"There is zero testing of the hypothesis" - He, as well as multiple unrelated others, also wrote papers detailing available options to intercept the object by re-purposing existing satellites from Mars or Jupiter, which would allow for data collection which would directly test the hypothesis.

Yes he did so: Poorly. His idea [0] to use Juno is a pretty bad one, given that it doesn't have the fuel to do what he suggests, and even if it did, one of its engines was damaged during a recent maneuver. And, at least according to Jason Wright, Loeb should have known all this but ignored it [1], because headlines.

The ESA has a possibly more promising plan to divert a probe that's on its way to Jupiter right now [2].

So, again: If you're going to write "The feasibility of intercepting 3I/ATLAS depends on the current amount of fuel available from the propulsion system of Juno" one thing a real scientist would do is, idk, try to find out how much fuel it has left, talk to team members, etc. Instead, Loeb just does presumptive math, which ends up being wrong, but that didn't stop a Florida state rep from taking this "idea from a harvard scientist" and turning it into an official request of NASA, which now more real scientists will have to waste their time with [3].

[0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.21402

[1] https://x.com/Astro_Wright/status/1951530225533329789

[2] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2490618-can-we-send-a-s...

[3] https://x.com/RepLuna/status/1951379349128815062