I will not adjust my research to accommodate those who are not following the rules of science. In other words, I have no desire to appease those who have the malice of ignorance as their guide.
If I am the one making the discoveries, I think I am also the most qualified person to interpret them. What the pseudo skeptics think is of no importance to me, because I am not going to reason with the unreasonable. If a person can think, I can lead them to reason. and vice versa. If they are determined to disagree no matter what I say or prove, then what does a scientist care about the opinion of the unscientific? I think instead of appeasing them, i would like to conquer them, one debate,one fact, one discovery at a time. I'm not spoon-feeding ungrateful babies, AND making the airplane noise. They can grow up a little, and accept a measure of humility which involves allowing a critical, and informed arrival at the facts, devoid of ego-driven angst at the expense of those who are doing it right. The uninformed skeptic is no threat to me, and I have firm faith in the idea that there is a contingent of intelligent people who are interested in learning new things, to challenge the status quo, and to dedicate their mindset to the progress of thinking which lies beyond the path of least resistance.
I appreciate that you have given these topics so much thought, and i have enjoyed our conversation.