However, science is amoral. It is also much fuzzier in some areas than many would like to admit. Hell, even Newton's Laws are not really truth, just talk to someone with a PhD in particle physics.
Science is a tool to inform philosophy and ethics. It cannot, however, replace either. It is possible this weakness is only due to our knowledge deficit and that with complete knowledge science and ethics would merge. However, as the total sum of human knowledge is assuredly less than half (probably much less) than everything there is to know, science remains incapable of replacing ethics and as such should be used as part of the discussion, not to shut the discussion down.
I'm intentionally leaving the rest of that discussion alone. This thread is burning nicely already.