To an extent, I realized that some fields of science are done by consensus. This is a pity but unfortunately true.
Consensus can get things wrong in science. This is the case specially to the fields in which experiments are rarely doable such as the many many versions of quantum gravity theory.
Usually one's testable findings in one version provoke irrationally strong reactions from those who are biased into other versions. Those whose testable predictions survive all comments and receives excellent reviews by scientists are left aside and forgotten for years. Their works are not hard to prove, but others seem to be just hard to get accepted. The evidence for these phenomena would normally lead to them being accepted, but they have an additional barrier in that they are "unacceptable" and often unpublishable. They take the illegitimate step from "no-physical-evidence-why-not" to "non-existent"!
Science is often presented as an objective pursuit, but the history of science tells you that this is far from being the case.
I feel that it's important to try and correct the errors that scientists are making. Unfortunately this is a pity for the science (and not of course those exceptional scientists)...
And this is only my thought.