Well first off, proposing that objective is not meaningless because we're currently not even trying.
What makes you think nobody's trying...just because one guy (Richard Horton) is complaining of shoddy practices in one specific field of study (biomedical research)? Are Horton's limited complaints reason enough for you to believe that the rest of scientific research is rife with unethical/fraudulent scientists, and that nobody is policing them?
I find this notion that I have to give you a complete proven system gift wrapped for you or I have no valid input to be essentially fallacious
That may be your notion, but it's not mine. I said nothing about you supplying a "complete proven system" to me or anyone else.
If you'd like a summary of some of my ideas...[snip]
I believe your summary can be boiled down to "let's try using some law enforcement techniques in order to expose fraudulent scientists, then we can publish a fraudster shitlist which will shame them out of the profession". Presumably, you believe that this will result in better science across the board - not just in the limited case of Richard Horton's perceived problems within the biomedical field.
Without addressing the merits of your proposal, I'd argue that your assumptions aren't valid. Primarily, you seem to assume that the root cause of a major portion of the bad science out there is unethical/fraudulent behavior by research scientists. There is nothing in TFA/TFS to support this assumption. Richard Horton never mentions ethics or fraud as being a problem in biomedical research. He lists sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, flagrant conflicts of interest, and the pursuit of fashionable trends as the causes of "bad" science. You seem to have determined that unethical behavior and fraud are the main threats to "good" science all by yourself.
This story is NOT about fraud or unethical behavior causing anything. This story is about the failures of peer review, inadequate statistical criteria, poor research methodology, conflicts of interest, laziness and incompetence. You are injecting fraud/ethics into the discussion without providing the slightest bit of evidence to support your claim.
There are many ways to find unethical people. It isn't that hard, chum. You just have to make ANY effort.
Well old buddy old pal, I suppose all those research institutions (and all those granting bodies) with research integrity departments are just providing busywork for bureaucrats, right?