their". "They're" is a shortened form of "they are", which doesn't even make sense in the context and I can't see how a native english speaker can consistently make this error, while their spelling and grammar otherwise seems to be correct.
No matter what this means it will be toss aside and ignored.
Hardly. It will be documented and peer reviewed, and if it's a genuine discovery - and those do happen as experimental equipment increases our ability to observe the universe and reduces error bars - it will be published and if it's at odds with concurrent theories' predictions, then it will prompt people to start looking at either the theories, or some hidden variables in the experiment.
That's why documentation of experiments to the last detail is so important; so they can be replicated by people to confirm the results.
Cynical much? Yeah, screwballs've never given me a reason not to be.
In case you never knew, in the nineteenth and early twentieth century physicists pretty much considered their branch of science "done" with classical physics offering explanation to practically all situations that had been observed; they assumed that there would mainly be some fine tuning of some equations and that's it.
But there were anomalies observed; mainly issues with light and gravity, and eventually as the observational accuracy increased, fine tuning of classical physics couldn't account to these anomalies.
Enter Max Planck who laid the basis for quantum mechanics with his works on black-body radiation, and Albert Einstein who first advanced quantum mechanics in his work regarding photoelectric phenomenon (and notably got a Nobel prize of physics for that work rather than his later works) and later introduced special and general theories of relativity, which changed the perception of the universe on macroscopic scale from galilean coordinate system and newtonian mechanics to something where space, time, matter and energy are all interacting with each other rather than being separate from each other.
If that's not new and exciting I don't know what is. In fact if your claim were to be accurate, we would never have proceeded to the level where classical physics were at that point. We would have still been using Catholic Church's official true physics; they couldn't stop the march of science, why do you assume that science itself somehow would do that?
Of course there are scientists who want to be right rather than discover the best explanations, or have "agendas" to use your wording, but the scientific community by and large would be pretty hard to persuade to hide new research results.
So, what you're suggesting is a form of conspiracy theory, and is prone to same weaknesses that plague all conspiracy theories; mainly that there would be too many people to "silence" one way or another - bribery, threats or elimination. It would not stay hidden forever, as resources of the people or organizations who would want to keep information hidden to advance their "agendas" always have limited resources.
You can't stop the signal.
