Thank thee for this observation. For clarity, I have replaced ”scientist” with ”scientificard” - that is the false and harmful pretentions to science, very different from the true, positive, humane science.

@Noemi The term scientificard turns up nothing on Google? I still don't understand your use of this term as your definition appears to attempt to discredit science/(the scientific method).

Please spend a few minutes and watch this video. It will give you a better understanding of what science is so you can better clarify your assertion.

@NoMagicCookie Thank thee, but this is not my point. Politicard is the decay of political, and scientificard - the decay of scientific (my words). See ”scientism” . [en.wikipedia.org]

@Noemi @NoMagicCookie The parts of the article I read, the first section, and the section on religion/new atheism, I found informative to an extent. The problem lies in figuring out where the term applies, in that its subjective nature can result in wildly divergent views on its valid application. My verdict is that while it is something to be on the lookout for, it could only safely be used in the most extreme of examples. No concrete examples have been given by you or were in the article, but I may have a candidate. There recently has resurfaced controversy over IQ scores. Perhaps the term 'scientism' could be applied to those who tend to minimize (another subjective term) that there might be factors related to intelligence that we can't yet accurately quantify, or we have not yet even identified. Interestingly, a recent movie played on this theme. "The Thinning", takes place in a dystopian future in which population control is enforced through a high-school aptitude test. Those who fail it are executed.

Our importance is not flattering, it is engaging. Because, as this site mentioned in the introduction, one of the humanist principles is to leave the world better than we have found it. This is real evolution and we have the duty of protection, especially when recovery is necessary. (So evolution can have purposes, and positive ones, contrarily to the modern myth of ”purposeless evolution”.)