Science doesn't have to make sense to be science
I fully disagree with this statement. So, I will better not get involved in a discussion with you because our positions are too different.
I get the point they were trying to make. Science is concerned with two things:
- Reproducible: If I tell you what I did, can you reproduce my experiments?
- Understanding: Given the results of those experiments, can we explain what happened?
Right now the EM Drive is on step one. We are trying to isolate all of the sources of error out of the experiment and make it as clear as possible as to what is going on so that the experiment can be reproduced by another lab. If the other lab can't reproduce it, it's not science and the original experiment is likely wrong. If they can reproduce it, then we can really get into part two and figure out why.
It's entirely possible that now that the article out there for scrutiny that it will end up like the Faster-than-light neutrino anomaly, but it is also possible that the drive is using something like the Mach effect to get the thrust. Completely within the bounds of known physics, but not really seen as a useful effect worth exploring.