Regarding the honest debate -- how does it suppose to go? Normally, people do research and publish their result in scientific papers. Or not publish -- if the results do not hold up to scientific scrutiny. It is called "peer review" -- and it is part of honest scientific debate. There are also conferences, where people report their results.
It is usually considered a bad taste to go to press when your papers are rejected from the professional journals. Well, maybe not in GW discussion. But there are many crackpots (at least in my field) that send their papers to the professional journals. I deal with that as a reviewer and as an editor. In many cases, those people say that "scientists want to suppress new ideas" -- and in all cases their "theories" don't hold up because of elementary mistakes!