Well it isn’t peer reviewed for one.

I don’t think people that are a little skeptical are being negative they are just being realistic. We’ve experienced things like this before and some of the hallmarks of the ones that let us down are there in this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_science

It has been peer reviewed - lots of scientists reviewed the paper, found various problems, some are trying to replicate it with varying success so far, some are looking for theoretical explanation. This is the essence of science, not sending it to some journal that just mails the article to the small subset of the same scientists and gather their replies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult

That’s not peer review lol and real peer review is the opposite of cargo cult.