Are there some branches of NLP which are considered scientific?
Bandler and Grinder also claim that NLP can treat problems such as phobias, depression, habit disorder, psychosomatic illnesses, myopia, allergy, common cold and learning disorders, often in a single session. NLP has been adopted by some hypnotherapists and in seminars marketed to business and government. Reviews of empirical research find that NLP's core tenets are poorly supported. The balance of scientific evidence reveals NLP to be a largely discredited pseudoscience. Scientific reviews show it contains numerous factual errors, and fails to produce the results asserted by proponents. According to Devilly (2005), NLP has had a consequent decline in prevalence since the 1970s. Criticisms go beyond lack of empirical evidence for effectiveness, saying NLP exhibits pseudoscientific characteristics, title, concepts and terminology as well. NLP is cited as an example of pseudoscience when teaching scientific literacy at the professional and university level. NLP also appears on peer reviewed expert-consensus based lists of discredited interventions.
Source: Wikipedia. I've made a fast search on Wikipedia, but I cannot access the papers. Also, going deep into this topic would be really demanding.