I like your argument here but the "something that produces understanding" part is fairly subjective and fragile.

Ofc I know what you mean there and don't mean to gaslight but it's still not a solid definition. 

 The way Feynman put it was that your theory shouldn't just make the observation that produced it "come out right" but should make something else "come out right" as well 

 So either we accept that "social consensus" is an intrinsic part of the scientific method, or we broaden the definition of what constitutes a scientific model 😂