If you disagree that science should, in modern parlance, be interpreted as a reference to the scientific method, I guess I have no basis for argument. It's not

If you disagree that science should, in modern parlance, be interpreted as a reference to the scientific method, I guess I have no basis for argument. It's not my intent to be the grammar (semantic, I guess?) police. I appreciate the sort of knowledge creation Kenji's engaging in. And I agree that it's the most rigorous I've seen presented in a remotely accessible way. In some ways that just makes me wish he'd take it a step further. I don't think it takes any special equipment or money or MIT degree to follow the scientific method. It seems likely that Kenji already does record data of some kind somewhere. I'm not saying he needs to look at pie crust with an electron microscope, you could simply list a more detailed procedure and qualitative scoring data in a footnote. I do think equivocating different forms of knowledge with science wastes a great way to introduce people to important scientific concepts. And I think one could argue it risks contributing to confusion about what science is, what it's capable of, and what it's limitations are. Of course, "be the change you want to see in the world" is great advice. And at the risk of seeming to make an insincere "compliment sandwich", I really do like Kenji and his recipes.