A real science of the life energy, if there was one, would not have a fixation on it's founder. It would hold conferences and publish journals on current work in the field, not constantly repeat the life story of it's founder, his legal problems, and stories about who did what to him.
The focus would be on new and original work, not on trying to convert skeptics and refute armchair critics. In psychology, it would work on understanding more of how people think, but would recognize and admit that an effective therapy is still in the future. In sociology, it would describe social interactions, not attempt to prescribe or pathologize any particular point of view.
In short, it would bear little resemblence to orgonomy, as it exists today, with it's strong political orientation, pathologizing of points of view that do not fit that agenda, and claims of an effective therapy that cannot be demonstrated by any statistical means accepted in the field of psychology.
It would leave the introductory information on how it got started, who did what, and other historical trivia to the public school system, not as a subject fror graduate-level conventions and journals,
It would also leave solving criminal acts to the proper legal officials, not to armchair speculation by untrained non-professionals. A psychiatrist or social scientist has no training or expertise to know if a conspiracy exists or who is doing what today, let alone what may have happened two generations ago.
A natural scientist also has no pàrticular training in military intelligence work, so an invasion from another planet is not within his area of expertise and should be left to the experts though a psychologist may render an opinion on the mental health of persons making claims,
Non-trained non-professionals would have no standing to present opinions or allegations at a conference of experts and professionals. Writing books and articles on a subject does not confer status as an expert.
There are other examples possible, but these will suffice to show how far the current interpetation of what orgonomy is has strayed from what it would be if it really was a science,