Most of the so-called Science that is pushed out there is actually psuedo-science manufactured by mega-corporations and supported by willing dupes.
That's the mindless rhetoric that the anti-science dupes use. However, since they have never done any science, have no experience with sciecne and are usually scientifically illiterate, such blanket condemnations are simply silly.
Who defines what is relevant?
Often you can do a statistical analysis to show that many of the factors considered by the antiscience dupes are irrelevant.
"rational thinking skills" sounds dubious.
Only for the anti-science cult
You can't lump all science together, after all there are branches of science... psychology, astrology, etc, with obvious arbitrary mechanisms that are not true.
I can only laugh at your ignorance. Astrology is not science.