thanks for the reply. You couldn't have known that I have a scientific background so it felt a bit strange that you were reminding/lecturing me about how science works. But of course it is always important, especially as scientists to bring this to our attention again.

We can't really expand too much about our arguments here in too great of a detail I guess as this would require several pages, so my only point I want to make it clear that statements such as

It is not a matter of being mainstream or not mainstream. The idea was interesting, but nature has chosen not to be like this.

are simply false. It sets up a strawman which is not worth arguing if the person arguing against e.g. the EU theory is not even familiar with the basic concepts as well as their many experimentally tested ideas. I am not necessarily a proponent of this theory, I just see it as a viable alternative to a model that itself has been falsified by observational evidence.

While the standard model has had its moments, we must acknowledge that all models are simply placeholders for the next paradigmatic revolution (Thomas Kuhn's work here is compelling)