Your comment is funny because it’s completely opposite - economics has generally great track record and fraudulent results typically do not survive for long. Citation cartels and paper mills exist in all disciplines.

Behavioral economics is challenging this - see the fake data published in a 2012 Ariely paper and identified in 2021.

Not "behavioural economics", but rather a very small number of rotten apples.

the economists have a terrible record which is why public opinion of them is low. I'd guess equal weight to meterologists forecasting.

Do meteorologists have a terrible record?

I've literally got the NWS hourly forecast and radar open in the next tab over to watch when and where the rain will be clear as I plan my route home...

Meteorologist are fairly accurate. People have a bias to remember more the times they were wrong.

Really? I see the whole "Yes the entire body of work, across multiple schools of economic thought, and every examination of the history demonstrates rent controls dont work. But we think this time, perhaps they will work"

to "Once again rent controls have failed" pipeline has been pretty firmly established.

Does it, really? There haven't been any problematic issues since economists and their lore became a dominant influence over politics that could be attributed to this influence?