Imagine this scenario
You're called as an "expert witness" in a trial. Before you sit down in the witness chair, you demand to the judge and jury, "Before I'll say anything, you have to agree that if I claim something is true, you have to rule as I say. Not only that, but I refuse to be cross-examined." The jury would laugh you out of the place and you'd be lucky if the judge didn't cite you for contempt.
You've made a serious charge. Present your "evidence". If it's convincing, then no doubt you'll find agreement. But insisting on preconditions beforehand is childish. Either you have the evidence to back up your claims or you don't. It appears you don't.