Quite contrary to the headline of John Humphrys`s article, Scientists want to know all and take responsibility for nothing (Comment, December 17), we (with engineers) take full responsibility for having freed the human race from the slavery of working merely to survive. The simplistic headline attempts to place the blame for the misuse of the knowledge of the way the universe works on the shoulders of the whole scientific community.

Columbus never foresaw that the consequence of trying to find a westerly route to India would be the discovery of America, the destruction of the indigenous American civilisations and the concomitant creation of the United States. Would the prescient Humphrys have advised Columbus not to go and what arguments would he have used?

Does anyone seriously think that Charles Townes, whose aim inventing the laser was to develop a high-frequency amplifier, should have tried to foresee the thousands of applications that have evolved and will evolve during the next 1,000 years? If Townes had thought of Star Wars guidance systems, should he have become a gardener and so deny thousands of people the benefits of sight?

It is obviously a different matter when it comes to the application of existing knowledge directly in warfare and related barbaric activities, but as the offspring of second world war refugees from central Europe, I know these are not simple either / or ethical issues. Lewis Wolpert is but one scientist and he does not speak for the whole scientific community, let alone the majority.

In any case, it misrepresents the subtle arguments implicit in Wolpert`s assertions. In fact, the vast majority of us choose not to work in areas about which we have doubts. However, we are not so naïve as to believe that this will leave any powerful technology that is "in the air" undiscovered for long and it is burying one`s head in the sand to assume so.

Many scientists, perhaps most, are pragmatic and consider their responsibility to lie in making expert advice available in the hope that this will help to ensure that the benefits outweigh the misuses. Just as the ability to hear is vital in the design of an opera house to ensure the acoustics are satisfactory, so an understanding of science is crucial for wise decision-making on its applications. The main reason that we set up the Vega Science Trust was to enable scientists to improve scientific understanding directly.

Finally, if we do survive the 21st century, it is likely that we shall have to thank the scores of responsible scientists who are presently struggling, in the face of opposition, to find the safest possible ways of providing the energy (probably nuclear) and the food (possibly GM) in the vast quantities needed by the human race.