In the actual world, though. This is why we don't perform lobotomies or think atoms are a plum pudding.

Incorrect. "Science" is the reason why we had things like lobotomies in the first place.

Your entire arguments rests on a "No true Scotsman"-like logical fallacy.

I'll reiterate my point: science is not immune from mistakes (nobody is arguing that), but in general, it tends to correct those mistakes over time.

There is no science without people though...and people are not immune from mistakes.

Nobody is saying they are, which is my entire point

No, that was my point. You were trying to say that it's OK because it correct itself over time. However, that fact does not really help us in the present time.

You seem to imply that science causes people to make mistakes. The opposite is true: people make mistakes and generate stupid ideas with reckless abandon. Science is the process of putting those ideas to objective scrutiny, and validating or refuting them with evidence. Stupid doctors came up with the idea of a lobotomy, science refuted it as a bad idea. You blame science for the origin of the idea, which is missing the point.

Oh I see your problem. Your perception is way off. Please allow me to correct your misunderstanding once again and hopefully for the last time.

You seem to imply that there is this perfect thing called science, which is wholly separate from people... This is a huge blunder because, in fact, there is no science at all without people. Therefore, science can't possible be responsible for anything by itself.

So, as you can see (hopefully...and finally), it follows that I couldn't possibly be blaming this inanimate thing called Science for anything. Nope. Not possible. I blame people.

People make errors. There is no science without people. You're trying to separate the two. Stop doing that.

Please stop being so condescending. If you can't make your point while being civil and polite, please refrain from doing so.

I was responding in kind, thank you very much.

Repeatedly responding to me with the same point and misrepresenting my position is equally rude. This person keeps saying that I'm "making a mistake" and that's all I'm saying back to them. Nobody is calling names or anything like that, so why don't you just butt out?

Furthermore, this person seems to just have a deep burning desire to have the last word, no matter how meaningless and trite that is. So, why don't you try reprimanding them instead?

I reviewed the thread before commenting, and yeah, neither of you is really making any progress with the other. Up until this point, however stubborn either of you have been, neither of you has been overtly snarky or condescending.

As for a "burning desire to have the last word", I see no less desire on your part than on theirs.

Oh I see your problem. Your perception is way off. Please allow me to correct your misunderstanding once again and hopefully for the last time.

This goes well past the line of civil discourse. Communication is a two-way street, and requires active participation of both parties. Once you decide that it's all their fault, rejecting the possibility that you're not communicating your ideas effectively, you're no longer participating in good faith. At this point it's better just to back off. (As I'm about to do.)