This is more akin to a criminal case where science can be used as evidence.

Most journals require more evidence than what passes as such in a court of law. On the say-so of a dog can amount to evidence in some courts. Specifically talking about K9s granting reasonable cause to search a vehicle or premises, even if the science behind it is not supportive.

Touché - and that m'lud is why even the best barristers seldom get awarded the Nobel prize in any of the sciences.

Are you saying that our justice system is un-scientific? lol

Yeah sure I need to bring you mathematical irrefutable proof that some event happened, but you can just call me a conspiracy theorist or whatever new words go with it today: racist, sexist, religious, bigot, homophobe, transphobe, etc. with 0 evidence.