One thing I have noticed in this debacle is that theory- & computationally inclined scientists tend to be more dismissive, and that those who are more engaged in labwork much less so. Unless of course the specific material you work with is copper sulfide. I am amused because a lot of theorists ascribe their attitude to not wanting to have their time wasted .. I guess experimentalists are simply used to long stretches of whatever..

How magnanimous of you to do everyone a service by ignoring all reasonable disagreement as conspiracy theories. Clearly we need more of your kind to prevent us mere mortals from talking about something that might be wrong.

As I pointed out, people are free to read these articles on their sites, I'm just trying to limit the damage in a way I can control. I am also not preventing anybody from discussing this- we are discussing it here.

Claiming the Koreans made a fake mistake to throw people off while getting publication priority isn't reasonable disagreement. It's within the realm of possibility they are playing 3D chess but I think the consensus opinion is reasonable: they didn't provide enough info to reproduce what they saw, and what they saw likely isn't room temperature superconduction. Since then we've seen experimental groups "confirming superconductivity" (which they didn't) and theory groups claiming the chemistry is consistent with superconductivity, but theorists will come up with theories for anything, often by just tweaking some variables until they get something that appears plausible.