[lutusp]

> Having a corpus of poor quality articles does not exclude you from being a science.

That's true, but if all that exist are poor-quality articles, then it's not science -- there must be a corpus of testable, falsifiable theories beyond the chaff. This is why psychology isn't a science -- there are lots of poor-quality articles, and there's nothing else.

> if there was no dissent, there would be no science.

Nonsense. A scientific dissent must be accompanied by evidence, as does the thing being dissented against. Dissent per se means nothing in and of itself.