1) You have a right to have unusual, heretical, controversial or just plain dumb opinions.
2) The scientific community is required to respect, and seriously debate your conclusions, regardless of their foundations.
Point (1) is valid. Calling for book-burning is silly. Some correct ideas do, indeed, seem wacky to begin with.
Point (2) is not. "Lucid" theories are worth almost nothing until backed by scientific rigor, peer review and the weight of evidence. Cf. "intelligent design" - a theory invented out of nowhere as a backstop against evolution. You're more than welcome to believe it (1), but real scientists shouldn't be wasting their time with it (2).
-- EDIT: I felt the need to add...
It's quite one thing to have an idea that you believe passionately, that you spend your life defending, that is ultimately proved true in the fullness of time.
It's quite another to dabble in a wide range of quackery, pushing unfounded positions in everything from constants of physics to animal telepathy and the conciousness of inanimate objects.
That's not perseverance in the face of scientific obstructionism, it's throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks.