We're probably just having a semantic disagreement. I suppose I am referring more so to the act of experiencing something. P-zombie's are hypothetical people

We're probably just having a semantic disagreement. I suppose I am referring more so to the act of experiencing something. P-zombie's are hypothetical people that lack a certain "property" (for lack of a better word) that other people have. This property is only testable on an individual basis. Since this property is not reproducible for agreement by consensus, you're right -- it isn't science. But it was never a purely scientific discussion to begin with anyway as we were debating the nature of consciousness/experience; no scientist does this as part of their job. If you are referring to "consciousness" as a specific pattern of neural activity that occurs within the brain that can be studied, and from which additional correlations and predictions can be made, then yes, of course we are learning about that. We may even be able to simulate a brain in its entirety one day (heck, my research is in simulation so I can certainly see where it's headed [hundreds of years down the road I might add]). I don't think anyone on HN would dispute the improving science of neural analysis.