I find it an interesting study to observe the typical pseudo-scientific attitude of those who denigrate ideas that they do not agree with as "not science". And, in nearly every case, they are doing so without actually deeply and personally investigating the issues for themselves.
How long did it take you to decide that this was "not science"? Most likely the moment you heard it from one of your respected peers who gave you a brief explanation of why you should believe and repeat that Meme. And so, having accepted by faith a critique advanced using "ad hominem" and" genetic" logical fallacies, buttressed by the "argument from authority", you finish your descent into hypocritical ignorance making strawman arguments against the very thing you have become.
Such people are what they create: strawmen