If you happen to be an integral part in some particular science testing, you might have reason to KNOW the particular science involved. If you aren't part of the test, the best you can do is believe, just like you might with any other religion.
That's a moronic argument. I'm not relying on beliefs, but on trust. I've studied enough and tested enough myself so that I have trust that other people are doing proper science, also knowing the disastrous effects it would have in their reputation and how difficult is to con scientists.
Yes, I have tested many scientific claims of science, you don't need to be doing cutting-edge research for that. Yes, there's a degree of trust involved with the rest. No, it's not the same as having a religious belief.
Just accept religion is based on beliefs and science is not. It's ok to recognize how crazy religious people are, at least crazy in that aspect as many religious people are still scientifically minded in other aspects of their lives.
Since you are the one who has judged the argument to be moronic, it is you who are the m****.
Trust only indicates a direction for your belief. Give your favorite scientist $10,000 in cash to hold for you. Do it without any kind of way you could get your money back if he were untrustworthy. Then we'll see where your trust is really based.
Some of the most popular scientific theories are ridiculous: Evolution and Big Bang for example. Yet some of the most trustworthy scientists believe in them while ignoring the scientific fact of the existence of God.