That's probably all true.

The point in the post, which perhaps I failed to make, is that the only way I can know the results or conclusions of those experiments is by using my own senses to look at the study, assume that they are giving me an accurate representation of reality, and that the report is a factual account of the experiment, and that the senses of the people who created the report were giving them an accurate representation of reality... if any of these links in the chain do not function, then the information that I receive is useless, or even misleading. Presumably, there is no way to confirm the information directly - I can only use my senses.

@kyriacos brought up this point:

You know, that camera you are holding? that's science
The computer you are using, sattelite, electricity to send the post. that's science too.

The point is that, I can see the effects of science, and therefore I should accept that science works. The reason this argument fails is that, I have no way of confirming that I am holding a camera, using a computer, or electricity, except by using my senses. I have to assume that my senses are giving an accurate representation of reality. Then I have to assume that all of these things are indeed the results of science - which is something I can't even confirm with my untrustworthy senses - I have to rely on second-hand accounts, assume that the information is being reported to me correctly, and that my senses are giving me an accurate representation of what is being reported, and so on.

I have a mental impression from my memory that indicates I make the assumption continually that my senses accurately report reality, but I can't tell you with confidence that it's true, as I only have this mental impression of a memory to tell me so.

Of course, on some level we might say this is a kind of intellectual masturbation. And maybe it is; maybe it's just for fun. We all have to make some assumptions about the world we're living in - that's just the way The Game is played. The thing is, (my mental impressions tell me that) many will make the argument that science is to be trusted over your own experience, because of the probability of failure of the senses. To take that to its logical extreme means we cannot trust science, and for the same reasons.