So how do scientists gain knowledge, if not by using the scientific method?pic.twitter.com/KaSVdLklhh
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
“Nearly all” is just my anecdotal experience, which may be distorted by memory or atypical. Perhaps it’s also a generational thing? Indoctrination with 1950s philosophy of science may have been more prevalent when I was a student than it has been in recent decades.
The scientific method should at least be given respect as an organizing myth, one still followed in the structure of a paper, especially when there is a definite experiment. It is also worthy to try to explain how science differs from other things, both to children and outsiders.
I always thought that "the scientific method", like a lot of philosophical ideas, boils down to "y'know, thinking, doing, learning, the way you would if you actually gave a shit". It's sort of vacuous, but you need to give it a name to distinguish it from blind stupidity.
I'm quite happy to adopt "y'know, thinking, doing, learning, the way you would if you actually gave a shit" as a formal definition of "The Scientific Method" 
Didn't Paul Feyeraband write about this in his book Against Method? The scientific method as a dogma actually inhibits scientific progress. It's not real. It's like the chivalric code, predominantly for optics, not actually followed.
Most scientists I know pay a nodding respect to the scientific method. Like a very eminent person who it would be shocking to ignore or insult, but you want to take their advice with a pinch of salt.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.