Detailed reports of observations are important, normal portions of the scientific process. They're just the first step. Where is the line? Is a hypothesis with

Detailed reports of observations are important, normal portions of the scientific process. They're just the first step. Where is the line? Is a hypothesis with an experiment design not science? Is a negative finding not science? Is a positive self-reported study not science? Is a positive double-blind study also not science (because it hasn't been repeated)? Being dismissive of preliminary findings as "not science" is the same kind of attitude that cause people to not publish negative results, which is an incredible tragedy of modern scientific progress.