This situation is also absolutely devastating for modeling science. Pretty much any model can be "based on empirical studies" since just about anything has been

This situation is also absolutely devastating for modeling science. Pretty much any model can be "based on empirical studies" since just about anything has been found to be statistically "significant". Unconstrained models are useless, as are unconstrained theories. It's also not enough to say "this study is not reproducible". Why isn't it? Towards what direction should the experimenters move next. It's not enough for biology to do "trial and error" studies , but they should be continued and provide more depth to their findings. Sadly , this is not happening largely because of lack of faith: the scientists themselves don't have enough faith in their own results to be making long bets on them.