Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not what licenses are for!! They are not statements about the quality of your work or anything similar. Use standard and well understood licenses e.g. GPL for code and CC for documentation. The world does not need more license fragmentation.
This has explicit usage limitations that matter in science land, which is very much the kind of thing that belongs in a license. Eg: You are permitted to use the Program to validate scientific claims submitted for peer review, under the condition that You keep modifications to the Program confidential until those claims have been published. Moreover, sure, lots of the license is text that isn't common in legal docume…
Again, this is not how a license work. You can express your intents, ideas and desires in a README file and in many other ways.
The license is nothing more than a contract that provides rights to the recipient under certain conditions. Standing up in court is its real power and only purpose.
That's why we should prefer licenses that stood up in court and have been written by lawyers rather than developers or scientists.