No, it isn’t, and the fact that someone could seriously suggest that the entire field of philosophy and religious studies is some kind of elaborate grift is a great example of what my original comment said.
Slow down, pardner, you're the one conflating religious studies with actual, and sometimes useful, philosophy.
What your original comment said is that people are blindly deferring to the authority of scientists, when they should instead be blindly deferring to the authority of theologians and philosophers (and presumably only those of your preferred faction).
(In the spirit of the continental philosophers, I read between the text.)
Your comment is full of false accusations and has nothing to do with what I wrote.
Where did I say they should blindly defer to philosophers and theologians? I said these subjects should be studied more. Nor did I say people currently blindly adhere to scientists.
If you’re going to argue, at least bother to read the comment carefully first.
What your original comment said is that people are blindly deferring to the authority of scientists, when they should instead be blindly deferring to the authority of theologians and philosophers (and presumably only those of your preferred faction).
(In the spirit of the continental philosophers, I read between the text.)