it presents the BPS model as natural law, moreover in normative manner, which I had already criticized as dangerous and thought we agreed on.
I don't see how that is presented in a normative manner. It describes well established facts about human survival and human flourishing.
This is not even tangential to scientific reasoning, don't you think? So because we believe the evolutionary model is true, would it mean that we have to eliminate the weak? It's the same kind of fallacy.
No, it's a completely different fallacy. What you describe is eugenics, a pseudoscience that has nothing to do with serious debate about BPS or any other model from which to start, and it's completely decoupled from reality.
And no scientific evidence backing up the societal model and no transition plan? Sorry but there is nothing else I can offer other than repeating the questions and criticisms others have already posted.
No scientific evidence?
Among many, I suggest you this reading:
"General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives and Practice" By Lars Skyttner - Reprinted in 2005
http://www.amazon.com/General-Systems-Theory-Problems-Perspectives/dp/9812564675As for the transition plan, there are many documents, videos, conferences and radio shows outlining how that may be achieved, and it's a continuos work in progress.