History isn't a useful guide when our current system is broken, it only reiterates what we've been doing wrong all along. If you really think replication is a waste of time though, then you won't understand why journals are filled with junk science.
We used to think placebo controls and double blinds were a waste of time. One great thing about the history of science your version excludes is that the way we do science is subject to review too, and we continually throw out what doesn't work in favor of methods that do.
We used to think placebo controls and double blinds were a waste of time. One great thing about the history of science your version excludes is that the way we do science is subject to review too, and we continually throw out what doesn't work in favor of methods that do.