In Defense, somewhat, of one poster, Laternater,
I think, simply, he was being overly broad in use of "biology" and "biological properties" but fundamentally he was right.
The single most significant driving force of every level of study humans have endeavored to undertake, has at it's core and as it's roots what we now term "biology."
There is physics, and physics is divided into two parts: Chemistry and not-chemistry. Chemistry is then further divided into two parts: Biology and not-biology.
Deliniations between study of physics, chesmistry and biology, particularly at the biological cellular level, all pretty much vanish.
The obvious significant reasons for scientific study is that study which better explains life, particularly human life. The reason we study the sun, is because the sun is the reason we are here, on Earth. It provides us energy and warmth. That energy and warth facilitate chemical reactions in plants and some small organisms. The plants provide energy for animals, and other small organism, thus provide for us. Understanding the Sun, let's us better understand ourselves. Understanding where life is NOT (at least at first look appearantly ) helps us better understand ourselves and life in general.
Just as understanding of the non-chemistry parts of physics will better let us understand chemisty.
Architecture, Metalurgy, ceramics, plastics, astronomy, all appearantly NON-biological studies, actually have root or purpose to facilitate the biological form we take. We build houses to keep warm, cool, or sheltered. We make metals to cook with, build better houses, or dissect a body for study. We design pots, jars, glass, and spaceshuttle ceramics, all for our use as living orgamisms, or as a mechanism of better study of living organisms. Same with plastics. Astromoy and astrophysics help us perform biologically, because if we can fully understand what's going on out there, we should be better able to understand what's going on inside our own bodies and minds (such as how supernova were necessary for us to be alive).
I think it was, in the sense, that as biological creatures with reason, we tend to focus overwhelmingly at that which serves biology.
This doesn't mean to say the WAYS in which we serve biology, are the best ways nor that we don't produce unintended consequences because of our ignorance (we do).
But simply, as biological beings our first and primary focus in all scientific endavors is that which studies life, even if life is not the primary focus, it is always a focus. Not to mention, MOST sciences (theoretical and applied) deal with the questions of origins, biolgical usefulness, or biology directly. (Cosmology, Particle/Quantum/String Phsyics, engineering, computer sciences, anthropology, Medicine, molecular biology, hell, even all the defense spending and weapons production is stilla study of biology, because it's a study of what kills or incapacitates things of people.
The Core theme of all study, is human study, thus a biological study, again, even if thea actual "biology" is not the primary focus. And, even non-human biological study, is a counterpart to human biological study, and studdying the non-human biology of the world and universe, will better let us understand the human biological study (thus lab rats).
At least, this is the theme for which I understood Laternater's point.
-
(this part is a wee metaphysical, but I think still interesting)
It may be even, that since our biological interests are so strong, we may not even fully understand the non-biological world properly (our biology may act as blinders, preventing us from seeing the non-biological chemistry occuring, because we have no understanding of our interest of it)
P.S. I understand that each group "non-chemistry" physics can be further subdivided, but as you can see, I am long winded as it is, so I used that for clarity and to save space.