Sometimes I think that scientists are so limited in their thinking.
Aren't you possibly jumping to conclusions, here? If a scientist limits his statements to the area he feels competent of (unlike sociobiologists..), this does not necessarily mean that his thoughts are similarly limited.
Personally I suspect that discussing altruism in the animal world is about as scientific as assigning a gender to a motorcar. Talking of altruism only makes sense for beings who can communicate their motives to us, humans. And even there, going farther than the OED's definition quickly leads onto marshy ground.