Since you have no definition of science, then you have no basis for saying my idea of science is wrong. Scientific Truth isn't established by consensus - ask the phlogiston people about that. If you can't provide a definition, then your statements about my idea of science become incoherent and indefensible.
Your insistence on a definition conflicts with the considered writings of the man considered to be the seminal philosopher of science. Moreover, as a scientist myself, I don't even have to rely on Popper's vastly greater authority in this matter; what he wrote agrees with my own experience. Scientists in general make the distinction between what is and what is not science without a generally accepted definition. You don't need to 'define' an apple to distiguish with 100% reliability betwen an apple and an orange.
'I know what I know' buys you nothing on this forum, bud.
This is an appeal to authority and simply transfers my same question to Popper.
Scientists in general make the distinction between what is and what is not science without a generally accepted definition. You don't need to 'define' an apple to distiguish with 100% reliability betwen an apple and an orange.
Yes, like they did in the days of geocentrism and phlogiston...so much for 100% reliability.
'I know what I know' buys you nothing on this forum, bud.
Isn't that what you are doing - telling me what is and isn't science based on no authority other than "science is what scientists do"? The most famous scientists in history were creationists (Newton, Farraday, Kepler) - by your standard of science, they weren't scientists since they were too silly to realize that creationism isn't science. Just how is it that creationists can come up with such astounding scientific discoveries? How is believing that God created the universe (and all in it) inconsistent with the rational pursuit scientific truth? That is precisely the starting point of Newton. Inquiring minds want to know.
Clearly, these men were able to make their discoveries as a DIRECT RESULT of their theistic worldview which says that the universe is rational and ordered and understandable because the Creator is rational and ordered. Tell me, what is unscientific about that and BE SPECIFIC.
Then again, what is a man but a fatherless biped with broad, flat nails?