""The "other scientists" would "weed him(or her) out"."
This happens regardless of merit. It's often done for the wrong reasons!
A biology teaching assistant once said to me, a student,
"Strangeness is not conserved." ** (see below for more on this)
He spoke it in a context as if it were a universal biological principle with applications in every day life.
But I am convinced scientifically that the idea that "Strangeness is not conserved"
has no further value at present than its strictly interpreted application in biochemistry and natural selection.
In human society, a higher degree of strangeness (differentness) IS conserved in free, prosperous countries and this helps CAUSE freedom and prosperity. Quality control and standardization are misunderstood by all but technically qualified persons in most fields, and this includes genetics. Most good geneticists would
agree that human eugenics is no longer a good field to be in.
** In reality, it is true that there are
directions in gene flow which help a gene pool
hold together, analogous to how a water droplet's
molecules are held together in the droplet by their atomic attractions. Regardless of the survival value of a collection of mutations to the individuals who carry them, their prospect of success in passing on the mutation to future generation is a new test having to do with success in either generating enough offspring with that mutation OR breeding with members of the species which don't have the mutation.
Sometimes, due to the effects on pheremones or
habits, an incompatibility has been introduced which gradually reduces the mutation's share of the gene pool from a small fraction back down to zero. A teaching assistant might correct me on this, while a good biology PhD. would comprehend what I have said and would add corrections
if any were necessary.