Your defensiveness is very revealing in all these critical comments of yours because the conclusion I draw in the article is pretty balanced. I don't say economics is a pseudoscience. I say the question of its scientific status is complicated, but overall economics isn't as scientific as economists want people to think; in other words, economists exaggerate their scientific status. That's consistent with saying that some kinds of economics are scientific, or that they're as scientific as the other social sciences.

But you can't handle any criticism of economics at all, can you? You expect a Medium article to be written like a dissertation. And when a critical article comes along, you jump all over it, complete with personal attacks (not critical thinking, like your asinine charge that I'm writing these articles on economics to rake in the profits). I'm just stating the obvious about economics, that the emperor's wearing no clothes.

And you're evidently protesting too much and overcompensating for what you know to be true but can't afford to admit. The medium is the message here, and your obvious defensiveness as an insider is itself evidence in support of my thesis.