You say "ridiculous sounding ideas often end up becoming standards science" - but take into account that "ridiculous sounding ideas" much more often, by a large factor, end up becoming no science at all.  

I agree that "that form of idealogical bullying should never exist" - except that it's not ideological, but just a practical matter of deciding which claims to spend time on understanding and possibly verifying.

When you ask scientists for "actual proof or evidence of the case" - it prove, that some new, and fairly unusual theory is invalid, you ask people to do a lot of work - but why should they do this work?

They would be interested to do this work - without even asking them - if someone provides some kind of evidence convinces them that there is a chance the new idea is at least useful enough to spend time on.  
That's all. 

I think “Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.” (Christopher Hitchens) applies perfectly to that.