Psychology is less of a science and more of a high-level guessing game. Most people think of science as a systematic methodology that is applied to a specific area of expertise to produce tangible and eventually predictable results. The process of experimentation is employed, of course, and the results typically vary throughout the test phases, but ultimately the process in question will come to a specific conclusion. Once a definite solution is determined, and the process can be consistently performed to produce the exact same results, the theory or postulate that was in question becomes an equation that now has a pat answer. It's a mathematical system of thought, it relies on precision, and the idea is that an answer can be found for every question, in the same way that repeating the same equation will always result in a specific sum.
Even in disciplined sciences, external variables may exist that can affect the outcome of any experiment. In most cases, the experiment will then be modified to either eliminate, or compensate for, all of the variables until a pat answer can be produced.
Overall, psychology doesn't really fit the mold of a disciplined science. The problem with psychology is that the entire structure is based on a component that is already an existing variable because the subjects under scrutiny are humans. Consequently, because it is darn near impossible to always predict the behavior of humans in any given situation, the best that psychology can do is work to create statistics. For example, if you put ten people, one at a time, into a room containing an angry possum, are all ten of them going to react the same way? Of course not. Nine out of ten people may immediately try to exit the room, but there will always be one goofball who screws up the status quo and decides to go head-to-head with the irritated marsupial, instead. As a result, all the psychologist will be able to do is provide data that says that 90% of the people facing a wild animal with an attitude will try to run away.
That's just a small example of a subject that has a much broader scope, because the flaws that limit the collection of empirical data are also what gives psychology so much breadth. The subject itself is still downright fascinating. Psychology is a useful tool for understanding certain behavior, and gaining some insight into the human condition. Unfortunately, it will never be able to overcome the bare fact that nobody can really ever know what another human being is capable of doing in any situation. Statistics don't constitute science, either, like some people seem to think. In a lot of cases, they're just numbers, and they're often used and misused as needed, usually in an effort to substantiate arguments that have very little substance to begin with.
One last thing, because I think I've gone off the deep end. Early psychological studies, mostly failed ones, did produce certain tenets that have remained steady throughout the course of psychology's evolution. One of them was the discovery that it is really just not possible for a human being to analyze their own behavior, as their own bias and justifications will taint the results. In addition, subjects that KNEW that they were being studied for any given reason were all impacted by something known as the Hawthorne effect, or what is commonly termed "subject bias." This typically means that a person will either consciously or unconsciously alter their behavior based on the fact that they know that they are under observation. Think about that, and think about all the media that is broadcast and classified as "reality" TV. There's absolutely no such thing. It's a form of reality, sure, but it's tainted by the fact that all the people that are on these TV shows know that they are always being recorded. To that effect, you will never really know for sure if the way they portray themselves is a true representation of who they are, or if they are playing to an audience. The only way to truly capture someone's "reality" is to do it without their knowledge. However, one of the primary, and most important, discoveries that was made regarding any kind of science or school of thought was that it is impossible to perform any type of observation without having some impact, no matter how small, on the environment that is being observed.
Oh, so to answer you question, I'll say, "No. It's not a science. It's really neat, though."