Geoff -- I don't think you and I basically disagree. I was trying to suggest that activity most of us would be ready to call "science" always originates with observations -- but there's variation in scientists' aims when they start "looking". In other words, they don't always have a hypothesis they are trying to confirm. Sometimes the astronomer "idly" scanning the skies, the geologist or zoologist in the field, and others, are just observing whatever comes under their eyes. If they are of a certain turn of mind, they can't help trying to "account for" what they see. A "pattern" may suggest a hypothesis, and then the more rigid, "controlled" observation rules of "scientific method" to test the hypothesis kick in. But one way or another, observations always come first. Prior to every hypothesis there were observations -- even in Einstein's case.
************** One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp& icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
