Is Yi Cui with an h-index close to 200 the best scientist then? Or Pulickel Ajayan? I worked with samples grown from both of them, so my opinion on them is mix

Is Yi Cui with an h-index close to 200 the best scientist then? Or Pulickel Ajayan? I worked with samples grown from both of them, so my opinion on them is mixed. They are drive-by shooters; they identify a hot area, publish some crappy but early papers on the topic and move on to the next hot trend. Both of them have very little to zero sustained contributions to the field. And this is, by the way, the case for most h-index superstars. Fundamental contributions are often sustained contributions over the years to a field, and the honest answer is that we can measure that only years after the science has been published.