.
This is not about comparing science to faith - this is about describing a religion/philosophy/faith that is based on as yet unproven assertions based on the progress of science (in the same way that most religions are based on an assertion about the supernatural).

I chose biological immortality as an example because several people out there are afraid of dieing, and they like to hope that their condition can be cured, despite there being no evidence that a cure exists. In other words, they have faith that they can become immortal purely by biologcal means. As yet, we still haven't proven whether or not biological immortality is possible.

As for the bit about scientists having faith in their work, I was thinking more about the ordinary people who aren't at the forefront of the latest scientific discoveries - it is they who are the ones most likely to have "faith in science".

So to sum up: "Science" is not "faith". "Faith" is not "science". "Faith in science" is not "science". "Faith in science" is faith.

BTW: For my take on what religion is all about, see this post.
( mistaspakkaman and the inedible shifting caterpillars, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 22:48, Reply)