even when Science and scientific method itself is still "evolving",
The scientific method is not evolving.
It's pretty simple.
Extrapolate a possible rule (hypothesis) based on the observation.
Make predictions based on the hypothesis.
Test the predictions to see if they hold.
Assert (declare the hypothesis a theory, or possibly a law, or possibly "true", if the predictions were accurate -- can go back to "make predictions" here to further strengthen the theory), adjust (go back to "extrapolate", incorporating the new observations from the tests), or reject (if the predictions were utterly false) the hypothesis.
The only failures in science are failures to follow the scientific method.
Junk science often starts with the hypothesis without the necessary observation first. It's glorified "wishful thinking". Then, it makes predictions to test the desired theory and rejects any findings which would result in anything but "assert the hypothesis".
But it isn't that the scientific method is flawed or "evolving" -- just those who (mis)apply it.
I'll leave the analogies to other fields of thought or belief systems as an exercise for the reader.