>Science is simply the process of using of data to come to conclusions. Is there a better method for building a model of the world? If we go with such a case,

>Science is simply the process of using of data to come to conclusions. Is there a better method for building a model of the world? If we go with such a case, then yes, there is a better model. Using data to come to a guess that have yet to be disproven. The difference is that a conclusion is more final that a guess not yet proven wrong. A scientists steeped in research may read conclusion and automatically conceptualize a notion much closer to guess not yet proven wrong, and maybe include the current winner among countless other guesses that have been proven wrong. They have enough experience to recognize that what we know may be wrong. It may be a little wrong due to some experimental error, it may be complete wrong (but relatively accurate as an approximation in the systems already applied), or some other option. A layman wouldn't have the same take away. When they see conclusion, they would think it is a settled matter when it isn't. The difference between trusting science because it is best we currently have and trusting science because it is right. One is a trust tempered with caution while the other risks becoming blind faith. The system could also further be improved by better expanding upon how disagreements to existing guesses are not always equal. A disagreement backed by data is better than one that is not, and a disagreement that fits the current data, though with no unique data supporting it over the existing guess, is better than one that contradicts existing data. Recognizing the possibility that data may be bad, and it is reasonable to be willing to refresh the data from time to time. A tolerance of letting people explore the wrong paths to see what data they may find. Lastly including the issue that all data is done by humans and thus subject to our biases (which is why things like double blind data is better than single blind data which is better than data without any layers of blindness). But that ends up being hard to fit into a few sentence explanation.