The part in bold is honestly laughable as an argument. A lot of people who study the system a little more beyond the function dichotomies arrive at these conclusions as well; it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand, assuming that one actually is able to somewhat assimilate a deeper understanding of what Jungian cognition is about.I have no doubt that some of the typings on there are inaccurate. I don't think any typing done based on what is known about a celebrity really can be that accurate. The reason I believe in their typings is that they have stereotype free typings. They don't buy into the fact that sensors are superficial or that intuition is imaginative, plus they actually debate their points if someone thinks they are wrong and regularly adapt their typings if someone makes a good case. Chances are if the typing is being done by a professional psychologist that is actually considering the opinions of many other professionals then most of the typings are going to be accurate. Just out of curiosity, what specific ideas does he use in his typings that you doubt?
Jungian typing is a very interpretative kind of science, and as such, any person is as able and capable to interpret, assuming one has a basic grasp of the system in question, which most people even in online circles, have.