Science began with the invention of scales. These carefully defined scales allow investigators anywhere in the world to repeat an investigation or finding, and where there is a difference in results, then these differences can be subjected to an impartial scrutiny to determine the actual facts.

Because this method has attracted investigators who are dedicated to the pursuit of truth, it has gained a large following of men and women who wish to know more of the physical world, and how it operates. Those who study science become imbued with an ethical standard which transcends personal ambition, religious concerns, national policy, and political intrigue. A scientist who finds inadvertent error in reported experimental results is honor bound to correct the error as soon as possible.

On rare occasions a professional scientist will fabricate evidence, and knowingly publish the erroneous results in established journals. The consequences, when inevitably discovered, are generally drastic, and the credibility of the individual is always afterwards in doubt. It is viewed as an offence against mankind.

Science is a very idealistic pursuit, and its practitioners proudly defend the open and humanistic nature of its practice. The detractors of the scientific method are few, and when they are vocal it often develops that they are motivated by an ulterior purpose. It is not truth they seek, but refutation of any evidence which conflicts with their pre-concieved notion of what the truth should be.

Scientists are seldom interested in specious attacks on experimental findings or objections to observations made from nature. If personal work is challenged they will vigorously defend the integrity of their findings until shown convincingly there is error, either in results or interpretation.

The more important results of scientific study have gained respect through repeatabilty and are taught to new generations in the classrooms. Because it is difficult to describe the exact experimental details, and impossible to reproduce them in the classroom, much that is taught as science in schools around the world is compressed and summarized, especially in the pre-university levels.

When a large body of evidence is examined for confirmation of a general idea, a theorist may form this into a mini-theory (hypothesis). If the idea and evidence is persuasive, and withstands rigorous re-examination, it will be elevated to the status of a theory. This is not a final proof of an absolute truth, nor is it presented as such. It is merely a means of unifying a large body of evidence which strongly supports a point of view.

Those who are opposed to a unifying view are invited to present what evidence they find which contradicts the view, and to point out areas which are unconvincing. If they are successful, the new theory will fail, and if not, the new theory will succeed, with credit and honor to the inventor.

What is crucial is dedication to truth and the sincere desire to find the best means of unifying all the evidence. Secrecy is detrimental to these purposes, and the patriotic interests of governments who desire to protect secrets related to national defence thus contravene the basic tenets of science. Secrecy and science are antithetical.

Deliberate lying is tantamount to suicide in the modern world. Individuals and governments practicing evasion of the truth, deliberate untruth, and manipulation of the truth soon find themselves in an indefensible position, and the scorn of the world will defeat their every initiative.