Scientists explore the unconscious and sub-conscious all the time. Go get an introductory textbook on neurobiology and give it a cursory glance before making silly assertions.

The scientists I’ve met and talked with (a couple dozen so far), and the ones whose works I’ve read (probably close to 100 by now) don’t see themselves “as the center of all reality.” That is a straw man fallacy created by you in order to make your position look better because you have a terrible argument full of holes.

You talk about a “greater vision of total reality.” What is total reality? What is a vision of it? You use words, but they don’t make sense and they have no meaning. Science doesn’t tell us what IS the case, it merely offers one explanation of an infinite amount of explanations. Typically, it offers the best explanation, and it is always wrong (and known to be wrong by ALL scientists) and thus refined or thrown out when a better explanation comes along.

Whatever “absolute truth” you claim to possess is worthless because you cannot show where you are wrong, you cannot make useful predictions with it, and your explanations are not simple in that they raise more questions than they answer.

Science has proven to be powerful and useful. It has always been shown to be wrong, and subsequently corrected. With this method it has given us everything we have, while other methods, e.g., religion, pseudo-science, astrology, myth, etc., have given us nothing. Yet people insist on hypocritically using and abusing science to attack science and promote lies and myths. It is irony to the greatest degree.

I dare you to demonstrate your crackpot ideas without using any technology or methods given us by science. I dare you to demonstrate your claim that science is at fault without using science in your proof.