"I would not be convinced even by an independent repetition of the results, but they don't even have that."
Hi @undergroundecon, I agree with your skepticism, but stating at the outset that you would not take a scientific study seriously even if it were replicated independently is putting your bias before the ability to have an open mind. It takes a while for research to be replicated, and if shows the same findings while having proper methodology it deserves to be taken seriously.
I have spent decades in academia and agree that there are a lot of blanks to fill in before the findings of the quoted study can be considered mainstream. My point is that what you term psuedoscience is for many researchers completely legitimate, groundbreaking, and just as valid as mainstream journals (which have their own set of publishing biases). If you don't agree with a finding just say that you do not agree, don't call it nonsense or you might find yourself eating your words later. Read the paper first and give grounded criticism of the actual faults of the study, with suggestions for improvement.