To be totally fair to the dude, he's not claiming anything yet, because he maintains that the experiments he's done are inconclusive, and he still needs to cont

To be totally fair to the dude, he's not claiming anything yet, because he maintains that the experiments he's done are inconclusive, and he still needs to control for additional effects. As far as I can tell, he's basically doing a series of experiments where he's trying to disprove his own project because he doesn't want another Dean drive. The data can't 'go against' general relativity because it's agreed by everyone--the researcher included--that he hasn't got all the variables controlled, and so the data doesn't 'go' at all. It'd be pseudoscience if he was cherry-picking data that shows his theory to be correct, or ignoring existing data that conclusively shows that his theory is incorrect. He doesn't seem to be doing the former; I don't really have a way of telling if he's doing the latter.