Tell me examples of what you think science can't measure.

I certainly didn't say science was infallible. There's no doubting there's not perfection in it. If the strict adherence to science is to be looked at as a type of dogma, it's a safer dogma given its proven track record.But there are objective truths - things we can know without a sliver of a doubt, absolutes that exist irrespective of subjective interpretation: there's no denying this either. Surely you acknowledge that there are things that simply ARE. That there's knowable realities. Science ( assuming our definitions are the same) in its current incarnation has enough compelling evidence to emphatically deny the spiritual ideas put forth. All of science is not simply a consensus reality though. There is a body of knowledge that exists of its own accord, but man-made all the same; but it contains immutable truths despite being subjectively asserted. My definition of the concept holds that it does not exclusively contain just utmost certainty. And in regards to far-fetched concepts like spirituality, simply because you have a conception of it does not automatically make it a possibility.

There are things science hasn't proven definitively. But these pieces together do not automatically add up to "there is still possibility for the ethereal, spiritual, and so forth." There is no "Aha! You see? Science isn't perfect after all." gotcha! moment. OF COURSE it errs, in the same way that wielders of facts can muck them up easily. Science as a collective of information is reliable if not diluted by human error.