>What is the alternative to following the science? Actually it is not the science that is causing this issue. But research in various forms is. Trusting scien

>What is the alternative to following the science? Actually it is not the science that is causing this issue. But research in various forms is. Trusting science is fundamentally different from trusting "scientists". Trusting science is essentially trusting nature to behave in a regular fashion. But trusting research, done and proclaimed by a bunch of humans is well, trusting human beings. Nothing could be more fundamentally different. I think adding a "repeatability factor" to researches could help. So if anyone on the planet can replicate a research method, it should have a repeatability factor value of 1. If only a single entity can replicate it, then it should have a value of 0. If some entities can validate it, then it should have a value somewhere in between. This does not mean that research that have low RF cannot be applied widely. It just that it will have to do additional work to gain the trust of the people. It only follows common sense that trust in something cannot be mandated. So, measures that are based on low RF value research should NEVER be mandated. No matter what that cost. And thus I think this can save the corruption and manipulation in the name of science.