That's a false dichotomy: It isn't "Science has been wrong before, so anything is possible" (https://theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-of-scien

That's a false dichotomy: It isn't "Science has been wrong before, so anything is possible" (https://theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-of-science-denial-96099 https://theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-o...) There are degrees of "wrongness" or likelihood. Pseudo-sciences exists practically as long as there have been sciences. With no evidence, and not for lack of trying. People really like to believe in that stuff. But with that track-record, it is on the rather wrong end of wrongness. Might be true, but on the likelihood of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, yes, a reproducible experiment by an independent party would be the way to go, On the other hand, the discovery of existence of high temperature superconductors while certainly baffling and had people scrambling to explain it, is exactly how science works. It was not completely out of the blue, we had a reasonable understanding of electromagnetism. But that "detail" didn't fit. It was just one more puzzle to solve, and it didn't invalidate everything we knew before. Also, there were gradual steps of increases of temperature of achieving high temperature supra conductivity. So, not "theoretically impossible", but rather "practically rather unlikely". A different ball-park then ghosts and visions. The healthy skepticism to high temperature supra-conductivity (and low temperature fusion) comes from the mantra "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (Sagan), and a lot of pseudo-science people came with the claims for supra-conductivity but without the evidence.