"I have not failed, I have just learned thousands of of ways which don't work" applies to science as well. It bothers me popular science often presents ground breaking work as a direct competitor to an established theory, while usually the established theory is a necessary stepping stone to the new one. usually, because it's more obvious approach and explains some aspects of the system. The old theory can be used as an instrument to gauge the qualities of the system under observation, and incompatibilities found provide then fertile material for new understanding.
Unfortunately, this is often the rhetorical approach commonly employed in unpopular, ahem, professional science as well. No one wants incremental progress, everything has to be transformative (science's disruptive).
Fortunately, this has yet to pervade other industries we all know and love.
