How anthropomorphic reasoning functions in scientificthinking has been a controversial topic. There is evidence itis problematic as well as evidence it can play productiveroles, for scientists and for students. In science education,however, the prevailing view remains that it is animpediment. For this study, we have chosen examples ofwhat we claim are productive instances in elementarystudents' reasoning, and we analyze them to understandhow anthropomorphisms functioned to support scientificthinking. We argue that one productive role is to supporttemporary shifts from mechanistic reasoning to moregeneral storytelling, in particular to fill gaps as studentswork to explain phenomena. That is, we propose thatchildren may come to mechanistic explanation as a form ofstorytelling. Part of their value is in allowing students to“invent science” based on their existing knowledge,supporting them to understand science as sensemaking.