The word "science", from the Latin "scientia", means "knowledge". Knowledge may be gained on the basis of reasoning alone and may also rest on observations. While deductive reasoning may be pursued independent of physical observations, inductive reasoning relies on such observations. For more than a thousand years, philosophers tended to be polarized regarding which type of knowledge was to be considered the more reliable and true.

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), a lawyer, politician and philosopher, is generally considered the father of the induction-based "Hypothetico-deductive method", used for the purpose of investigating and verifying scientific events. Bacon also established the views, expressed here in simple terms: that verification of a scientific theory distinguishes it from any other type of theory and that, in principle, verification can be carried out with perfect accuracy. During the 19th century, John Hershel (1792-1871), a philosopher and scientist, propounded a method toward scientific inquiry close to what is popularly called "the scientific method". Hershel’s approach, who, like Bacon, utilized both inductive and deductive reasoning, expressed Bacon’s methodology in a more algorithmic form. Specifically, Hershel suggested that one should use inductive reasoning, toward arriving at a scientific hypothesis, then use deductive reasoning to test induction-based hypotheses.

The inductive-deductive paradigm, toward investigating physical phenomena, is the essence of what we popularly call the scientific method. Strictly speaking, there is no single, well-defined, exclusive method which could be applied, in general, toward investigating different scientific phenomena. Scientific methods, which underlie innumerable scientific protocols, generally reflect Hershel’s approach, what we popularly call "the scientific method". What may also surprise non-scientists is that the discovery of many scientific theories was not triggered thru or at the time of pursuing any scientific methodology. In fact, many scientific theories had their genesis in speculation, guesses, and serendipity.

During the 20th century, Karl Popper (1902-1994), a philosopher of science, suggested a test toward distinguishing and demarking the scientific from the non-scientific. Specifically, Popper’s demarcation test criteria was that for a theory, claimed by any scientist or non-scientist, to be scientific it has to be falsifiable. Popper’s falsification test may be viewed as a presumptive test – the test carrying the criterion for what is science; namely, the criterion carried previously by Bacon’s verification testing. In other words, Popper’s falsification test only replaced Bacon’s verification test insofar as the verification test’s previous position as a criterion for recognizing the scientific. In short, what Popper is saying is that a theory or explanation is not considered to be scientific unless it is falsifiable – that should be the first test. Once a theory has been recognized as scientific, we need verification tests to establish the theory’s strength. A theory’s strength, which is expressed in terms of accuracy and reliability, rests on the degree to which the theory’s predictive and descriptive elements match the observable and measurable. Because of the inductive nature of the verification process, laws which emerge from scientific arguments and theories are best assayed on a continuous strong-to-weak scale, rather than cited with absoluteness and finality. For this reason, scientific theories, explanations, claims and opinions should be cited only with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty or probability, and not with absoluteness. Nevertheless, even when our scientific knowledge of a particular physical phenomenon is known or suspected to be weak, we would do better to accept a rational weak scientific opinion than the unfalsifiable or unverifiable claims of a psychic or charismatic speaker.

Our confidence in a scientific theory should be consistent with the theory’s strength. The systematic and logical protocol offered by "the scientific method" play a key role during the verification processes, such as investigations, research, analyses, testing and in the process of formulating quantitative and/or qualitative hypothesis and conclusion-associated arguments. Common knowledge of the numerous successes and accomplishments of science, coupled to the accuracy and reliability it is known to yield, tends to make the word "scientific" evokes: truth, accuracy and reliability. Simply put: the word "science", in connection to a submitted opinion or theory, gives credence and bolsters the value of a submitted opinion. Therefore, it is important to "ferret out" and refute pseudo scientific claims - before such claims unjustifiably benefit from the reputation earned by science, regarding the standard of truth and reliability associated with the scientifically verified. Scientific investigative methods, coupled to reasoned skepticism, are our defense against pseudo and non-scientific claims.