Is Science Ethical?

In response the Freeman Dyson's, Can Science Be Ethical?, Brave New World, and, Harrison Bergeron, the topic of advancing technology and ethics has been brought forth. Dyson gives numbers of examples of technology, merely describing them as toys for the rich. Do these advancements merely serve no other purpose than to make the rich richer and widen the gap between rich and poor? It's arguable but Dyson refers to it as an "evil" amongst our technology. But unfortunately, only nuclear energy has been recognized as the true evil here. In Brave New World, genetical engineering might be recognized to some such as John and other savages as the true evil. For Harrison Bergeron, the governments way of using technology to suppress the individual is viewed as evil to Harrison. Being a young man of above average looks, height, muscle mass, oh no, the government simply cannot have it. Although equality is in place through this use of technology, does it necessarily make people happy? Anyway. In Dyson's article, he mentions another form of technology which exists that lessens the gap between higher and lower classes.  He gives credit to the motorcycle, which was developed in Europe during the first decade of the twentieth century. Although these advances in technology offer humanity a way to reach immeasurable heights, is it worth the cost of your morality? Not to mention it destroying the little hope that is left for the lower classes.  He ends his article with words of hope for our future, "Knowledge of physical science will not console me for ignorance of morality in time of affliction, but knowledge of morality will always console me for ignorance of physical science."