[elisbce]

History always repeats itself. Anytime a potential groundbreaking result is announced with one or some of the following characteristics, more likely than not something fishy or problematic ensues.

1. Paper submitted hastily without all authors in agreement or even knowing. (Check, two separate papers were submitted with collaborators in the US missing in one paper)

2. Not all due diligence and checks were done, e.g. missing tests or providing half-assed "proofs". (Check, missing phase transition results, provided video proof for superconductivity shows imperfect samples and diamagnetism, no full levitation, no pinning effect in superconductivity. You would imagine they could have made good samples instead of broken ones and completed all necessary tests since the material was obtained at least 3 years ago)

So in all, they seem to be rushing to conclusions and public fame than being cautious and scientific.