But my point is that guesses are stil guesses...not science.
I'm thinking of the wild speculations made regarding the "piltdown" man until it was revealed to be a fraud. Obviously good data and a sound inductive/deductive reasoning process can lead one to make good guesses...but until the science catches up...they are only guesses and "not quite" science. And your source material from which you gather data had better be real, not fraudulately manufactured.
Inspiration often takes us beyond where reason and logic fails us, this is not science but it is often true!
What were these then? Presumably you are referring to the numerous "wild speculations" right from the start that Piltdown Man was in fact a fraud. Piltdown Man was eventually discredited because it didn't fit with the pattern of other finds; as the decades rolled on it came to appear more and more as an irrelevant/embarrassing anomaly that didn't match anyone's predictions of what ought to be found.