I think when you are part of a government funded research facility and someone comes up with a competing hypothesis that could challenge your position and renown, and you have seen a lot of legitimate crackpots it becomes far to easy to simply label them a crackpot as well, especially if say the government that funds you is telling you "look, this crackpot is getting people nervous, we need you to do something".
I'm not saying this guy is right, I'm just sayin that since his prediction proved true his model might be worth a second look.