The sad fact is that none of the publications on orgonomy to date, including these by Reich, bears any resemblance to a scientific report and no really good experiments have ever been done. My own opinions on the subject have been formed on a basis of personal observation and not published reports. Despite Jim DeMeo's ranting on about scientists who dismiss his and Reich's work having emotional or financial motives, the only published work in the field is so flawed that no sensible scientist would consider it. DeMeo claims that the mere fact of publication in an in-house journal that is not peer reviewed is in itself reason to reject it. True, but that is not grounds to exempt such private publications from the same standards.
Scientists are right to refuse to consider evidence that is so poorly presented.
That is the function and basis of a scientific report and without such detail it is untestable and unverifiable. A scientist is quite right to refuse to consider an untestable claim. I can't blame any scientist for thinking all Reichians are frauds and fools if that sort of evidence is presented. Nobody has ever yet done a proper study of cloudbusting with double-blind experiments, randomized trials, and independent outside evaluation of the results. Cloudbusting can be conclusively proven to an on-site observer but trustworthy written evidence has not yet been published, efforts by DeMeo and other true believers to convince rightfully skeptical scientists with amateur and easily discredited evidence are then followed by vituperative personal attacks on the motives and mental health of the scientist when he quite rightly refuses to believe without proper evidence.