What is the difference between science and zombie science?

What is the difference between science and zombie science? *Note: This article is from the book Zombie Science: Icons of Evolution Again. How do we know if one of the things we hear “science says” is true or not? In the end, you’ll have to realize the truth yourself. That doesn’t mean that there is no objective truth and that everything is subjective. When it comes to science, you’ll be told one thing from our very rich and powerful scientific and educational institutions, as well as from the mainstream media that act as their mouthpieces. But you’re probably learning something else entirely if you look at the evidence itself; that’s the objective truth. Before we move forward, let’s look at some of the ways people use the word “science.” What is science? On the one hand, science is the process of seeking the truth by formulating hypotheses and testing them against the evidence. If we repeatedly test the hypothesis and find it in agreement with the evidence, we may temporarily tend to regard it as fact. If we find it repeatedly in disagreement with the evidence, we should retract it or reject it because it is wrong. We call this process empirical science. On the other hand, people see science as the recent advances in medicine and technology that have influenced our lives. These advances originated from human creativity and design, but their practical applications involve testing them against the evidence to see if they will work. So, advances in medicine and technology have an experimental as well as a creative aspect. Let’s call that technological science. Third, science refers to a scientific institution, which consists of people trained and staffed to conduct research in various fields. Let’s call this institutional science, or just science. The majority of this group’s opinions are sometimes referred to as “scientific consensus,” which is sometimes expressed as “all scientists agree...” (although some of them usually don’t agree), or “science says...” In 1500, the scientific consensus that the Sun revolves around the Earth, a view demolished by Nicholas Copernicus and Galileo Galilei, was established. In 1750, the consensus was that certain organisms (such as worms) arise through self-generation, a view demolished by Francesco Reddy and Louis Pasteur. Fourthly, some people define science as the process of providing natural explanations for everything, i.e., the explanation of all phenomena in terms of physical objects and the physical forces that exist between them. This is sometimes called the "naturalistic methodology", the idea that science is limited to physical explanations, because the repetition of experiments can only take place on physical objects and physical forces. In principle, the naturalistic methodology is not a claim about reality, but a restriction of the method. It does not negate the existence of non-physical fields. But in practice, many scientists assume that if they do research long enough, they will find a physical explanation for anything they examine. This assumption that there are physical explanations for everything is not only related to the method, but is equivalent to the physical philosophy that considers material things and physical forces to be the only truths. Mind, free will, spirit, and God are illusions. Intelligent design, the idea that certain properties of the world are the product of intelligent reason and not undirected natural processes, are also illusions. Not all scientists today are materialists, and indeed modern science was started primarily by Christian[*] European believers in God. However, science today is governed by materialist philosophy. Priority is given to presenting and defending materialistic explanations rather than following evidence to where it leads. This materialist philosophy that masquerades as empirical science, I call it zombie science. I don't call scientists (or any other real people) zombies. But when people insist on defending physical explanations after they've been shown to be inconsistent with evidence, and are therefore experimentally dead, they're practicing zombie science. We find the most striking exposition of zombie science in evolutionary biology. [*] The author refers, of course, to Newton, Kepler, Galileo, and others, but there is no doubt that there is historical disagreement between Muslims and Christians about when scientific practice came about. Whether they are Muslim or Christian, this does not invalidate the claim that they are believers in God and reject materialist philosophy. - Dr. Jonathan Wells. — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2018-10-21 (archived at the Internet Archive) https://www.braheen.com/articles/evolution-design/ما-الفرق-بين-العلم-والعلم-الزومبي