Don't let the details get in the way of the stories and characters.
You keep assuming that's the only possibility, that it's always going to be a zero-sum game. What I've been trying to get across to you is that that's not true, that in the best science fiction, the scientific or speculative concepts promote and enhance
the storytelling and characterization. If you think I failed to achieve that in DTI:WTC, that's one thing, and I accept that criticism as an incentive to try harder in the future. But it's totally false to talk as though it always has to be a choice of one or the other. Saying that the science can never do anything except get in the way of the character stories is misunderstanding the genre of science fiction on a fundamental level. The goal of the genre is to postulate hypothetical scientific advances or discoveries and explore their impact on human beings
. The human consequences -- personal, societal, ethical, philosophical, emotional -- of the speculative situations are the whole point of telling the story; but it's the speculative situations that make it possible to explore human nature in ways you couldn't do otherwise. It's not supposed to be a choice between one or the other. It's supposed to be both working in harmony.
But as LeVar Burton used to say, you don't have to take my word for it. The best way to get proof of this is to read a lot more science fiction and see how the best authors pull off that balance.