Just a few general remarks:

From a view point of science in general and scientific skepticism in particular skepticism of sociology is arsenic.

arsenic: too outsmarting without consistency.

In sociology contest you can shut down a laptop by smashing it on a stone. In a scientific contest this is not a way to shut-down the laptop. It is taken into account but it is not how science proceeds even on a yearly basis.

In science[sci-fi]:

Bruce: “are you sure he barged into your room and destroyed any evidence in his favor so neutrino actually gained 60 nano-seconds?”

Andrew: “yes he came at a Planck window-hole, he had energy of a Planck-hulk and he left a signature which weighs a few micro-grams, I called in the Goldsmith and he weighed it, turns out if we employ the hulk he can barge into clouds and rain the whole town”.

In sociology: “see did we not tell you scientists were seriously thinking of a way out of the neutrino-issue, finally, no-one can win over the Albert Hummestein, he is a human-aurora”.

In science(skepticism-fiction): “we have discovered something for real, neutrinos indeed break the speed, someone worked out the straight path of photon and neutrino and turns out neutrinos had it in them to break a feat”