If science were tribal, each country would have to have its own science. Canadian science textbooks would disagree with Chinese ones, and both disagree would with French ones, and so on. That's not how it is, so that's a false equivalence.

The absurdity in question falls out of a philosophical interpretation of science, resulting in existential naturalism. Who am I to present such an interpretation? No one special (unless you count my Ph.D. in philosophy). You're free to present a different interpretation.