Defend your right to own a car.

[David88vert]

I can see where a case like that is confusing. Psychology as a whole is definitely a science and is definitely based on a quantitative and qualitative set of data. Its kind of hard to think up an analogy that would explain why her case doesn't really disqualify psychology as a science.

Everytime you drop an apple on the ground, it'll fall, but I can fake zero gravity by taking you up in an airplane and doing some zero G maneuvers. Then when you drop the apple, it'll appear to float. Does that mean that there's a flaw in gravitation and relativity?

Since you are not educated in the field of psychology, and have very limited life experience, what qualifies you to know more about these specific cases than professional psychologists? I do not see where your opinion is any better than a hobos.

There are lots of applied sciences that do not meet the litmus test of science. And to be equated to be the same as geology, biology, physics, etc is not reasonable. I work in a field that is an applied science as well, but I do not falsely claim to be a scientist.

I'll give you something to contemplate.
Three days ago, a new psychological study was released on which countries are the happiest. The top three are Norway, Sweden, and Australia. The US was number 12.
Happiness is not defined the same between individuals or cultures. There is no way to measure happiness - no rulers or scales, just an arbitrary number. This means that it does not have clear terminology and is not quantifiable. It does not pass scientific rigor. In this case, psychology is not providing an empirical analysis of the natural word, and it is unable to present a defined secular truth.

As for the apple/zero gravity example, the answer is no, there is no flaw. It is a controlled experiment that is repeatable, predictable, and testable.
You don't seem to grasp the most basic structure of science.

Psychology is valuable and useful, but you cannot sell it as being the same as biology, physics, etc. To do so is to attempt to redefine science. This is why real scientists experience intellectual frustration. If you allow anything with statistical analysis to be a science, then any field is a science, and you demean the value of those who actually work in fields that adhere to the structure of scientific dedcution and discover real truths.