As the article points out in 8., there have been previous, independent experiences that support the results.
There's also that nice graph of measurements of the speed of light versus time, in which experiments tended to reproduce the results of (erroneous) previous measurements, due to confirmation bias.
Reproducing an experiment, even with reputable scientists at NASA or reputable universities is in no way a guarantee.
When the magnitude of the observed effect scales roughly with the margin of error of the experiment, one has very good reason to be skeptical ...
this doesn't mean that it sounds too good to be true.
edit: fixed units - dont have easy access to micro, thanks for pointing that out.
You can spell it out, like "91 micronewtons".
You can also use exponential notation like 91e-6 N or 91x10^(-6) N.
To be fancy you can copy-and-paste unicode characters and write 91×10⁻⁶ N.
(I follow the subject by browsing news now and then at http://talk-polywell.org/ which really is about the small fusion projects. That place should have more details then at Wired.)
Use 'μ' for micro, 'm' is for milli.