Frankly I don't know if you have a scientistic outlook or not because your position changes from post to post. I'm not sure even you know what you think.
Well I think your conclusion is what are really happening about Cofty's position.
Honestly I also can't call him a scientimIST because as you said his very position is totally ambiguous.
Sometimes he demands scientific evidence about the existence of God (which is scientism) but sometimes he says he never asked for scientific evidence and even accept other/any types of evidence.
His clear position is atheism (based on the problem of natural evil).
This topic is about three points:
1) if there's knowledge outside the scientific method.
2) if scientism itself is a philosophically well defined worldview.
3) if Cofty is a scientimIST.
I think we have exhausted the debate.
1) yes.
2) yes.
3) impossible to conclude.
Anyone still disagree with some point?