I had a few professors in law school who were of the opinion that there is so much precedent out there that any argument could be made. The only real question is whether the judge would swallow it.

I really don't see science, at least the sciences the affects our political lives, social / soft sciences and medicine (medicine is a quasi-soft science because of its ethical origins and the way studies isolate the effects of substances, which is not how the real world works), as being much different.

Whether a bridge made of taco shells can hold a two ton truck traveling at 50 mph is a different issue.