it has convinced every scientist
Not me nor my colleagues. Just as an example in one picture of the "paper" there was a wrong emissivity plot. No material can have en emissivity better than the Black Body. Also all the "band emissivity" theory he propose is wrong. The only factor that be used is total emissivity as Paradigmoia implicitly says proposing his experiment.
Maybe TC was wrong. But then it would be easy for anyone to write a proper rebuttal explaining the error,
Yes he was. "Anyone" is normally busy with his own work ( making research and writing real papers) and have no time to write a rebuttal to TC.
As far as we know the TC paper was not even shown to TC colleagues ( as normal practice) before it was released on the web.
Anyhow, just get your free small sample of dried durapot 810, stick a thermocouple on it, heat it to a mild glow, and give it a go with an IR device with adjustable emissivity.
Wrong material. Durapot 810 has magnesium impurities that make his emissivity quite different from pure Alumina. Lugano reactor body was made by pure Alumina. Proposing this experiment you also imply that the only factor to be used is total emissivity. You not mentioned the band sensitivity of the "IR device" but just the adjustable (total) emissivity factor.
The only fact you can verify is that measured power density has a very weak ( if not NULL ) dependence vs emissivity because that factor cancel in calculus.
This weak dependence together with the use of the emissivity curve they have found in literature for the material that they experimentally verified to be the constituent of the reactor body make the LR quite robust.