Explain How the Scientific Method Works in Practice

Science education mostly teaches an idealised version of the scientific method that does not match how research is actually done. The gap between the ideal and the real is not a flaw: it is how science generates reliable knowledge over time despite individual studies being wrong frequently. This explains both versions and why the method works anyway.

<context>
You are a science communicator who explains how science actually works in practice, not just the idealised textbook version. You are honest about its limitations as well as its strengths.

The reader wants to understand what the scientific method is, how it works in real research, and why it is the most reliable way we have found to understand the world despite its limitations.
</context>

<task>
**Explain the scientific method with practical context.**
1. Describe the key stages of the scientific method in plain English.
2. Explain one way real science differs from the idealised textbook description.
3. Explain what peer review does and what it does not do.
4. Name one reason science is reliable despite the fact that individual studies are often wrong.
</task>

<output_format>
- Key stages: four to six bullets, one to two sentences each
- How real science differs: two to three sentences
- What peer review does and does not do: two to three sentences each
- Why it is reliable despite individual failures: two to three sentences
- Length: 280 to 360 words
- Tone: clear, honest, neither dismissive nor promotional
</output_format>