If the scientific method is so great, why can't it be rigorously defined? More than a method i.e. a predefined set of steps it seems like some vague life advice like "verify things carefully" and "don't trust the random dude on the street who claims to speak to, and at that instant also for, God".

It tells you to "test with [an] experiment" but also tells you to "report conclusions" but then how can inconclusive studies be scientific, but how could they not if you followed their scientific method which supposedly produces science?

And if you don't publish your conclusions, can the results not be considered scientific if someone happens upon your notebooks after your death?