The implication of your (seemingly) dismissive attitude to the sciences that I currently chase, at least seems to be that they are somehow less worthy than astronomy and less interesting than astronomy.
I have always read very many papers in many other sciences apart from astronomy, and currently attend graduate-level lectures in neurobiology and molecular biology, so I am well qualified to opine that there do indeed exist other sciences which are as interesting as astronomy!
Robert
P.S. I can quite understand intellectual arrogance, indeed I tolerate it very well, in people that are as bright as Dr Dana. For it must surely be that these types of people actually do have a justifiable intellectual pride. But the flipside of this is the less admirable quality of scorn.
_________________
ADDED IN EDIT
Your assertion of the primacy of the science of astronomy is undoubtedly the viewpoint that one should get from an astronomer! But these complex arguments about which of the sciences is the most grand and beautiful and complex and interesting and significant , tend to go on forever .
So, suffice it to say that there are extremely interesting and beautiful and fiendishly complicated problems to solve in each and every one of the sciences
( But I note the familiar disparagement of mycology and phycology in your post)
__________
P.P.S.
I haven't actually lost interest in astronomy, as evidenced by this mugshot of Yours Truly about to use his 25x100 Binos to chase down some RCW nebulae.
I recently got two 6 inch Refractor tube assemblies, with a view towards building a pair of 6 inch binoculars, so as to expand these visual studies of southern HII regions!