This is just what i suspect. think about it :)
Now, I need for you to be honest with yourself. In which direction are you reasoning? Are you reasoning from evidence, or are you finding evidence after the reasoning?
If you're honest with yourself you'll agree that you're reasoning from the latter. If it truly is the former, then you need more evidence. Then you'll need to figure out why there's dissonance between you and the experts. As a general rule, rationalists trust the experts. It'll be hard for you to gain an audience amongst them, and they're the people you should be trying to make convincing arguments for.
The feeling of adversary is not proof, although it may feel affirming.
Although your assertions lay on the fringes of probability, they are inherently unfalsifiable. But we "skeptics" have no obligation to prove the assertion untrue -- which would actually be pretty hard to do. The burden of proof is yours.
Your claim is a fringe probability. Now think of all the other fringe probabilities that are equidistant from the center of this probability map. Why waste energy brooding over something that is just as likely to be true as a bunch of other crackpot ideas?
I suspect you think believing this is also in some way meaningful to living a good life as an open minded person. That is not a good mindset to have.
Believe in what is most likely to be real.