To be expected, no doubt, when you made such extraordinary claims.

Extraordinary claims indeed, but while they could be true there's little substance behind them so far.

I don't think that's good enough evidence for what's an pretty extraordinary claim, frankly.

Thomas further explained the show failed to challenge the extraordinary claims.

From the time of the Journal's first publication extraordinary claims have been made for it.

And what is his evidence for this extraordinary claim?

I was speechless for several seconds, trying to make sense of this extraordinary claim.

Such review is normal for academic studies where complex statistics or extraordinary claims are involved.

I find this an extraordinary claim, greatly at variance with the data and historic experience.

However, a criticism would be that he often made extraordinary claims without citing a source or reference.