A &#x27;real scientific&#x27; article wouldn&#x27;t do anything to convince people - it would be picked apart and doubted. Which is kind of an interesting thing in an of itself. I think for controversial stuff, you simply won&#x27;t get scientists to budge no matter how transparent or rigorious the reporting. If the stuff turns out to be true, there will be a long delay before acceptance.<p>I no longer believe that open replications make much difference either (there have been open replications and I still don&#x27;t know anything more).<p>They are focussed on industrial and consumer installations instead. I&#x27;ll start really believing if people are using this in the real world and that&#x27;s the strategy they have I think. So wait and see is what I do.