My perspective is that of pre-Enlightenment: Science, properly understood, starts and ends with God. "Science" without God was called degraded science. Thus, alchemy is a science. Chemistry is a neat hobby.
Very different from the modern view, I get that.
However, it doesn't come from nothing. It's based on Aristotle and Plato, which no philosopher has been able to discredit thus far, to the point where Enlightenment "thinkers" simply defined them out and started living in a made-up simplified model of the world rather than reality.
Before the argument comes: Widespread physical achievements are not an indicator of superiority.
Consider the alchemist's tools: A few bottles of glassware, a fire, a still, an oven. And, most importantly, his own soul. With these tools, what a modern man might call miracles can be worked, through an understanding that starts with God and leads towards a deeper understanding of Him.
The idea was never to build a billion dollar machine to hammer out a million cans of soda per hour, because that's ultimately pointless, as it solely serves physical comfort, which is fleeting at best.
Consider old cathedrals. Merely by stepping into them, one feels the presence of the Divine. Why is that? Because the entire building is constructed out of shapes, measurements, materials, colors, that reflect the truth of scripture. Sacred Mathematics.
Now walk into a modern glass and steel church. Compare.
The same argument can be made for any modern "science" in some form or another.
The cutting edge of modern physics is just looping round again. Just like a few milligrams of lead were turned into gold in the LHC. Something that's been done before.
In a century or two, they'll probably get it, God willing.