Kochevnik,
While I agree with your point (the scientific community is far more competitive today), I think the problem is that we still call this stuff science.
Something being “true” or “empiric” does not make it scientific, it is transparency, reproducibility, a logical inferences that do so.
The problem with most areas of the “scientific literature” (especially medical sciences where I work) is we have conflated trade journals with scientific papers. If the raw data, study forms and details of the method are kept secret and the only way to reproduce the experiment is through industry funding, it is a trade study no different than Ford looking into what features customers prefer on their cars. It can only be considered scientific when everything is available (easy to do in today’s Internet age) and the study is designed such that others can replicate it.
Unfortunately, very little scientific research exists, so we much rely on trade literature instead.
