Does science "get lots of things wrong"?

Donald Trump has asserted that, "Science gets lots of things wrong." Actually, that statement doesn't go nearly far enough. If it's any good at all, science needs to get everything wrong. That's because the scientific method is a method of successive approximations.  It works like this:

1. Observers notice a set of facts. (OBSERVATION)
2. Theorists try to come up with an explanation that covers all observed facts. (THEORY)
3. Scientists versed in the facts use the theory to make predictions that will either support or not support the theory.  (PREDICTION)
4. Several scientists, well-versed in the field but WORKING INDEPENDENTLY, run experiments to see if the predictions hold up in the real world. (EXPERIMENT)
5. Results of the experiments are published for other independent scientists to review, and test for themselves. (PEER REVIEW)
6. Experimental data are then considered as new observations, and the cycle begins anew.

Please note that when we talk about "facts" in science, we are talking about experimental data, NOT about conclusions!  Many, many observations have supported the conclusion that germs cause diseases, for example. The diseases, and the existence of the germs are facts. They can be observed by any reasonably equipped researcher. But the conclusion that the diseases are caused by the germs is a theory, albeit a very well-established one.

Some diseases, such as allergies, are not caused by germs. Does this mean that Germ Theory of Disease is WRONG? No. It just means it is incomplete. Similarly, all scientific theories are incomplete. That's how science works. There's always more to learn. That's the great advantage of science over superstition. Some superstitions may be right, such as the superstition that chicken soup can alleviate common illnesses. Believing that superstition may help you treat your child's cold, but you won't learn anything from it that you didn't already know. Science always gets things at least a little bit wrong, but it leaves room for further investigation. Over the course of many cycles of investigation, we can learn a lot, and get much nearer to the truth than by blindly following popular superstitions.