Science and Scientists

There is a curious confusion in the minds of many between these two entities - science as a method of inquiry with its consequent body of knowledge and the individuals who espoused the method of scientific inquiry and their attendant notions. A range of writers cannot it seems distinguish these. A number of "Histories of Science" have appeared by authors in this confused state which have distressed scientists in need of a history of science. What these confused authors give is some form of history of scientists. There accounts are replete with the contradictory and paradoxical doings of famous scientists much of which for a history of science is irrelevant "noise". It is of no concern to a scientist what his predecessors' views were on alchemy, astronomy, the bible or whatever. What is of concern is that the individual did some work which has proven to be of lasting value. How did he do it?