A scientific law is the truth. The truth must follow the universal constant principle a well. Just observing empirical evidence and interpreting the data does not make it a scientific law or truth.
I prefer to use the term self- evident truth instead of the word truth. Both or the same by the constant principle because they contain the word truth! I choose one definition over the other because it is backed with empirical evidence, itís un-deniable and itís simple to explain.
ALL UNIVERSAL STATEMENTS IS SCIENTIFIC! Donít forget, a scientific law is a universal statement backed with empirical evidence and verified repeatedly which demonstrates it is CONSTANTLY producing the same (law of non-contradictory) results.
NOTE: When I use all caps itís like me using a high-lighter on a piece of paper. I can ensure you I am not yelling.
All laws were based on exactly that , observation. In fact the term scientific law is out dated and not used anymore because the fact that......You are wrong but...
You are nearly correct, where you fail miserably is not realizing that scientific law is never an absolute determination.
It is a definition to the best of ability at the time, these however can be altered in light of a more accurate definition.
Such was the determination of the universal law of gravitation where 43 arc seconds per century discrepancy existed in Mercury's orbit , this is less than 1/1000th of a degree but is explained by the Theory Of Relativity. So the truth is a definition of something, but the definitions can be refined and made more accurate, hence laws can be superseded and why we don't call them laws anymore. They are simply classical theory, not theory like a wild guess but scientific theory. This is also where terminology fails the layman , as a scientist know the difference between theory and hypothesis vs a deep rooted hunch brought by superstition.