JDHURF made a comment to the post below saying, in part, that "Truth is ultimate and all truth is ultimate truth…..when one diferenciates between scientific truth and ultimate truth they obviously have a religious agenda and do not know what they are talking about."
To clarify my thinking I had to respond and I think it would do well to put my response as a new post in itself.
No, I think you may have misunderstood me. I do believe there is an ultimate truth out there. I also believe that scientific knowledge can be the same as this ultimate truth but we really have no way of ever finding that out absolutely conclusively.
Science's truth can be understood in the Poppernian way as being the best understanding given the current facts. No theory can be proven correct, though it is necessary for an idea to be called scientific that it must be capable of being proven wrong, i.e. that it is falsifiable.
Science's understanding is the most rational understanding of the universe, but it may not be the most correct one. Indeed, it probably is not.
As a skeptic I happen to greatly appreciate rationalism, but in being a skeptic I also understand its limitations.
I don't suppose you view my reasoning as religiously motivated, do you?