You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I think NASA has struck an appropriate balance between skepticism and curiosity. After results claiming thrust f

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I think NASA has struck an appropriate balance between skepticism and curiosity. After results claiming thrust from the EM drive were given by paid lab testing and a Chinese study, NASA threw a miniscule amount of effort at this, expecting it to fail. It generated positive results, so they threw in a hair more. This will continue until either very rigorous, well-funded studies duplicate these results, or they are invalidated at a lower- or mid-tier levels of rigor. There should be a reasonable threshold at which we are willing to test ideas that would upset traditional scientific knowledge, or we risk displaying the mental rigidity which we mock in the religious and scientific orthodoxy of ages past. Obviously the perfect candidate idea for such testing would be one in which a sound theory was already present, but there have been examples of profound changes in theory that came about due to strange observations - consider the motion of Mercury and higher-temperature superconductors. I too am excited about the possibility of life in our solar system, and I hope NASA gets probes to Europa, Titan and Enceladus as soon as possible, but these projects don't have to compete. The small amount of funding this has received so far is unlikely to be the difference between go and no-go for life-seeking probes.