Haven't many of the fast/slow thinking claims, as popularized by the best-selling Daniel Kahneman's book, been debunked?
Priming has issues with repeatability in experiments.
To believe that "debunks" the entirety of heuristics and bias is completely absurd. The author literally won a Nobel prize for Prospect Theory.
I think that book sucks personally. Just an incredibly dull book to read. The online social contagion that it is a work of fiction might actually be more interesting.
Maybe we could call it the "if a book bases it claims by citing a few papers, and those specific papers turn out to be bogus, then its claims are unsubstantiated" heuristic