I analyze the case of a principal who wants to give an agent proper incentives to investigate a hypothesis which can be either true or false. The agent can shirk, thus never proving the hypothesis, or he can avail himself of a known technology to produce fake successes. If the hypothesis is false, a proper investigation never yields a success. I show that if, in the case the hypothesis is true, a proper investigation yields successes at a higher intensity than faking, the option of faking a success does not distort players' payoffs. In the opposite case, honest investigation is impossible to implement.