> Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity may not agree with each other but they both have destroyed mountains of attempts to disprove them.

I agree. Unfortunately for all of us the rest of published literature is nowhere near as battle test as these two theories, nor would they survive such testing.

> Not saying you are saying that but some posters are.

I didn’t mean to imply that you were. But the it doesn’t sound like the personally you replied to was on the side of “all science is bad” either.

I am closer to the “much ‘science’ is junk”. There is much good work a being done, but the garbage is very much there, more so in some fields than others.

The null hypothesis at this point for most new papers one reads is certain fields (looking at you nutrition & health) is “this won’t replicate”. It’s certainly also true for much work primarily involving modelling; the null hypothesis as a read should be “if this doesn’t have code, I won’t be able to reproduce/replicate it”.

We should not throw the baby out with the bath water, but we should be frank about the current state of things.