M.M., I guess I shouldn't figure a thread 'll be read top to bottom, somewhere up there i kind of invented those abbreviations (for fun, too, eh?) and stuck with it.

Altmeyer I'll have to try to get to later, I only just now could glance at that one webpage you linked, sorry.

(btw, look, i'm not staking out nothing here, i really was so into this greens & ed. stuff, theoretical & practical, for some time among "greens", it really does wear like an old shoe, so when i saw the topic revisited, i thought why not have some more fun...)

and i'm only just now acquainted with sdo & rwa (a whole lot more obscure than my short forms) -- but i hope i'm an old breath of fresh air (possible?)...let me read up a bit and maybe then go at it on your terms

as for the requested demo re "scientism", i'm right in the middle of battling maybe the most egregious example of rigid orthodoxy since...the Catholic Inquisition? (see, told you i was a disinterested defender of catholic schooling in Ont., see also above), vs the monstrous industry-abettor-regulator-"scientific" nexus behind what is fairly described as the most potent destructive health and environmental matter of our day, re "electrosmog", esp. re microwaves; it would be an example to thresh out in a renamed thread, but the examples i could bring of an "atheist" or a "skeptic" or a "scientist" -- the best among them have via that naivete i spoke about allowed themselves to be owned by that nexus, and it is every bit as bad as what being in lockstep with one's leader could be, nay, worse, because it is a rough equivalent of that cruder rigidity all the while claiming a higher more rational ground that is thereby spoiled ; and just as the manipulative know to manipulate religious attitudes for their unsuspected purposes, same for reference to "science"