Yes, that’s fair and I was sloppy with my phrasing. What I meant was that if you have 1,000 practical applications that function on the assumption the law is true and they behave as predicted, and then you have a single example that appears to disprove, then extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

A single device, made in some garage, that appears to disprove it is simply not rigorous enough to prove anything and isn’t worth third party investigation until the creator has shown they’ve ruled out possible explanations.