ABSTRACT
The coherence of the scientific creation story is a product of revisionism among educators, science writers, historians of science, and scientists themselves. The distinctly modern method of acquiring knowledge of nature began with the Scientific Revolution. One of the frustrations of learning science is the tidy revisionism of textbooks, where the scientific view is presented almost axiomatically, as a definitive account, not as a record of the heroic and often fruitless struggles that led to it. Science, too, tends to exempt itself from self-examination, which is left to historians and philosophers of science. Science and jurisprudence both investigate apparent breaches of "law." It is significant that the same word denotes two entirely distinct concepts. Jurisprudence evolved protocols to regulate testimony, requiring witnesses to bear responsibility for their claims. Science too has protocols to evaluate scientific testimony—whether of nature or researchers.
