Well working peer review is a good thing but is not a guarantee of success: there are many examples of external powers driving things by making sure only those

Well working peer review is a good thing but is not a guarantee of success: there are many examples of external powers driving things by making sure only those with proper views are selected for the peer reviews. Focusing on reproducibility helps a lot: when one can do an experiment with fruit flies one can see if genetics or lysenkoism better explains the results. Last but not least, I agree completely with your view that disagreements are solved today on Twitter and FB and this is not good. While somewhat tangential to my main point (focus reproducibility and scientific methodology can remove most other obstacles): given their impact on society and the active role they decided to play means that they should be regulated the same way as other mass media, both for monopoly checks and for responsibility for publishing materials.