Teaching Technologists Some Discipline

It seems that some unruly technologists
In the Life Science and
Computer-related technology areas
have found the audacity
to patent their inventions!

Can you imagine?
What has this horse and buggy whip world come to!

We need "discipline" here.
Lucky for us, those strict constructionists over at the Supreme Court have constructed their own set of laws that teach the scientists the truth about the fundamental building blocks of "science".

Amicus Briefs in Support of Sequenom's Petition for Rehearing En Banc: Bioindustry Association

Look here.
"Science", the true kind,
is built with three (3) kinds
of "fundamental" building blocks.

These three "fundamental" building blocks are:
(1) "Abstract" as opposed to other kinds of ideas;
(2) Laws "of Nature" as passed down to us from Mother herself; and
(3) "Natural" as opposed to other kinds of "phenomenon".

Why is that so?
Because Clarence and his cohort of other science-guy clowns
have proclaimed so, over and over again
from the unassailable heights of
their Mount Olympus hide away.

Let us count the many times that
Clarence and club have disciplined us
about the "fundamentals".

(1) Parker v. Flook --"`A principle, in the abstract, is a fundamental truth; an original cause; a motive; these cannot be patented, as no one can claim in either of them an exclusive right.' Le Roy v. Tatham, 14 How. 156, 175 [1853]. Phenomena of nature, though just discovered, mental processes, and abstract intellectual concepts are not patentable, as they are the basic tools of scientific and technological work." 409 U.S., at 67 [1978].
(2) Gottschalk v. Benson ---
(3) ...

In other words "modern" science is no different than that understood of it back in 1853 when Le Roy v. Tatham was decided. Once some ancient wise ones pontificate to the rest of the world from the unassailable heights of
their Mount Olympus hide away how true "science" works, then that's it. The starried eyes hath decisis it.