That's the way it works.

The new guys show off some fancy effect.

The old guys say, "No way! They're full of shit!"

The whole thing gets polarized.

Then (important difference with politics) lots and lots of various other people, on both sides, go out and try it. Over time, they either succeed or don't. Either way, we decide from the resulting evidence which view is closer to the "truth", which in this case means a direct correspondence with the physical Universe. (Note that another difference is that scientists have a whole set of euphemisms they can use to disagree violently with one another without generating a lot of hate and discontent. "That turns out not to be the case" is science-speak for "This idiot is so full of shit his hair smells." Civility is important.)

This is why turning science into intellectual property is such a vile thing, even for the people who plan on profiting from it. Discoveries that turn out to be bogus -- which happens more often than not -- are going to cost the patentholders and trade secret protectors a lot more, over time, than they're gonna make out of their proud new babies, because they won't have armies of folks checking their work for airholes.

I have no opinion on this, except to say it would be nice if it panned out. It's 'way too early to tell whether it's physics or bullshit.