Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
Science is decentralized and unregulated. There is no rules committee that assigns the rules by which science must be conducted. I believe that if this were proposed, scientists, nearly without exception, would oppose it, because they have first hand experience with how important it is that science be open to all and have no bias. A regulatory bureaucracy that oversees conduction of science would very quickly spell the end of its integrity. Data would become unreliable and discovery would come to a halt.

The free reality of science allows it to exist on the merits instead of by decree. Things that are repeatable are kept and everything else is discarded. Bureaucracies do not have this. They are by nature prohibiting of the kind of openness and merit that science has in peer review and experimentation.
Pure nonsense.

There are regulatory bureaucracies AND rules committees, or something that nearly approaches them in the peer-review process and, you know, ethics.

Maybe study science before talking about its structure and nature.