"Is it not possible that many such scientists and philosophers have PhD's and responsible positions in the research field?"

Many pseudoscientists have PhDs and some have responsible positions in "research." I'm not impressed by a PhD alone and being in a responsible position means you know the right person, not that you're a good researcher. The more important questions are 1) what is the quality of the persons thinking, 2) what contributions has the person made to the field, 3) is the person identifying good questions, 4) does the person's work reflect a clear understanding of the subject area, 5) has the person produced something that others can build on? "Scientists" don't get a bye just because they're "scientists."

One of the hallmarks of the pseudoscientists is that they point to such and such a doctor somebody with 3 PhDs - so he just MUST be right. Curiously, they unfailingly miss the fact that their hero's 3 PhDs haven't resulted in his generating any actual results.

As for philosophers, I'm sure there are a great many intelligent and clear-thinking individuals among them, and I suspect those brilliant souls have the darnedest time trying to get their opinions noticed in a din of vociferous stupidity.