I can think of academic practitioners with doctorates who had wildly disastrous opinions about their field of expertise too: Peter Duesberg, a Ph.D. in molecul

I can think of academic practitioners with doctorates who had wildly disastrous opinions about their field of expertise too: Peter Duesberg, a Ph.D. in molecular biology / retrovirology who taught at Berkley and was a member of the National Academy, who maintained that HIV does not cause AIDS and that antiretroviral drugs do more harm than good. Walter Freeman, M.D. academic neurologist and first chair of neurology at George Washington University who believed that severing frontal-lobe connections could stabilize personality and stop pathological cycles of thought. Charles B. Davenport, Ph.D. in biology, geneticist and founder of the Eugenics Record Office. Henry H. Goddard, Ph.D. in psychology, intelligence-testing researcher and later professor of abnormal psychology who believed intellectual disability, poverty, prostitution, and criminality constituted a hereditary family type. Clarence Cook Little, Harvard Ph.D., mammalian geneticist and prominent cancer researcher who insisted for years that the evidence did not establish a causal relationship between smoking and lung cancer. Fun game. We could laugh at all of them, and your examples too, if not for the damage they caused.