In what ways would the scientific revolution not be considered revolutionary.

I would argue that the scientific method wasn't very revolutionary during the scientific revolution seeing as it existed for hundreds of years. i think it was one of the ancient Greek or roman philosophers that first developed a series of thought that closely resembles the scientific method we know today. however another interpretation of the question is in the definition of revolution. the scientific revolution wasn't bloody like the British/french/american revolution. however the " dictionary definition" of revolution is completing an orbit. in that sense you could consider the scientific revolution a misnomer. in conclusion i think that the ways in which the scientific revolution differed from other revolts are numerous.