First you talked about anomalism, and now it's something else.
The burden of proof is still on him.
If you are content to throw adjectives at him instead of insisting on substantiation for his claims, then that can be your approach. It's not mine. That my approach is different than yours doesn't make me "wrong". This is not math.
He has already made other people's signing off a condition of substatiation, which indicates he has nothing. He says he doesn't want to waste his time if others won't buy in ahead of time. That's bogus on its face.