No they aren't. It's actually the opposite. Everything we accept as science started off as "kooky". Germ theory was started by a "kooks" who thought there were small invisible organism that made us sick. It wasn't until microscopes were invented that they were validated.
From mendel to copernicus, much of science was viewed as "kooky" and rejected initially by the educated elites. The idea of continental drift was ridiculed and mocked for decades until it was found to be correct.
> All the ones worth anything are published in peer reviewed journals.
Actually, all the ones worth anything aren't published in peer reviewed journals initially. The truly transformational ideas are almost always rejected because journals exist to maintain the status quo.
Also, you have a slavish reverence for "insiders" when they are flawed creatures as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
All great science is "kooky". But not everything "kooky" is great science. So not mutually exclusive at all.