Science can reasonably be defined as the sincere search for truth. If one remains sincere and honest in their searchings, they will inevitably be scientific (however misguided and ignorant the beginnings). If one steadfastly holds the desire for truth (reality, what is, etc.) above attachment to any other perception or believe, the science will not be wholly misguided.
Here is an operational definition for you to use: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment
Unfortunately, many misunderstand science (perhaps understandably, as the progression in human knowledge is not uniform and on a linear trajectory throughout the species) to be a conspiracy. This confounds any true understanding of science, as this criticism is mainly based on a paranoia (often by the unthinking religious) of those espousing the benefits of science. It is not a critique of science, but merely an attack on the concept as it is perceived. In other words, the sincere search for truth is condensed into the concept of "science"; all other definitions are either elaborations of this, or a misunderstanding.
Of course, these are all just my egotistical ramblings.
But, regardless, the main point is that conservapedia.com can be wholly dismissed, since there's a opposing wiki here refuting it.