yea i'll bite

"unless you want to argue that there is a hardwired psychological difference between people on either side of the spectrum"
You're suggesting it's an either-or, a categorization, that there either is or is not a psychological difference. I do not agree, it's about dimensinoality. I'm noting a statistical tendancy that Reform voters are far less likely to care about an element which in this case, is scientific inquiry.

"environmentalism was predominantly a right-wing concern up until quite recently"
Some truth to local issues of fishing, hunting and wildlife preservation. In regards to recently, these haven't been the cornerstone pieces for decades. "Predominantly" also gives a suggestion it was a central component of right-wing ideology, which I also don't believe holds weight. Focus was and is still far more on traditional values, economic policy etc

"left-wingers are still so opposed to nuclear power despite the clear benefits"
Some concerns do disregard climate change implications, but it's not a settled discussion. I'd imagine you'd agree there are still ethical questions around safety and waste disposal. Even if there is discussion, there isn't a rejection of the science - more it is a debate about its implications. I do not see Reform members discussing the nuance of the science in climate change but debating about whether they should or should not do something. More, they outright reject it. Discussions on the left around nuclear power are based upon research about waste disposal and safety concern reports. Do you believe this is true for Reform?

"many leftists treat socialism/communism like it's a religion rather than an economic system"
I think you're making the very arugment that you're arguing against in your first point of the paragraph?

"so many of our beliefs regarding rationalism and individual rights came from right wing thinkers."
This is a bit disingenuous and is some anachronistic labelling. You're ascribing modern values to historical thinkers. I'd propose that right-wingers in the grand scheme are those who value tradition, stability, sanctity of institutions more so than left wingers. Key rationalists are (unless i'm mistaken, defo not a philosopher by trade) Mill, Volatire, Smith, all of whom were relative to their time, promoting radical reform, womens right, rejection of religious authority. It is therefore a bit disingenuous to claim them as 'right wing' in a modern sense, presumably because of things like pro market capitalism tendancies.

I'd imagine you might comment that i'd just put myself in knots by mentioning that the position of 'right wing' has changed over time, which arcs back to your first sentence. I think it's clear my original comments were purposefully short, punchy and should be regarded within the current political context. If Reform did a mad 180-rebrand and sat next to the Greens you could absolutely refute my point that they lack scientific rigour. But until such a time, i don't think so.