And what do you actually know about psychological research?
I fail to see, what meglon's knowledge of psychological research has to do with his argument. Which is that psychologists — by the very nature of their chosen domain — aren't particularly good at conducting experiments. He may be wrong, or he may be right, but his own proficiency in psychology has little to no connection to the argument. One does not need to have ever touched the oddly-shaped ball to see, that the quarterback sucks.
I am also a fan of the "hard" sciences
Yeah, and I am a fan of synchronized swimming... But I don't pretend to be any good at it.
I can tell you that experiments in the social sciences (when done correctly) are far more controlled (relatively speaking)
It would seem, that the very point of TFA is that the "when done correctly" part is true a lot less often, than the taxpayers financing most of these had the right to believe...
With humans, animals, and other living things, the noise factor is intense.
Yes, of course. Your work is harder in that respect. But this does not mean, your profession is any better at it... You may have collectively lowered the bar for each other — either because of these difficulties or because of some inherent imprecision of your domain and/or sloppiness of its practitioners — and TFA reflects the sorry outcome...
We have had to develop highly sophisticated techniques to be able to perform science and uncover truth.
Once again, TFA suggests, that over half of what you are portraying to be the "uncovered truth" is not... And meglon thinks, that's because you are untrained for (and perhaps even uninterested in) proper experimentation.
Describing your profession's challenges does not refute his accusation, nor does a claim of being "a fan" of physics.