Hey kyriacos,
I really like your article, as I encountered countless "experts" through my field of work as a plant scientist. ;)
The only problem I see, is that it is dangerous to set things as homeopathy or astrology on one level with psychology or economics. While the first are just funny fairy tales, the latter, at least in some areas, apply empirical methods not unlike e.g. molecular biology. Especially dealing with quantitative effects, you can just repeat and observe. Problems are the small sample sizes given ( often only 3 repetitions, which is a bad joke statistically) or the small number of participants in psychological studies.
But I am surely not an expert... ;)
I can argue that in many ways they are the exact same and can even cause more damage. The only difference with the latter is that they are bullshit..but with extra steps.
But then pretty much everything except mathematics and maybe physics is utter nonsense. Especially biology would be mumbojumbo as well, as the methods are often very similar. And while there are certainly claims that are ridiculous, many are not.
But hey, only experts would claim the absolute truth! ;)
there are few pieces of research that are worthy but they are the smaller percentage