  An attempt to redefine science in the 21st century (BK Jennings, On the
Nature of Science, Physics in Canada, 63(7) 2007) has abandoned traditional
notions of natural law and objective reality, blurred the distinctions between
natural science and natural history, elevated Occam's razor from an
epistemological preference to a scientific principle, and elevated peer-review
and experimental care as equals with repeatable experiment as arbiters of
scientific validity. Our comments review the long-established axioms of the
scientific method, remind readers of the distinctions between science and
history, disprove the generality of Occam's razor by counter example, and
highlight the risks of accepting additional scientific arbiters as equal to
repeatable experiment.
