Can scientific theories, effectively, be conspiracies?

1. Let's define a scientific theory as some formal attempt to summarize existing data, and predict future data, presented in formal scientific journals, and used by a significant number of scientists and institutions for this purpose. 2. Let's define a conspiracy as an attempt by individuals to undermine and/or exploit some aspect of society to a significant degree, for their own purposes and/or benefit. So, now that our terms are clear, can a scientific theory, effectively, be a conspiracy? To what extent is it actually possible for ideas to proceed through the peer review process in Journals, and be used for practical purposes by professional scientists, and, nevertheless, have as a significant part of their purpose to be, suborning, undermining and exploiting society, to a significant degree. I think this is rather an interesting question. Now, I would suspect the vast majority of professional scientists, engineers and doctors would say "no, that's totally impossible, the scientific method is, when pursued correctly, incapable of such total dysfunction. Furthermore, the peer review process ensures only constructive social purposes are possible." On the other hand, many people might say that the "scientific method" is little more than trial and error, the peer review process is simply the old boy network, and scientists, like everyone else, are primarily interested in wealth and power, and will do and say anything to get it. So, effectively, it may be that all scientific theories -- even the most well known and successful, like the Special Theory of Relativity -- are largely, or totally conspiracies. So, how can we decide this question, exactly? I would sincerely appreciate feedback on this point. Any thoughts, or relevant examples?