You're not pointing out the philosophical problems with science. You're inventing attributes for science, attributes we don't accept as defining science (it's not a 'collection of truths'), and attacking your own invention. Pontificate, if you will, on the philosophical problems of that.
I accept science as the best explanation for things according to the tools and understanding we currently have. As those tools become more advanced and our understanding keeps pace, the best explanations we have will accordingly evolve. It is a method of explaining the universe with a success record unmatched by any other. So yes, if you're attacking that, then you're promoting deliberate ignorance.
I accept science as the best explanation for things according to the tools and understanding we currently have. As those tools become more advanced and our understanding keeps pace, the best explanations we have will accordingly evolve. It is a method of explaining the universe with a success record unmatched by any other. So yes, if you're attacking that, then you're promoting deliberate ignorance.


