You can't say it about psychology because psychology explains things that happen. Astrology attempts to create a causal relationship between two unrelated things. So that's a poor example.

Psychology uses causal relationship between two or more unrelated things all the time. That's how the narrative is created. Actually, to step this up a bit I dare you to bring a study of your choice to I can demonstrate this to you.

No self honor isn't a justification, that's not an accomplishment, however actually advancing a field in a measurable way is. Your just skirting around the issue.

How can you tell if a field is even valid? Why have a "field" anyways when there is so much trash all over it, overshadowing actual research (aka neurobiology vs bullshit psychology)

I'm well aware of the reproducibility issues in science publication. This doesn't make your statements any more true.

Actually it does because so far we know that most are not replicable and in my dictionary. no replicability = snake oil.

Perhaps you should focus on writing a better post then throwing shade at me.

my post is good enough. I have yet to see a valid counter argument. I am well aware of the opposing arguments. This is why it is so easy for me to bring evidence to the table. I am very careful with that I write and almost always I can anticipate the "classic" response.

I was in academia for some time in case you didn't know.