Is the "scientific community" saying "you have to skeptical about everything ... except science"?
Not at all, which is why gravity and evolution which are both understood well enough to be labeled accepted facts (especially evolution) are still called "theories". Religion is inherently based on faith, not observation, testing, and proof which supports its tenets or claims -- a key distinction.
On the dot. I was trying to point out that the original research seemed to come from the point that being skeptical about the absolute power of scientific method is not ok. The authors were "shocked to find" .. blah blah.
Not at all, which is why gravity and evolution which are both understood well enough to be labeled accepted facts (especially evolution) are still called "theories". Religion is inherently based on faith, not observation, testing, and proof which supports its tenets or claims -- a key distinction.