I'm going to go against common opinion here and say that, while mathematical truths may be considered distinct from scientific truths (and I'm not disagreeing with that), the process of discovering mathematical truths may follow science-like processes.
First of all, obviously peer review is part of academic mathematics. It has that in common with the scientific method.
Secondly, and this isn't true for ALL mathematical truths, but some mathematical truths are in part found by a process of trial and error, and measurement and observation. Think about pi, for example - early estimates for pi were made by measuring. Think about a^2 + b^2 = c^2 - the intuition to come up with this idea was probably inspired by many observations, and crucially, the result was then tested. Someone could scientifically falsify if a^2 + b^2 = c^2, by constructing a real triangle for which it wasn't true.
Many, but not all, mathematical discoveries are intuited from many observations, and are testable and in principle falsifiable by other observations.
I think even derivatives and integrals from calculus were discovered and tested through science-like methods.
I'm not saying all of mathematics is science, but I am saying that a significant portion of mathematics follows science-like processes to generate and verify ideas.