I have never heard of biology as a "pseudo-science", so you might expand on the "novel predictive" part.
See the article Cribb posted in AAR recently by Lakatos. Or
this. A novel prediction is one which can be falsified by testing. Mendeleev predicted that certain elements as yet undiscovered would have certain atomic weights. When we found them, we found that his calculations were correct; thus, his theory was validated. Kepler calculated where planets should be, which we had not discovered yet, based upon his discoveries about gravity and orbits. We looked where he said they should be, and found Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Those are novel predictions. Biology is incapable of making this kind of prediction, it can only analyze what has happened in the past. Biologists cannot accurately predict anything in the future. They can talk about probabilities and possible dynamics, but they cannot make a definitive statement upon which the validity of their theories can be hinged, which we can directly test and determine to be correct or not, unless it is some sort of reaction which has already been determined to be true
in the past. Psychology is in the same boat. It doesn't devalue them, that's my point: pseudo-science isn't supposed to be a slander, but it is a statement of heirarchy. The things which are popularly called pseudo-science today, like creation science, homeopathy, eastern medicine, etc., are not sciences at all, pseudo or otherwise. They're cult practices and quackery.
Just think about it: what is the theory of evolution? It's not an analysis of the future, is it? It's analysis of the past. It makes no predictions. Genetics as well (although it's possible it's made some predictions I don't know of). On the other hand, astrophysics, quantum mechanics, chemistry, these things make predictions about future events which can be validated or proven wrong, the results of which would expand the knowledge of humanity. Nothing which lay in the future can falsify the theory of evolution, only better analysis of the past has the chance of doing that.