"You seem to believe that science is a list of facts"

Please quote where I said something that insinuates it. If you can't then you just make lies about me by not understanding what I have written. Only points to your ability for having a logical discourse. It is also ad hominem if you cannot prove your statement.

"and that the "facts" i.e. beliefs that are spoonfed to you from TV sets are indisputable, and cannot be questioned"

Same here. Please quote where I said something that insinuates it. If you can't then you just make lies about me by not understanding what I have written. Only points to your ability for having a logical discourse. It is also ad hominem if you cannot prove your statement.

"It's important to question everything, & yes, that's what scientists do . . They look for holes in "facts""

I have never said that it isn't what scientists do and that we should not question anything. It is exactly what everyone should do. Question everything.
This is what you have failed to do by just spreading lies and fake news without questioning them (just to give an example of your bullshit statement in the comment above about CPR tests that cannot be used to diagnose).

You have also used another logical fallacy of red herring - which was mixed with a strawman. You have diverted from my question asking you to explain Scientific Method. You changed the subject (red herring), and then created a fallacious opinion about my character (strawman).

It is now evident to me that you do not understand science as you have been unable to just explain its core basics such as the scientific method.
Please stop talking about science if you do not understand what it is.

This conversation is over as it has intellectually boring and tedious.

It does not teach me anything except proving once again that there is no point in having a conversation about science with someone who does not understand science and values personal beliefs and conspiracy lies over science. And also once again it proves that there is no point in having a conversation who just responds with one logical fallacy after the other making me dissect each logical fallacy instead of just having a conversation with reason and logic.
I must have gotten into identical such conversations thousands of times by now. A person ends up not understanding science and not having basic knowledge about logical fallacies in reasoning and conversation.
And this is not an attempt at ad hominem. Just an observation based on facts related to our conversation.

Good luck with your logical fallacy revolving around obsession about "mainstream media" (Just because some information is mainstream/from mainstream media does not automatically make it distrustful and not factual).

Bye.