I agree with some of what you are saying, but not when it comes to hypothesis and theory. The scientific method of proposing a hypothesis and then having others duplicate it, transforms the hypothesis into a real working theory. This is the basic scientific method, without which we would all be hard-pressed to come up with anything valid and workable.
What is wrong with science is not the hypothesis & theory method, it is the lock-down of certain subjects, those "forbidden" areas of science that should be open and readily available to all scientists. But greedy corporatism places bans on certain areas, where scientists fear to tread because they will be marginalized and in some cases, stripped of their credentials because their research is perceived as a threat to the corporation's bottom line - the almighty dollar. Many examples come to mind -- free energy is one of them, and costly pharmaceuticals is another. If a scientist creates a free-energy device that actually works, it is instantly declared to be a "national-security" issue, and becomes forbidden to manufacture. If a scientist finds a simple 10 cent cure for cancer, his discovery is bought off and shelved, to insure the continued profits of Big Pharma. This is criminal and should be dealt with as such. So all I'm saying here, is don't throw out the baby with the bathwater - keep using hypothesis & theory, but don't let the opposition force you to abandon your personal integrity in the process.
