I agree but also the opposite is happening. The ability to identify Trends and Heuristics is seen as 'not scientific, or exact enough', and thus tossed out as

I agree but also the opposite is happening. The ability to identify Trends and Heuristics is seen as 'not scientific, or exact enough', and thus tossed out as worthless. So trends/heuristics can be both, over-played, and under-appreciated. So guess there are two camps in the thread: Psychology is either over-stating its findings, 'trying to be too exact when exact is not possible', so it's bad science. Or when it does find something, it's deemed not exact enough, 'how dare you report a simple heuristic', so it's bad science. Damned either way.