I'm not discounting geopolymers as a viable technology, I just think dedicating the majority of your site to defending a hypothesis instead of promoting your te

I'm not discounting geopolymers as a viable technology, I just think dedicating the majority of your site to defending a hypothesis instead of promoting your technology is odd. Also it seems like it would be pretty simple to prove or disprove the hypothesis scientifically but no one seems to care enough to try, which doesn't speak to it's credibility. Instead they argue about the provenance of samples analyzed 40 years ago and subsequently destroyed.